CRIM2 (part 2) - Atty. Anselmo S.

Rodiel IV
D. Crimes against public interest

TITLE FOUR - CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST

CHAPTER ONE - FORGERIES

Section One. - Forging the seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands,
the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive.

Article 161. Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the Philippine
Islands, forging the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive.

Punishable acts: (GSS)

1. Forging the Great seal of the Government of the Philippines

2. Forging the Signature of the President
3. Forging the Stamp of the President

Article 162. Using forged signature or counterfeit seal or stamp.

Elements: (GKU)

1. The Great seal of the Republic was counterfeited, or the signature or stamp of
the President was forged by another person
2. The offender Knew of the counterfeiting or forgery; and
3. He Used the counterfeit seal or forged signature or stamp

Section Two. - Counterfeiting Coins

Article 169. How forgery is committed.

The forgery referred to in this section may be committed by any of the following
means:
1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument, payable to bearer or
order mentioned therein, the appearance of a true and genuine document.
2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering by any means the figures,
letters, words or signs contained therein.

NOTE:
1. “Appearance of a true and genuine document”
 1. This means the note or instrument itself is false.
2. The acts of the offender made it appear as true and genuine.
2. “Erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering”
1. Here, the note or instrument may be true and genuine.
2. However, the acts of the offender made the figures and the words in the
instrument false.

Article 163. Making and importing and uttering false coins.

Elements: (FMU)
1. False or counterfeited coins
2. Made, imported, or uttered such coins; and
3. Uttering such false or counterfeited coines, he connived with the
counterfeiters or importers.

Article 164. Mutilation of coins; Importation and utterance of mutilated coins.

Punishable acts: (MIU)

1. Mutilating coins of the legal currency (in PH), with the intent to damage or to
defraud another; and
2. Importing such mutilated coins, with the connivance with the mutilator
3. Uttering such mutilated coins, with the connivance with the mutilator or
importer in case of uttering

NOTES:
1. “Shall mutilate coins of the legal currency”
1. Hence, the coin mutilated must be of the legal currency and current coins
of the Philippines.
2. If the coin mutilated is a coin of the foreign country, it is not a crime of
mutilation under the RPC.

Article 165. Selling of false or mutilated coin, without connivance.

Punishable Acts: (PI)

1. Knowingly, shall possess false or mutilated coin with intent to utter the same
2. Knowingly, shall actually utter such coin.

Elements of the 1st punishable act: (PIK)

1. Possession
2. With Intent to utter; and
3. Knowledge

Elements of the 2nd punishable act: (UK)

 1. Actually Uttering; and
2. Knowledge.

NOTES:
1. “Although without the connivance”
1. Even if he did not connive, but if he has knowledge, he will be punished by
the RPC.
2. Again, for false coins, it can be non-legal tender. For mutilated coins, it
must be legal tender.

Section Three. - Forging treasury or bank notes, obligations and securities;

importing and uttering false or forged notes, obligations and securities.

Article 166. Forging treasury or bank notes on other documents payable to

bearer; importing, and uttering such false or forged notes and documents.

Elements: (BF)
1. Instrument payable to Bearer;
2. Forged, imported, or uttered such instrument; and
1. In case of uttering, he connived with the importer or forger.

NOTES:
1. What does "treasury or bank notes on other documents payable to bearer”
include?
1. It includes bonds, certificate of indebtedness, bills, national bank notes,
coupons, treasury notes, certificate of deposits, checks, drafts for money,
sweepstakes money.
2. “Commercial documents,”
1. If there is forgery, Art. 166/167 applies. The meaning of forgery is
provided under Art. 169.
1. An example is the falsification of PNB checks is punishable under
Art. 166.
2. Hence, Art. 172 applies to commercial documents like bill of lading
or warehouse receipt.

Kind of document Crime committed

Treasury/bank notes/documents Art. 166/167
payable to order or bearer, such as
checks
OTHER commercial documents, like bill Art. 172(a)
of lading/warehouse receipt/letter of
credit
Article 167. Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments not payable
to bearer.

Elements: (OF)
1. Instrument payable to Order or other document of credit not payable to
bearer;
2. Forged, imported, or uttered such instrument; and
1. In case of uttering, he connived with the importer or forger.

Same as Art. 166, but the check is payable to order.

Article 168. Illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank notes and
other instruments of credit.

Unless the act be one of those coming under the provisions of any of the
preceding articles, any person who shall knowingly use or have in his possession,
with intent to use any of the false or falsified instruments referred to in this
section, shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed in said
articles.

Elements: (FKUP)

1. The treasury or bank note etc., is Forged or falsified by another;

2. The offender Knows that any of these instruments is forged or falsified
3. He performs any of these acts:
1. Use the same; or
2. have the same in his Possession, with intent to use

Section Four. - Falsification of legislative, public, commercial, and

privatedocuments, and wireless, telegraph, and telephone message.

How to falsify
Counterfeiting or imitating Any handwriting, signature, or rubric
Causing it to appear that Persons have participated in any act or
proceeding, when they did not in fact
participate
Attributing To persons who have participated in
any act or proceeding, a statement
other those in fact made by them
Making Untruthful statements in a narration of
facts
Altering True dates
Making alterations or intercalations In a genuine document which changes
its meaning
Issuing In an authenticated for, a document
purporting to be a copy of an original,
 Making Untruthful statements in a narration of
facts
Altering True dates
Making alterations or intercalations In a genuine document which changes
its meaning
Issuing In an authenticated for, a document
purporting to be a copy of an original,
when no such original exists; Including
in such copy statements contrary to or
different from the genuine original
Intercalating Any instrument or note, relative to its
issuance, in a protocol/registry/log
book.
Falsificatio Falsificatio Falsificatio Falsificatio Knowingly Knowingly
n of public n of public n of n of introducin using
document document public/ private g in falsified
s by public s by commercia document evidence document
officers ecclesiasti l s by ANY in any s
cal document person judicial
minister s by proceedin
private g false
persons document
s
Any public Any Any private Any person Any person Any person
officer/ ecclesiastic individual (public or (public or (public or
employee/ al minister private) private) private)
notary
Taking To the Knowingly To the
advantage damage of introduce damage of
of public a third in evidence a third
position party/Intent in any party/intent
to cause judicial to cause
damage proceeding damage
Falsifies Falsifies Falsifies Falsifies False Knowingly
public record/ public private documents using any
document document document document embraced of the false
of such or OTHER in the next documents
character kind of preceding embraced
that affects commercial or this in the next
the CIVIL document Article. preceding
STATUS of or this
persons Article.
Article 170. Falsification of legislative documents.

Elements: (BAAM)
 1. There is a Bill, resolution, or ordinance enacted or approved or pending
approval by either the House or a provincial board or municipal council
2. The offender Alters the same
3. He has no Authority therefor; and
4. The alteration changed the Meaning of the document.

Article 171. Falsification by public officer, employee or notary or ecclesiastic

minister.

NOTES:
1. How does a public officer take advantage of his public position for public
documents?
1. He has the duty to prepare the document; or
2. He has the custody of the document
2. In Art. 171, damage or intent to cause damage is not necessary. What is being
punished is the violation of public faith and the destruction of the truth as
therein solemnly proclaimed. (Pacasum v People, 2009)
3. Acts punished by law:
1. Counterfeiting or Imitating any handwriting, signature, or rubric
1. If there is no attempt to imitate or forge the signatures of the other
person, the accused may be found guilty under the second mode, and
not the first mode. (US v Freimuth, 1904)
2. Causing it to appear that persons have Participated in an act or
proceeding when in fact they did not so participate
1. The imitation of the signature is not necessary to be convicted under
this paragraph. (Reyes)
2. An illustration is voting in place of the registered voter. (People v
Abubakar, 1979)
3. Attributing to persons who have Participated in an act or proceeding
statements other than those in fact made by them
1. Instead of executing an SPA which the offended party intended, the
defendant managed to pervert the truth and ascribe statements
making him a buyer and new owner of the coconut land of the
offended parties. (US v Capute, 1913)
4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts
1. If the narration of facts is contained in an affidavit or a statement
required by law to be sworn to, the crime committed is perjury (Art.
183). (People v Cruz, 1960)
2. The facts must be absolutely false. If there is some colorable truth to
the narration, no crime is committed. (Layug v Sandiganbayan, 2000)
3. He must be aware of the falsify of the facts narrated by him.
4. He must have the legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts
 4.
narrated by him
1. It was held that the prosecution need not identify a specific law
under which the accused has the obligation to disclose the truth.
To convict the accused for falsification of document involving
making an untruthful statement, what is important is that he has a
legal obligation to disclose the truth. In this case, accused made
untruthful statement in petty cash replenishment report of private
corporation. Hence he is liable for falsification of private
document because he has a legal obligation to disclose the truth
in the report. (Manansala v People, 2015)
2. COMMENT: If falsification will be asked in the Bar, the question
will likely revolve around any of these three instances.
5. Altering true dates
1. The true date must be essential. If it is unessential, its alteration is
not criminal.
1. As example, alteration of dates in official receipts to prevent
discovery of malversation is falsification. (Reyes)
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a Genuine document which
changes its meaning;
1. The alteration must make the document speak something false.
(Typoco v People, 2017)
1. If it made the document speak the truth, it is not a crime.
7. Correlation of Falsification to Malversation, Plunder, Estafa, and BP
22
Correlation Crime to be charged
Falsification and malversation 1) If falsification was used to CONCEAL
malversation, there are separate crimes
of malversation and falsification.
2) If falsification was used as
NECESSARY MEANS to commit
malversation, there is a complex crime of
malversation through falsification.
Falsification of PUBLIC document and 1) If falsification was used to CONCEAL
estafa estafa, there are separate crimes of
estafa and falsification.
2) If falsification was used as
NECESSARY MEANS to commit estafa,
there is a complex crime of estafa
through falsification.
Falsification of PRIVATE document and Under the doctrine of common
estafa element, the element used in one
crime cannot be legally re-used in the
other crime. Here, due to the element
of damage, only one of the two crimes
can be charged.
1) If falsification was used to CONCEAL
 2) If falsification was used as
NECESSARY MEANS to commit estafa,
there is a complex crime of estafa
through falsification.
Falsification of PRIVATE document and Under the doctrine of common
estafa element, the element used in one
crime cannot be legally re-used in the
other crime. Here, due to the element
of damage, only one of the two crimes
can be charged.
1) If falsification was used to CONCEAL
estafa, the crime is estafa.
2) If falsification was used as
NECESSARY MEANS to commit estafa,
the crime is falsification. (Basically,
whichever is first is the crime.)
Falsification and Plunder Separate crimes because one is under
RPC, while the other is a special law.
BP 22 This does not concern the falsity of
documents. This concerns the
issuance of unfunded checks. Hence,
they are not related at all.
Correlation Crime to be charged
Falsification of PUBLIC document and 1) If falsification was used to CONCEAL
estafa estafa, there are separate crimes of
estafa and falsification.
2) If falsification was used as
NECESSARY MEANS to commit estafa,
there is a complex crime of estafa
through falsification.
Falsification of PRIVATE document and Under the doctrine of common
estafa element, the element used in one
crime cannot be legally re-used in the
other crime. Here, due to the element
of damage, only one of the two crimes
can be charged.
1) If falsification was used to CONCEAL
estafa, the crime is estafa.
2) If falsification was used as
NECESSARY MEANS to commit estafa,
the crime is falsification. (Basically,
whichever is first is the crime.)

Article 172. Falsification by private individual and use of falsified documents.

Punishable Acts: (PPIU)
1. Falsification of Public, official, or commercial document by a private
individual;
2. Falsification of Private document by any person;
3. Knowingly Introducing in evidence in any judicial proceeding a false document;
and
4. Knowingly Using any of the false documents embraced in Article 171/172.

NOTES:
1. Public document
1. A document created, executed, or issued by a public official in response
to the exigencies/official functions of the public service, or in the
execution of which a public official intervened. (US v Asensi, 1916)
2. Commercial document
1. A document defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce or any
other commercial laws. (Batulanon v People, 2006)
2. Examples of those covered by Art. 172 are bill of lading/warehouse
receipts/trust receipts/promissory notes/letters of credit.
3. Checks are not covered because they are covered by Art. 166/167 -
forgery of notes payable to bearer/to order.
3. Private document
1. A deed or instrument executed by a PRIVATE PERSON WITHOUT the
intervention of a NOTARY public or other person legally authorized, by
which document some disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced, or
set forth. (US v Orera, 1907)
2. Remember that if the document falsified is private, damage, or intent to
cause damage is essential. Damage need not be material; damage to one’s
honor is even included. (People v Marasigan, 1940)
4. The correlation of falsification and estafa has been discussed already.
5. There is no falsification of private document through reckless imprudence
1. The reason is there must be intent to cause damage, so there must be
malice.
6. For knowingly introducing in evidence in any judicial proceedings a falsified
document, damage is not required.
1. Why? Because the violation of public faith and intention to destroy the
truth is sufficient.
7. For knowingly using falsified documents, it must not be used in judicial
proceedings. Otherwise, the punishable act is the previous one.
1. If not used in judicial proceedings, it must be coupled with damage/intent
to cause damage.
8. Correlation of Obstruction of Justice Law to the third (3rd) and fourth
(4th) punishable acts
Crimes committed under Art. 172 Obstruction of Justice Law
1) Knowingly Introducing in evidence in “Presenting or using any record,
any judicial proceeding a false document, paper or object with
document knowledge of its falsity and with intent to
affect the course or outcome of the
 Crimes committed under Art. 172 Obstruction of Justice Law
1) Knowingly Introducing in evidence in “Presenting or using any record,
any judicial proceeding a false document, paper or object with
document knowledge of its falsity and with intent to
2) Knowingly Using any of the false affect the course or outcome of the
documents embraced in Article investigation of, or official proceedings in,
171/172. criminal cases.” (PD 1829, Sec. 1(f))
Both can be charged since different
laws. Further, when there is Art. 172
(third and fourth acts), there is
Obstruction of Justice.
Article 173. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and telephone
messages, and use of said falsified messages.

Punishable acts: (UFU)

1. Uttering fictitious wireless, telegraph, or telephone messages
2. Falsifying wireless, telegraph, or telephone messages
3. Using such falsified messages

Elements of acts no. 1 and 2: (PA)

1. The offender is an Public officer or employee of the Government, or an Officer
or an employee of a private corporation engaged in the service of sending or
receiving wirless, cable, or telephone messages
2. He commits Any of the above acts.

Elements of act no. 3: (KUP)

1. The accused Knew that the wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message
was falsified by any person specified in nos. 1 and 2 above
2. The accused Used such falsified dispatch
3. The use of the falsified dispatch resulted in the Prejudice of a third party or
that the use thereof was with the intent to cause such prejudice.

Section Five. - Falsification of medical certificates, certificates of merit or

services and the like.

Article 174. False medical certificates, false certificates of merits or service, etc.

Persons liable:

1. Physician or surgeon who, in connection with the practice of his profession,

issued a false certificate;
2. Public officer who issued a false certificate of merit or service, good conduct,
or similar circumstances; and
 3. Private individual who falsified a certificate falling in the classes mentioned in
nos. 1 and 2.

Article 175. Using false certificates.

Elements: (FKU)

1. A False certificate mentioned in the preceding article was issued;

2. The offender Knew that the certificate was false; and
3. He Used the same.

Section Six. - Manufacturing, importing and possession of instruments or

implements intended for the commission of falsification.

Article 176. Manufacturing and possession of instruments or implements for

falsification.

Punishable Acts: (MP)

1. Making or introducing into the Philippines any stamps, dies, marks, or other
instruments or implements for counterfeiting or falsification; and

2. Possessing with intent to use the instruments or implements for counterfeiting

or falsification made in or introduced into the Philippines by another person.

CHAPTER TWO - OTHER FALSITIES

Section One. - Usurpation of authority, rank, title, and improper use of

names, uniforms and insignia.
Usurpation of authority
Any person
Knowingly and falsely represent
himself (implies malice)
Officer/Agent/Representative of
Department/Agency of Government
Usurpation of official functions
Any person
Under pretense of official position,
perform any act
Pertaining to a public officer of
Government/agency
Without being lawfully entitled to do
so.

Article 177. Usurpation of authority or official functions.

Punishable acts: (UU)

 1. Usurpation of authority; and
2. Usurpation of official functions.

COMMENT: Due to the case of Leonen, it is better to stick to usurpation of

authority. Do not confuse yourself with usurpation of official functions.

Usurpation of authority
1. It can be committed by any person, whether public officer or private
individual. (Degamo v Ombudsman, Leonen, 2018)
2. He must represent himself as a public officer, KNOWINGLY and FALSELY.
1. There must be a positive, express, and explicit representation.
3. The punishable act in usurpation of authority is false and knowing
representation, i.e. the malicious misrepresentation as an agent, officer, or
representative of the government.
1. Private respondent did not maliciously misrepresent himself as an agent,
officer, or representative of the government.
2. He is a public official himself, the Department's Undersecretary for
Operations, whom public respondent had found to have signed the letter
in his own name and under the words, "By Authority of the Secretary.”
3. Hence, a de facto officer is NOT liable for usurpation of authority. Since
he had colorable title to the position, he did NOT knowingly and falsely
represented himself as a public officer. Hence, no crime was committed.
(Degamo v Ombudsman, Leonen, 2018)
1. This must be contrasted with a “usurper” who intrudes into an office
without color of title, and assumes to to act as an officer. (People v
Hilvano, 1956)
4. Good faith as defense for usurpation of authority. (Degamo v Ombudsman,
Leonen, 2018)
1. Why? Because good faith is inconsistent with knowledge/malice.
5. The crime of usurpation of authority under Article 177 is covered by Section 3
of RA 3019 as it involves fraud upon the government. (Miranda v
Sandiganbayan, 2005)

Usurpation of official functions

Article 178. Using fictitious name and concealing true name.

Punishable acts: (UC)

1. Using fictitious name
2. Concealing true name
Using fictitious name Concealing true name
Uses name other than real name Conceal his true name/personal
circumstances
Public use
To: To:
 Using fictitious name Concealing true name
Uses name other than real name Conceal his true name/personal
circumstances
Public use
To: To:
1) Conceal a crime Conceal his identity
2) Evade execution of judgment
3) Damage public interest

NOTES:
1. Damage must be to public interest. If damage is to private interest with intent
to defraud, it will be estafa. (Article 315, par. 2(a))
1. An example of this crime is signing a fictitious name in application for
passport. (US v To Lee Piu, 1916)
2. The use of fictitious name may be complexed with the crime of delivering
persons from jail as necessary means. (Regalado)
3. This is also in Obstruction of Justice Law: "(d) publicly using a fictitious
name for the purpose of concealing a crime, evading prosecution or the
execution of a judgment, or concealing his true name and other personal
circumstances for the same purpose or purposes.”
1. If Art. 178 - use of fictitious name is violated, Obstruction of Justice Law is
also violated.

Using of Using Fictitious Usurpation of Estafa by means

Fictitious Name Name (PD 1829 - Civil Status of deceit under
and concealing Obstruction of Par. 2(a)
true name Justice Law)
1) To conceal a For the purpose To enjoy the rights To defraud third
crime, of: arising from the persons
2) To evade the 1) concealing a civil status of the
execution of a crime, person
judgment, or 2) evading impersonated
3) To cause prosecution or the
damage to public execution of a
interest. judgment, or
3) concealing his
true name and
other personal
circumstances for
the same purpose
or purposes
Hence, if using of
fictitious name is
committed,
obstruction of
justice is also
committed.
 other personal
circumstances for
the same purpose
or purposes
Hence, if using of
fictitious name is
committed,
obstruction of
justice is also
committed.
Article 179. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia.

Section Two. - False testimony

False False False False False

testimony testimony in testimony in testimony in testimony in
against the favor of the civil case other cases other cases
accused accused (Perjury) (Perjury) (V2)
(V1)
Any person Any person Any person Any person Any person
Gives false Gives false Gives false Makes Makes
testimony testimony testimony untruthful untruthful
statements statements
(same) (same)
Against the In favor of the Any party
defendant defendant
Criminal case Criminal case Civil case Not included Not included in
in the the preceding
preceding Articles
Articles
Knowledge Knowledge Knowledge Knowledge Knowledge
that it is false that it is false that it is false
Related to the Testify under Make an
issues oath, before a affidavit, upon
person a material
authorized to matter, before
administer a person
oaths. authorized to
administer
oaths.
Offering false testimony in evidence Subornation of perjury (Case law;
Principal by inducement)
Any person Any person
Knowingly Knowingly and willfully
Offers in evidence a false witness or Procured a witness to swear falsely
testimony
Any judicial or official proceeding (all The witness suborned falsely testified
cases) (US v Ballena)
NOTE: Prosecution has discretion to

Any person
Knowingly
Offers in evidence a false witness or
testimony
Any judicial or official proceeding (all
cases)
NOTE: Prosecution has discretion to
charge ONE of the crimes mentioned.
Double jeopardy must be considered.
Principal by inducement)
Any person
Knowingly and willfully
Procured a witness to swear falsely
The witness suborned falsely testified
(US v Ballena)

Three (3) forms of false testimony

1. False testimony in a criminal case

2. False testimony in a civil case
3. False testimony in other cases

Article 180. False testimony against a defendant.

NOTES:
1. The prosecution must WAIT under Art. 180
1. The prosecution must wait for the finality of the judgment in the
criminal case where the testimony was given.
2. The reason is the penalty for violation of Article 180 depends upon the
penalty imposed by the court in the criminal case, such as:
1. If the defendant was sentenced to RP/RT - penalty is PM for false
testimony
2. If the defendant was sentenced to PM - penalty is PC for false
testimony
3. If the defendant was sentenced to Correctional or Acquitted - penalty
is Arresto Mayor for false testimony
3. NOTE: He must wait because of lack of sentence in the criminal case, not
because of prejudicial question.
2. It does not matter if the defendant was convicted or acquitted
1. Either way, the witness who falsely testified is punishable under Art. 180
2. However, it must be noted that the provision does not include arresto
menor. Hence, if such is the sentence, the witness cannot be charged
under Art. 180.
3. Knowledge of falsity is needed because this is a malum in se.
1. Hence, lack of intent/good faith are valid defenses for the charge.

Article 181. False testimony favorable to the defendants.

NOTES:
1. For false testimony IN FAVOR of the defendant in criminal cases, there is NO
need to WAIT
 1. Why? Because in Art. 171, the penalty for the witness depends on the
“punishable” penalty and not on the “sentence” of the defendant.
1. If the prosecution is for a felony punishable by afflictive penalty - the
penalty is arresto mayor to PC for false testimony
2. In any other case - the penalty is arresto mayor for false testimony.
2. A defendant who testifies in his own behalf, and falsely imputes to some
other person the commission of a grave offense constitutes the crime of
false testimony favorable to the defendant.
3. However, a defendant who merely denies the commission of the crime or his
participation therein should not be prosecuted for the crime of false
testimony. (US v Soliman, 1911)
4. A statement by the witness that he is an expert in handwriting is a statement
of mere opinion, the falsity of which is not sufficient to convict him of false
testimony. (US v McGovern, 1905) Why? There was good faith. It was his mere
opinion.
5. Prescriptive period for the crime of false testimony
False testimony False testimony IN False testimony in civil
AGAINST the defendant FAVOR of the defendant cases
in criminal cases in criminal cases
It will not begin to run as It will being to run after It will not begin to run as
long as the criminal case the witness testified. long as the civil case is
is not decided with not decided with finality,
finality. because of prejudicial
question.
Article 182. False testimony in civil cases.

NOTES:
1. When does Art. 182 apply?
1. It applies only to ordinary civil actions, special civil actions, and their
ancillary proceedings.
2. It does not apply to special proceedings. For special proceedings,
Article 183 applies. (US v Gutierrez, 1909; Reyes)
2. Prejudicial Question
1. The criminal action for false testimony must be suspended when there is
a pending determination of the falsity of the subject testimonies of
private respondents in the civil case. (Ark Travel Express v Abrogar, 2003)
1. The resolution of the issue in the civil case, which is whether the
witness falsely testified, will determine whether the criminal action for
false testimony will proceed. (Rule 111)

Article 183. False testimony in other cases and perjury in solemn affirmation.

NOTES:
 1. Perjury
1. General Rule:
1. It should not be done in a judicial proceeding.
2. Exceptions: (SPL;SpecPro)
1. Special penal law - Information charging special penal law that does
not adopt the nomenclature of the RPC on penalties. Why? Because
the court will not determine the penalty imposable. (Regalado); and
2. Special proceedings (US v Gutierrez, 1909; Reyes)
2. Ways of committing perjury:
1. Falsely testifying under oath; and
2. False affidavit.
3. In both cases, the act was done before a competent person authorized to
administer oaths.
1. Falsely testifying under oath - this usually happens before quasi-judicial
agencies
2. False affidavit - this usually happens in the execution of judicial
affidavits, or affidavits submitted to the DOJ for preliminary
investigation.
4. In both cases, knowledge is important.
1. Why? Because this is malum in se.
2. Further, the provision states “knowingly makes untruthful statements.”

Article 184. Offering false testimony in evidence.

1. Compare to Subornation of Perjury

1. It is committed by a person who knowingly and willfully procured another
to swear falsely, and that the witness suborned did testify under
circumstances rendering him guilty of perjury. (US v Ballena, 1911)
2. Therefore, the fact that subornation of perjury is not expressly penalized
in the Revised Penal Code does not mean that the direct inducement of a
person by another to commit perjury has ceased to be a crime, because
said crime is fully within the scope of that defined in article 17, subsection
2, of the Revised Penal Code. (People v Pudol, 1938)
2. Correlation of Offering False testimony in evidence/Subornation of Perjury to
False testimony
1. Offering false testimony in evidence/subornation of perjury - the offender
is the PARTY himself
2. False testimony - the offender is the WITNESS in the case.

G. Crimes against persons

Chapter One - DESTRUCTION OF LIFE

Flow: Start from inside the womb to living
Intention Unintent Abortion Abortion Abortion Dispensi Infantici
al ional by the by the by a ng of de
Abortion Abortion woman parents physicia abortive
herself of the n
(V1) pregnant
woman
(V2)
Any Any Woman Parent of Physician Pharmaci Any
person person pregnant st person
woman
Intention Unintenti Take Without Kills any
ally onally advantag prescripti child
causes causes e of his on
scientific
knowledg
e
Abortion Abortion Practice Causes Causes/ Dispense Less than
abortion abortion Assists s 3 days of
abortion abortive age
Violence/ By Upon Consent NOTE:
No violence herself/ of the Immateri
violence Consent woman al if intra-
but another uterine
without person to life is
consent/ do so less than
consente 7 months
d
For
purposes
of
concealm
ent of her
dishonor
Parricide Murder Homicide
Any person Any person Any person

Kills Kills Kills

His spouse/parent/child, Another Another
whether legitimate or
illegitimate/ascendant/
descendant
If committed with ANY of Without the
the following attendant circumstances of
circumstances: infanticide/parricide/
Any person Any person Any person

Kills Kills Kills

His spouse/parent/child, Another Another
whether legitimate or
illegitimate/ascendant/
descendant
If committed with ANY of Without the
the following attendant circumstances of
circumstances: infanticide/parricide/
1. Aid of armed men murder
2. Aid of men who insure
or afford impunity
3. Abuse of superior
strength
4. Means employed to
weaken defense
5. Evident
premeditation
6. Treachery
7. By means of
inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, stranding of a
vessel, derailment of
locomotive, other means
involving great waste or
ruin
8. By means of motor
vehicle
9. On occasion of
calamity (include
preceding paragraph)
10. In consideration of
price, reward, promise
11. Cruelty, by
deliberately augmenting
the suffering of the
victim
12. Outraging or scoffing
at his person or corpse
The crime is not Other qualifying
infanticide. circumstances in SPL:
1. Anti-Torture Act
The crime is not parricide
or infanticide
Intentional Serious Administerin Less serious Slight
mutilation physical g injurious physical physical
injuries substances injuries injuries
(LONG) or beverages
Any person The best Any person Any person Any person
strategy is person
method of
cancellation.
Memorize the
other 4
crimes. If
inapplicable,
the crime is
serious
physical
injuries.
Without intent Incapacitated Without intent Without intent Without intent
to kill for the work to kill to kill to kill
which he was
habitually
engaged -
permanently
unable
Intentionally Incapacitated Inflict serious Inflicts Inflicts
mutilate for the work physical physical physical
another which he was injuries injuries to injuries to
habitually another another
engaged - 91
days
Reproductive Incapacitated Knowingly 1) 1)
organ/Any for labor (any administering Incapacitate Incapacitate
other organ kind of work) injurious for labor for for labor for 1
- 31 days. substances 10 days to 30 to 9 days
days 2) Requires
2) Requires medical
medical attendance
attendance for 1 to 9 days
for 10 days or 3) Not
more prevent from
(indefinite) engaging in
habitual work
nor require
medical
attendance
4) Ill-treat
another by
another which he was injuries injuries to injuries to
habitually another another
engaged - 91
days
Reproductive Incapacitated Knowingly 1) 1)
organ/Any for labor (any administering Incapacitate Incapacitate
other organ kind of work) injurious for labor for for labor for 1
- 31 days. substances 10 days to 30 to 9 days
days 2) Requires
2) Requires medical
medical attendance
attendance for 1 to 9 days
for 10 days or 3) Not
more prevent from
(indefinite) engaging in
habitual work
nor require
medical
attendance
4) Ill-treat
another by
deed without
causing injury
5) If the facts
do not show
the extent of
injuries
Extra RPC
Death Death Dischar Death Physica Giving Giving Duel
or or ge of caused l assista assista
physica physica firearm in a injuries nce of nce of
l l s tumult inflicte suicide suicide
injuries injuries uous d in a (V1) (V2)
inflicte inflicte affray tumult
d under d under uous
excepti excepti affray
onal onal
circum circums
stance tances
s (V1) (V22)

A A Any Several Same Any Any Killing

legally parent person persons as person person adversa
married death ry in a
person caused duel
in a
tumultu
ous
affray
but the
victim
onal
circum circums
stance tances
s (V1) (V22)

A A Any Several Same Any Any Killing

legally parent person persons as person person adversa
married death ry in a
person caused duel
in a
tumultu
ous
affray
but the
victim
merely
suffere
d
serious
physical
injuries
Surpris Surpris Dischar Not Assist Assist
ed his ed his ge a compos another another
spouse daughte firearm ing of to to
r+ at group commit commit
under another organiz suicide suicide
18 + ed for
living commo
with the n
parent purpose
of
attackin
g each
other
In the In the Not Quarrel/ To the
act of act of constitu Assault extent of
having having te in a doing
sexual sexual attempt confuse the
intercou intercou or d and killing
frustrate tumultuo himself
rse with rse with
another his d us
seducer homicid manner
e/
parricid
e/
murder/
other
crime
with a
higher
penalty
is
 of
attackin
g each
other
In the In the Not Quarrel/ To the
act of act of constitu Assault extent of
having having te in a doing
sexual sexual attempt confuse the
intercou intercou or d and killing
frustrate tumultuo himself
rse with rse with
another his d us
seducer homicid manner
e/
parricid
e/
murder/
other
crime
with a
higher
penalty
is
prescrib
ed by
RPC
Shall Shall In the
kill/ kill/ course
serious serious of the
physical physical affray
injuries injuries someon
any or any or e is
both of both of killed
them them
In the In the It
act or act or cannot
immedi immedi be
ately ately ascertai
thereaft thereaft ned
er er who
actually
killed
the
deceas
ed
1) But
the
person
who
inflicted
the
serious
 killed
the
deceas
ed
1) But
the
person
who
inflicted
the
serious
physical
injuries
can be
identifie
d
2) If it
cannot
be
determi
ned
who
inflicted
serious
physical
injuries,
all
those
who
shall
have
used
violence
upon
the
victim

Special law
Anti-Hazing Law (RA 11053) (SNIA)
Any act of physical or psychological suffering/harm/injury
Inflicted upon a recruit/neophyte/applicant/member

As part of an initiation rite/practice

Made as a prerequisite for admission/Requirement for continuing membership in a

fraternity/sorority/organization.
 Who are liable under Presumptions for Anti-
Anti-Hazing Law (13 Hazing Law, among
people) others
All/Any 1. All who planned 1) Vexation - The
2. All who participated persistent and repeated
3. All present (prima proposal or invitation made
facie; not conclusive) to a person who had twice
4. Any person + refused to participate or
intimidate/vex/force + for join the proposed fraternity,
sorority, or organization,
recruitment
shall be prima facie
evidence of vexation for
purposes of this section.
Members 5. Member + cooperate + 2) Present - The
induce victim to be presence of any person,
present even if such person is not
6. Member + present + a member of the fraternity,
intoxicated/drugs sorority, or organization,
during the hazing is prima
facie evidence of
participation therein as a
principal, unless such
person or persons
prevented the commission
of the acts punishable
herein or promptly
reported the same to the
law enforcement
authorities if they can do
so without peril, to their
person or their family.
(Prevention/Reporting are
the defenses of those
present)

Officers 7. Officers + present 3) Any person charged

8. Adviser + present + under this Act shall not
failed to prevent/ be entitled to the
promptly report mitigating circumstances
that there was no
intention to commit so
grave a wrong.
Alumni 8. Alumni + present 4) Hazing is a malum
9. Alumni + conceal/ prohibitum. Good faith is
obstruct investigation not a defense.
School authorities 10. School authorities/
barangay/city officials +
allowed/knew + failed to

Alumni
School authorities
Owner/lessee/Parents
Comprehensive
Firearms and
Ammunition Regulation
Act
1) Use of a loose firearm
+ inherent in the crime =
special aggravating
circumstance
2) Use of a loose firearm +
rebellion/attempted coup
d’etat = absorbed
3) Crime committed +
without the use of loose
firearm = separate
crimes
Section One. - Parricide, murder, homicide
Article 246. Parricide.
1. The law does not require knowledge of relationship on the part of the offender.
promptly report mitigating circumstances
that there was no
intention to commit so
grave a wrong.
8. Alumni + present 4) Hazing is a malum
9. Alumni + conceal/ prohibitum. Good faith is
obstruct investigation not a defense.
10. School authorities/
barangay/city officials +
allowed/knew + failed to
act to prevent/promptly
report
11. School + application
approved + hazing
occurred/no
representative (fine only)
12. Owner/lessee of place
+ actual knowledge +
failed to act to prevent/
promptly report
13. Parents + home of
member + actual
knowledge + failed to act
to prevent/promptly
report
Provided, if the crime Provided, if it is equal,
committed has a penalty the penalty of prision
LOWER than the penalty mayor in its minimum
for illegal possession - the period shall be imposed
penalty shall be the latter in addition.
 1. Hence, parricide is committed even if the son did not know that he killed
his father.
2. Since the law did not state “affinity,” in-laws are not included.
1. Only blood relatives are considered herein.
3. “Any Ascendant or Descendant”
1. If the child killed his father, the relationship can be legitimate or
illegitimate.
2. If he also killed his grandfather, the relationship must be legitimate. If it is
illegitimate, homicide or murder was committed.
1. Why? The provision states “father, mother, or child, whether
legitimate or illegitimate, OR any of his ascendants or descendants.”
2. Hence, it implies that only legitimate ascendants/descendants are
covered by parricide.
4. “Or his spouse”
1. Of course, they must be legally married. But remember that all
marriages enjoy the presumption of validity under the Family Code.
5. Cases or parricide when the penalty shall not be reclusion perpetua to death:
1. Parricide through negligence (Art. 365)
2. Parricide by mistake of identity (Art. 49); and
3. Parricide under exceptional circumstances (Art. 247)
6. Relationship of the offender with the victim is essential element of the crime of
parricide:
1. If a person wanted to kill a stranger but by mistake killed his own father,
he is liable for parricide, but Article 49 will apply as regards his penalty.
2. If a person killed a stranger by shooting at him, and the same bullet also
killed his father, he is liable for the complex crime of parricide with
homicide. Hence, Article 48 will apply.
3. A stranger who takes part or cooperates in the killing is not liable for
parricide. He is liable only for murder or homicide. The circumstance of
the relationship is personal between the offender and the offended
party.

Article 247. Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional

circumstances.

1. The spouses must have a valid marriage. The daughter, however, may be
legitimate or illegitimate so long as living with the offender.
2. “Surprised his spouse”
1. Surprise means to come upon suddenly and unexpectedly
3. “Sexual intercourse”
1. This means vaginal penetration by the penis. (People v Gonzales, 1939)
2. It does not include merely sleeping on the same bed. (People v Bituanan,
1931)
 3. It does not include not include preparatory acts such as oral sex. (Reyes)
4. “In the Act or Immediately thereafter”
1. The discovery, the escape, the pursuit, and the killing mustily form part of
one continuous act. (US v Vargas, 1903)

Article 248. Murder.

1. “Outraging” (physical act)

1. It means to commit an extremely vicious or deeply insulting act.
2. “Scoffing” (verbal act)
1. It means to jeer, and implies a showing of irreverence to the dead.
1. Dismemberment of a dead body is one manner of outraging or
scoffing at the corpse of the victim and qualifies the killing to murder.
(People v Guillermo, 2004)
3. Rule for the application of the circumstances which qualify the killing to
murder:
1. If there are two qualifying circumstances, one will qualify the crime to
murder, and the other will be generic aggravating.
2. When one qualifying circumstance is absorbed or included in another,
such as poison and treachery, only the latter shall be considered to qualify
the crime to murder. The former will not be considered at all.
3. Any of the circumstances mentioned must be alleged to qualify or
aggravate the crime. This is in keeping with his right to be informed of the
nature and cause of accusation against him. If not so alleged, they will
only be considered for exemplary damages.
4. Under RA 10591, the use of loose firearms, when inherent in the commission
of a crime punishable by RPC, shall be punished as (special) aggravating
circumstance. (Sec. 29)
1. SPECIAL AGGRAVATING (like quasi-recidivism)
1. Not qualifying circumstance.
2. Mere special GENERIC circumstance.
2. It cannot be offset by ordinary mitigating.

Article 249. Homicide.

1. Homicide is the link for crimes against persons

1. Homicide v. Murder etc. = presence of qualifying circumstance
2. Homcide v. Physical Injuries = presence of intent to kill
2. Intent to kill
1. When death results, intent to kill is conclusively presumed. Evidence of
intent to kill is crucial only to find if there was attempted or frustrated
homicide. (Yapyuco v Sandiganbayan, 2012)
2. Intent to kill is usually shown by the kind of weapon used and the location
 2.
and nature of the wound.
3. Accidental homicide
1. If the death of a person was brought about by a lawful act performed with
due care and without homicidal intent, e.g. death in a boxing match, there
is no felony committed. This is an exempting circumstance of accident.
(Article 12(4))
2. There can be no crime of attempted or frustrated homicide through
reckless imprudence. The element of intent to kill is incompatible with
negligence or imprudence. (Reyes)
4. Corpus delicti
1. It does not require the cadaver of the victim. It merely requires 1) the
fact of death, and 2) the identity of the victim.
1. Crime has been committed
2. Someone is guilty for the crime

Article 250. Penalty for frustrated parricide, murder or homicide.

1. The courts, in view of the facts of the case, may impose upon the person
guilty of the frustrated crime of parricide, murder or homicide, defined and
penalized in the preceding articles, a penalty lower by one degree than that
which should be imposed under the provision of Article 50.
2. The courts, considering the facts of the case, may likewise reduce by one
degree the penalty which under Article 51 should be imposed for an attempt
to commit any of such crimes.
3. COMMENT: This Article gives the court the discretion to impose a penalty
two degrees lower for frustrated parricide, murder, or homicide. It also gives
it discretion to impose a penalty three degrees lower for attempted parricide,
murder, or homicide. However, the rule is of course, one or two degrees lower
only so follow that.

Article 251. Death caused in a tumultuous affray.

1. “Tumultuous affray”
1. A melee or free-for-all, where several persons not comprising definite or
identifiable groups attack one another in a confused and disorganized
manner, resulting in the death or injury of one or some of them. (People v
Unlaganda, 2002)
2. “Several persons”
1. This means at least four persons are involved. (Article 153, par. 3)
3. “Not compose of groups organized for the common purpose of assaulting and
attacking each other reciprocally”
1. If they are composed of such groups, such as fraternities and gangs,
each part of that group shall become a co-conspirator for the crime
 1.

committed. Hence, all of them will be liable for homicide, because they
had a common design to kill another person.
2. The quarrel in the instant case is between a distinct group of individuals,
one of whom was sufficiently identified as the principal author of the
killing, as against a common, particular victim. It is not, as the defense
suggests, a "tumultuous affray" within the meaning of Art. 251 of The
Revised Penal Code, that is, a melee or free-for-all, where several persons
not comprising definite or identifiable groups attack one another in a
confused and disorganized manner, resulting in the death or injury of one
or some of them. The crime committed is homicide under Art. 249.
(People v Unlaganda, 2002)
4. “Someone was killed in the course of the affray”
1. Someone means the victim can be a participant or a non-participant of
the affray. However, the offender must be a participant thereof. Otherwise,
the crime is homicide.
5. “It cannot be ascertained who actually killed the deceased”
1. If it can be ascertained, then only that person ascertained will be liable for
the crime of homicide.
6. Persons liable:
1. The person who inflicted serious physical injuries; or
2. If it is not known who inflicted the serious physical injuries, the persons
who used violence upon the person of the victim are liable, but with lesser
liability.
7. KRISTEL: In the case of Wacoy v People, June 22, 2015, (Perlas-Bernabe),
it was explained that there is tumultuous affray when several persons quarrel
and assault each other in a confused and tumultuous manner provided that
they are not composed of groups organized for the common purpose of
reciprocally assaulting and attacking each other. There were only two (2)
persons, who picked on one defenseless individual and attacked him
repeatedly, taking turns in inflicting punches and kicks on the poor victim.
There was no confusion and tumultuous quarrel or affray, nor was there a
reciprocal aggression in that fateful incident. Since assailants were even
identified as the ones who assaulted the victim, the latter's death cannot be
said to have been caused in a tumultuous affray.

Article 252. Physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous affray.

1. “Only serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the participants thereof.”
1. The difference is in this Article, the victim must be a participant in the
affray. This can be inferred from the phrase “only serious physical injuries
are inflicted upon the participants thereof.”
2. Article 251 or Article 252 absorbs the crime of tumults or serious disturbance
for the offender who injured another person, if he also caused the tumults or
 2.

serious disturbance.
1. However, if the accused did not kill or injure any person, the crime is
merely tumults.
2. If the accused is also the one who caused the tumults, the crime is merely
death/serious physical injuries in a tumultuous affray.
3. COMMENT: A shot at B in a shopping mall, during mall hours. People around
the vicinity scampered and panicked because of the gunshot. What crimes did
A commit? In my opinion, complex crime of attempted homicide with
tumults.

Article 253. Giving assistance to suicide.

1. Whether suicide was consummated or not

1. This means the “assist” alone consummates the crime. The death of the
person who wants to commit suicide is not necessary to consummate the
crime.
2. “To the extent of doing the killing himself”
1. It must be noted that the penalty for this act is the same as the penalty for
homicide. Hence, the act of the offender must be equal to the act of a
person liable for homicide, although in the former, the offended party
wanted to die. To illustrate, A wanted to kill himself by a gunshot. He could
not pull the trigger so he asked B to pull it for him. B pulled it for him and
shot A, causing the latter’s death.
2. Other examples: pushing A on a cliff; kicking the chair for strangulation;
slitting A’s throat for him.
3. IN SHORT, DID YOU DETERMINE THE FATE OF THE PERSON OR NOT?
1. If yes, RT (because it is like homicide)
2. If no, PM
3. Committing suicide is not a felony
1. It must be remembered that the person committing suicide is NOT liable
for a felony. Committing suicide is not a felony. Further, if in committing
suicide, he kills another, he is NOT liable for the killing of another because
criminal liability is not incurred by a person was not committing a felony.
(Article 4(1)). As illustration, A shot his chest at close range. The bullet
also hit the person behind him. A was saved by the doctors, while the
person behind him died. A is not criminally liable for homicide.
4. Correlation of assisting to commit suicide and murder
1. If A wants to jump from a bridge and he asked the aid of B to shove him
off, if B does so, the latter shall be liable for Article 253, because he lent
assistance to another to commit suicide to the extent of doing the killing
himself.
2. However, if A was hesitating to jump from a bridge, and B suddenly shoves
him off, B is liable for murder qualified by treachery.
 5. What if the son assists the father to commit suicide?
1. If a son assists his father to commit suicide, the son is liable under this
Article and NOT for parricide. Remember that this provision does not
qualify. It says “any person who shall assist another to commit suicide.”
6. Euthanasia or “mercy killing”
1. The difference between Article 253 and “mercy killing” is in the former,
the other person wanted to die. In the latter, although in a vegetative
state, he did not want to die. Hence, killing the person constitutes murder
qualified by treachery.
1. What if the deceased said “patayin mo na ko’? The crime is giving
assistance of suicide.

Article 254. Discharge of firearms.

Discharge of Alarms and Grave threats Homicide Physical

firearms scandals Injuries
Pointed at a At a public Any place Pointed at a Pointed at a
person place person person but
not in a mortal
area
To intimidate Cause To demand To kill To injure
disturbance/ money/
scandal condition
NOTE:
Discharge of
firearms is
hard to
commit.

RA 11053 - Anti-Hazing Act of 2018

SEC. 2. Definition of Terms.

As used in this Act:

1. Hazing refers to:
1. any act that results in physical or psychological suffering, harm, or injury
inflicted on a recruit, neophyte, applicant, or member as part of an
initiation rite or practice made as a prerequisite for admission or a
requirement for continuing membership in a fraternity, sorority, or
organization
2. including, but not limited to, paddling, whipping, beating, branding, forced
calisthenics, exposure to the weather, forced consumption of any food,
 2.

liquor, beverage, drug or other substance, or any other brutal treatment or

forced physical activity which is likely to adversely affect the physical and
psychological health of such recruit, neophyte, applicant, or member. This
shall also include any activity, intentionally made or otherwise, by one
person alone or acting with others, that tends to humiliate or embarrass,
degrade, abuse, or endanger, by requiring a recruit, neophyte, applicant,
or member to do menial, silly, or foolish tasks.
2. Initiation or Initiation Rites refer to:
1. ceremonies, practices, rituals, or other acts, whether formal or informal,
that a person must perform or take part in order to be accepted into a
fraternity, sorority, or organization as a full-fledged member. It includes
ceremonies, practices, rituals, and other acts in all stages of membership
in a fraternity, sorority, or organization.
3. Organization refers to:
1. an organized body of people which includes, but is not limited to, any
club, association, group, fraternity, and sorority. This term shall include
the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), the Philippine National Police
(PNP), the Philippine Military Academy (PMA), the Philippine National
Police Academy (PNPA), and other similar uniformed service learning
institutions.
4. Schools refer to:
1. colleges, universities, and all other educational institutions.”

Elements of Hazing
1. Any act of physical or psychological suffering/harm/injury
2. Inflicted upon a recruit/neophyte/applicant/member
3. As part of an initiation rite/practice
4. Made as a prerequisite for admission/Requirement for continuing membership
in a fraternity/sorority/organization.

SEC. 14. Penalties.

The following penalties shall be imposed:

1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine of Three million pesos
(P3,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon those who actually planned or
participated in the hazing if, as a consequence of the hazing, death, rape,
sodomy, or mutilation results therefrom;
2. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine of Two million pesos
(P2,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon:
1. All persons who actually planned or participated in the conduct of the
hazing;
2. All officers who are actually present during the hazing;
3. The adviser who is present when the acts constituting the hazing were
 3.
committed and failed to take action to prevent the same from occurring
or failed to promptly report the same to the law enforcement authorities if
such adviser or advisers can do so without peril to their person or their
family;
4. All former officers, nonresident members, or alumni who are also
present during the hazing:
5. Officers or members who knowingly cooperated in carrying out the
hazing by inducing the victim to be present thereat; and
6. Members who are present during the hazing when they are
intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs;
3. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum period and a fine of One
million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon all persons who are
present in the conduct of the hazing;
4. The penalty of reclusion temporal and a fine of One million pesos
(P1,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon former officers, nonresident
members, or alumni who, after the commission of any of the prohibited acts
proscribed herein, will perform any act to hide, conceal, or otherwise
hamper or obstruct any investigation that will be conducted thereafter:
5. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed
upon any person who shall intimidate, threaten, force, or employ, or
administer any form of vexation against another person for the purpose of
recruitment in joining or promoting a particular fraternity, sorority, or
organization.
1. The persistent and repeated proposal or invitation made to a person who
had twice refused to participate or join the proposed fraternity, sorority,
or organization, shall be prima facie evidence of vexation for purposes
of this section; and
6. A fine of One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be imposed on the school if
the fraternity, sorority, or organization filed a written application to conduct an
initiation which was subsequently approved by the school and hazing occurred
during the initiation rites or when no representatives from the school were
present during the initiation as provided under Section 5 of this Act: Provided,
That if hazing has been committed in circumvention of the provisions of this
Act, it is incumbent upon school officials to investigate motu proprio and take
an active role to ascertain factual events and identify witnesses in order to
determine the disciplinary sanctions it may impose, as well as provide
assistance to police authorities.
7. The owner or lessee of the place where hazing is conducted shall be liable
as principal and penalized under paragraphs (a) or (b) of this section, when
such owner or lessee has actual knowledge of the hazing conducted therein
but failed to take any action to prevent the same from occurring or failed to
promptly report the same to the law enforcement authorities if they can do so
without peril to their person or their family.
 8. If the hazing is held in the home of one of the officers or members of the
fraternity, sorority, or organization, the parents shall be held liable as
principals and penalized under paragraphs (a) or (b) hereof when they have
actual knowledge of the hazing conducted therein but failed to take any
action to prevent the same from occurring or failed to promptly report the
same to the law enforcement authorities if such parents can do so without
peril to their person or their family.
9. The school authorities including faculty members as well as barangay,
municipal, or city officials shall be liable as an accomplice and likewise be held
administratively accountable for hazing conducted by fraternities, sororities,
and other organizations, if it can be shown that the school or barangay,
municipal, or city officials allowed or consented to the conduct of hazing or
where there is actual knowledge of hazing, but such officials failed to take
any action to prevent the same from occurring or failed to promptly report to
the law enforcement authorities if the same can be done without peril to their
person or their family.
9. The presence of any person, even if such person is not a member of the
fraternity, sorority, or organization, during the hazing is prima facie
evidence of participation therein as a principal unless such person or
persons prevented the commission of the acts punishable herein or
promptly reported the same to the law enforcement authorities if they
can do so without peril to their person or their family.
10. The incumbent officers of the fraternity, sorority, or organization
concerned shall be jointly liable with those members who actually
participated in the hazing.
11. Any person charged under this Act shall not be entitled to the mitigating
circumstance that there was no intention to commit so grave a wrong.
12. This section shall apply to the president, manager, director, or other
responsible officer of businesses or corporations engaged in hazing as a
requirement for employment in the manner provided herein.
13. Any conviction by final judgment shall be reflected in the scholastic
record, personal, or employment record of the person convicted,
regardless of when the judgment of conviction has become final.”

Malum prohibitum
1. This is a malum prohibitum offense. Hence, criminal intent, good faith, and the
mitigating circumstance of lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong as
that committed are inapplicable. (Dungo v People, 2015)

RA 10591 - Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act

ARTICLE V - PENAL PROVISIONS

SEC. 28. Unlawful Acquisition, or Possession of Firearms and Ammunition.

The unlawful acquisition, possession of firearms and ammunition shall be

penalized as follows:
(a) The penalty of prision mayor in its medium period shall be imposed upon any
person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a small arm;
(b) The penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed if
three (3) or more small arms or Class-A light weapons are unlawfully acquired or
possessed by any person;
(c) The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period shall be imposed upon any
person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a Class-A light weapon;
(d) The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon any person who shall,
unlawfully acquire or possess a Class-B light weapon;
(e) The penalty of one (1) degree higher than that provided in paragraphs (a) to (c)
in this section shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully possess any
firearm under any or combination of the following conditions:
(1) Loaded with ammunition or inserted with a loaded magazine;
(2) Fitted or mounted with laser or any gadget used to guide the shooter to hit the
target such as thermal weapon sight (TWS) and the like;
(3) Fitted or mounted with sniper scopes, firearm muffler or firearm silencer;
(4) Accompanied with an extra barrel; and
(5) Converted to be capable of firing full automatic bursts.
(f) The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any
person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a major part of a small arm;
(g) The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any
person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess ammunition for a small arm or
Class-A light weapon. If the violation of this paragraph is committed by the same
person charged with the unlawful acquisition or possession of a small arm, the
former violation shall be absorbed by the latter;
(h) The penalty of prision mayor in its medium period shall be imposed upon any
person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a major part of a Class-A light
weapon;
(i) The penalty of prision mayor in its medium period shall be imposed upon any
person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess ammunition for a Class-A light
weapon. If the violation of this paragraph is committed by the same person
charged with the unlawful acquisition or possession of a Class-A light weapon, the
former violation shall be absorbed by the latter;
(j) The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period shall be imposed upon any
person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a major part of a Class-B light
weapon; and
(k) The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period shall be imposed upon any
person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess ammunition for a Class-B light
weapon. If the violation of this paragraph is committed by the same person
charged with the unlawful acquisition or possession of a Class-B light weapon, the
former violation shall be absorbed by the latter.

SEC. 29. Use of Loose Firearm in the Commission of a Crime.

1. The use of a loose firearm, when inherent in the commission of a crime

punishable under the Revised Penal Code or other special laws, shall be
considered as an aggravating circumstance:
1. Provided, That if the crime committed with the use of a loose firearm is
penalized by the law with a maximum penalty which is lower than that
prescribed in the preceding section for illegal possession of firearm, the
penalty for illegal possession of firearm shall be imposed in lieu of the
penalty for the crime charged:
2. Provided, further, That if the crime committed with the use of a loose
firearm is penalized by the law with a maximum penalty which is equal to
that imposed under the preceding section for illegal possession of
firearms, the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be
imposed in addition to the penalty for the crime punishable under the
Revised Penal Code or other special laws of which he/she is found guilty.
2. If the violation of this Act is in furtherance of, or incident to, or in connection
with the crime of rebellion of insurrection, or attempted coup d’ etat, such
violation shall be absorbed as an element of the crime of rebellion or
insurrection, or attempted coup d’ etat.
3. If the crime is committed by the person without using the loose firearm, the
violation of this Act shall be considered as a distinct and separate offense.

NOTES:
1. “Inherent”
1. In such a case, the use of the unlicensed firearm is not considered as a
separate crime but shall be appreciated as a mere aggravating
circumstance. Thus, where murder was committed, the penalty for illegal
possession of firearms is no longer imposable since it becomes merely a
special aggravating circumstance. The intent of Congress is to treat the
offense of illegal possession of firearm and the commission of homicide or
murder with the use of unlicensed firearm as a single offense. (People v
Gaborne, 2016)
2. These are crimes which require or is committed by means of a firearm.
Murder, homicide, treason, discharge of firearms, and alarms and scandals
are examples.
2. Example for the first “Provided”
1. A, with a loose and unlicensed pistol, shot at B. Due to lack of precision, B
was not hit by the bullet. The crime committed is attempted homicide.
Such crime is penalised by the law with a maximum penalty of prision
 1.

correccional, because it is two degrees lower from reclusion temporal.

Hence, the penalty to be imposed is that for illegal possession of firearms,
which is prision mayor in its medium period, in lieu of prision correccional.
3. Example for the second “Provided”
1. A, with a loose and unlicensed pistol, shot at B. The latter was hit in his
chest. However, he did not die due to medical intervention. The crime
committed is frustrated homicide. Such crime is penalised by the law with
a maximum penalty of prision mayor because it is one degree lower from
reclusion temporal. Hence, the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum
period shall be imposed in addition to the penalty for the crime punishable
under the RPC.
4. If sedition, it will fall under the first paragraph.
1. Thus, the use of the loose firearm shall be considered as special
aggravating circumstance, because it was inherent.

SEC. 30. Liability of Juridical Person.

The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum to prision mayor in its medium period
shall be imposed upon the owner, president, manager, director or other
responsible officer of/any public or private firm, company, corporation or entity
who shall willfully or knowingly allow any of the firearms owned by such firm,
company, corporation or entity to be used by any person or persons found guilty
of violating the provisions of the preceding section, or willfully or knowingly allow
any of them to use unregistered firearm or firearms without any legal authority to
be carried outside of their residence in the course of their employment.

SEC. 31. Absence of Permit to Carry Outside of Residence.

The penalty of prision correccional and a fine of Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00)
shall be imposed upon any person who is licensed to own a firearm but who shall
carry the registered firearm outside his/her residence without any legal authority
therefor.

SEC. 41. Illegal Transfer/Registration of Firearms.

It shall be unlawful to transfer possession of any firearm to any person who has
not yet obtained or secured the necessary license or permit thereof.
The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed upon any person who shall
violate the provision of the preceding paragraph. In addition, he/she shall be
disqualified to apply for a license to possess other firearms and all his/her existing
firearms licenses whether for purposes of commerce or possession, shall be
revoked. If government-issued firearms, ammunition or major parts of firearms or
light weapons are unlawfully disposed, sold or transferred by any law enforcement
agent or public officer to private individuals, the penalty of reclusion temporal
shall be imposed.
Any public officer or employee or any person who shall facilitate the registration of
a firearm through fraud, deceit, misrepresentation or submission of falsified
documents shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional.

Section Two. - Infanticide and abortion.

Article 255. Infanticide.

1. Since a baby cannot put up any defense, the aggravating circumstance of

treachery is absorbed.
2. We must not consider if the child had an intra-uterine life of less than 7
months.
3. Scenarios as to the time the child was killed:
1. Child was killed while inside the womb, even if 10 months already -
Abortion;
2. Child was killed while outside the womb, but less than three (3) days old -
Infanticide;
3. Child was killed while outside the womb, and is at least (3) days old -
Parricide if the offender is an ascendant, or Murder if the offender is a
stranger.

Infanticide Parricide
Basis of the crime Age Relationship
Victim The victim must be a The victim must be a
child, less than three relative of the offender
(3) days of age. (If
already 3 days,
parricide/murder; if 1 or
2, infanticide always)
Offender Any person Relative of the victim
Information Only one (1) information Separate informations
for infanticide has to be must be filed: 1) an
filed for several accused information for parricide
for the ascendant who
killed his descendant,
and 2) an information for
murder for the other
accused where
relationship does not
apply, i.e., NURSE.
Mitigating circumstance It applies to the mother It does not apply
of concealment of and the maternal
dishonor grandparents
 murder for the other
accused where
relationship does not
apply, i.e., NURSE.
Mitigating circumstance It applies to the mother It does not apply
of concealment of and the maternal
dishonor grandparents
Article 256. Intentional abortion.

Punishable Acts: (VCC)

1. He shall use any Violence upon the person of the pregnant woman
2. Without using violence, he shall act without the Consent of the woman
3. The woman shall have Consented

Persons liable:
1. The person who intentionally caused the abortion, under Article 256.
2. The pregnant woman, if she consented, under Article 258.

Frustrated and attempted abortion

1. Intentional abortion has three (3) stages - consummated, frustrated, and
attempted.
2. How does “frustrated” occur?
1. As defined in Article 6, it is frustrated when the offender performs all the
acts of execution necessary to produce the felony but which nevertheless
does not produce by reason of causes independent of the will of the
offender.
2. To illustrate, A administered enough drugs to induce the expulsion of the
fetus from the womb of the mother. However, due to doctor intervention,
the fetus remain in a healthy and strong condition inside the mother’s
womb.
3. How does “attempted” occur?
1. As defined in Article 6, there is an attempt when the offender commences
the commission of the felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform
all the acts of execution to produce the felony by reason of some cause or
accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.
2. To illustrate, A administered enough drugs into the juice of B, a pregnant
woman, to induce the expulsion of the fetus from B’s womb. As B was
about to drink the same, C shoved the glass of juice from B’s hand.

Complex crime of intentional abortion and physical injuries/homicide

1. A and B had a long standing war. One day, A punched the stomach of B for 10
times, precisely to remove the foetus inside B’s womb. The foetus was
expelled from the same. Further, the injuries inflicted upon B required medical
attention for 30 days. What are the crimes committed? A committed the
complex crime of intentional abortion through less serious physical injuries.
Article 257. Unintentional abortion.

Complex crime of unintentional abortion/intentional abortion and physical injuries

1. If the violence was intended, and the foetus dies, although the abortion was
not intended, the offender is liable for a complex crime of unintentional
abortion through physical injuries. It is a compound crime under Article 48. It
was a mistake in the blow.

Separate crimes of unintentional/international abortion and SLIGHT physical

injuries
1. COMMENT: However, always remember what kind of physical injuries were
inflicted upon the pregnant woman. To illustrate, A and B were rivals. Because
of the anger of A towards B, A snatched the hair of B and dragged her across
the room. As a result, B suffered physical injuries which required medical
attention of 5 days. Further, since she was pregnant at the time, the foetus
was expelled from her body due to the trauma caused by the incident. What
are the crimes committed by A? A committed the separate crimes of
unintentional abortion and slight physical injuries. It cannot be complexed
because the latter is a light felony.
2. If the violence was intended, but the abortion was not intended and the foetus
did not die, the offender is merely liable for the physical injuries he inflicted
the pregnant woman. There is no crime of frustrated or attempted
unintentional abortion.

There can be NO complex crime of unintentional abortion and grave threats

1. In the former, acts of physical violence were inflicted upon the woman. In the
latter, mere threats were inflicted upon her. If the threats resulted into an
abortion, “unintentional abortion” will never be the proper crime because
there was no “abortion by violence.”
2. Hence, if grave threats were made, and due to the stress, abortion was
caused, only grave threats was committed.

The pregnant woman who tried to commit suicide is not liable for unintentional
abortion
1. The Article contemplated a physical violence inflicted by another person to
the pregnant woman, and not by the pregnant woman herself.

The Article is silent as to the “knowledge” of the offender

1. It merely deals with the intent to commit violence.
2. Hence, it was ruled that knowledge of the offender of the pregnancy was not
necessary. (US v Jeffrey, 1910)
3. Unintentional abortion presupposes the LACK of knowledge of the offender.
He merely intended to injure/hurt the woman.
There must be VIOLENCE
– not mere shouting or quarelling

Article 258. Abortion practiced by the woman herself of by her parents.

NOTE: The offender must be the PARENT of the pregnant woman. It does not
include the new spouse of the parent (step-parent) or parent-in-law.

Article 259. Abortion practiced by a physician or midwife and dispensing of

abortives.

1. The crime is consummated by simply dispensing the abortive. It does not

require the actual abortion of the foetus.
2. However, if the pharmacist knew that the abortive will be used to kill the
fetus, and the pregnant woman actually ingested the abortive, the pharmacist
will either be a conspirator or an accomplice to the crime of abortion/
frustrated abortion/attempted abortion.
1. The crime of dispensing the abortive without proper prescription under
Article 259 is absorbed.
3. If the abortives were taken, and the woman ingests it, but she was actually not
pregnant, Regalado opines that an impossible crime was committed.
1. DISAGREE: Impossible crime requires that the act is not punishable under
any other provision of the RPC. Here, the crime of dispensing of abortives
was committed, so it is not an impossible crime.

Section Three. - Duel

Article 260. Responsibility of participants in a duel.

Elements: (KIM)

1. Killing one’s adversary in a duel;

2. Inflicting upon such adversary physical injuries; and
3. Making a combat although no physical injuries have been inflicted.

Persons liable:

1. The person who killed or inflicted physical injuries upon his adversary or both
combatants in any other case, as principals; and
2. The seconds, as accomplices.

Duel
A formal or regular combat previously concerted between two parties in the
presence of two or more seconds of lawful age of each side, who make the
selection of arms and fix all other conditions of the fight.

Seconds

The persons who make the selection of the arms and fix other conditions of the
fight.

Self-defence cannot be invoked if there was a pre-concerted agreement to fight.

However, if the attack was made by the accused against his opponent before the
appointed place and time, there is an unlawful aggression, hence self-defence can
be claimed. (Justo v CA, 1956)

It must be noted that if death results, the law imposes the same penalty as
homicide.

Article 261. Challenging to a duel.

Punishable acts: (CIS)

1. Challenging another to a duel

2. Inciting another to give or accept a challenge to a duel
3. Scoffing or decrying another publicly for having refused to accept a challenge
to fight a duel.
Persons liable:

1. Challenger; and
2. Instigator

A challenge to fight, without contemplating a duel, is not challenging to a duel.

The person making the challenge must have in mind a formal combat to be
concerted between him and the one challenged in the presence of two or more
seconds.

Chapter Two - PHYSICAL INJURIES

Nature of Physical Injuries as to the Stage of Execution

1. It is a formal crime; always in the consummated stage as the penalty is based

on the gravity of the injury. The gravity of the injury, whether serious, less
 1.

serious, or slight, will not be known unless and until the felony is
consummated.
2. COMMENT: This includes mutilation.

Intent to kill is determined by:

1. The kind of weapon used

2. The nature, number, and location fo the wound; and
3. The words uttered by the offender.

Physical Injuries Attempted/Frustrated

Homicide or Murder
Manner of commission The offender inflicts May be committed even
physical injuries if there is no physical
injury inflicted
Criminal Intent No intent to kill Intent to kill
Effect of the victim’s The crime becomes The crime becomes
death homicide, as provided by homicide
Article 4(1).
Article 262. Mutilation.

1. Mutilation
1. The word of mutilation implies the lopping or clipping or cutting off of
some part of the body. (US v Bogel, 1907)
2. Punishable acts:
1. By intentionally mutilating another by depriving him, either totally or
partially, of some essential organ for reproduction (castration)
2. By intentionally making other mutilation, that is, by lopping or clipping off
of any part of the body of the offended party, other than the essential
organ for reproduction, to deprive him of that part of the body (mayhem)
3. “Castration”
1. Intentionally depriving a person of essential organ for reproduction does
not always mean cutting off the same. It suffices that the reproductive
organ is rendered useless (PAMPAGULO PA) .
2. The penalty imposed shall be higher when the victim is under 12 years
of age. (RA 7610, Sec. 10)
4. QUESTION: A and B were quarrelling. A had a knife, so he used it against B.
The knife cut off the hand of B. What is the crime committed by A?
1. It is serious physical injuries, under paragraph 2. It is not mutilation
because of lack of specific intent to cut a body part/mutilate B.
5. Attempted Homicide v. Mutilation v. Serious PI (intent)
1. Attempted homicide - with intent to kill
 2. Mutliation - without intent to kill + intent to mutilate
3. Serious PI - without intent to kill + without intent to mutilate + with intent
to injure
Mutilation Physical Injuries
There is a special intention to clip off No special intention to clip off some
some part of the body so as to deprive part of the body so as to deprive him
him of such part of that part

Article 263. Serious physical injuries.

1. Punishable Acts: (WBAI)

1. Wounding
2. Beating
3. Assaulting
4. Administering Injurious Substances (Article 264)
2. You need to divide the injuries under Serious Physical Injuries
1. Some are related to Mutilation; Some are related to Less Serious Physical
Injuries
3. Serious Physical Injuries
1. When the injured person becomes insane, imbecile, impotent, or blind
as a consequence of the physical injuries inflicted (IIIB)
2. When the injured person
1. Loses the use of speech or the power to hear, or smell
2. Loses an eye, an arm, a hand, a leg, or a foot
3. Loses the use of any such member
4. Becomes incapacitated for the work in which he was theretofore
habitually engaged (permanently), in consequence of the physical
injuries inflicted
3. When the injured person
1. Becomes deformed
2. Loses any other member of his body
3. Loses the use thereof;
4. Becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of the work in which
he was habitually engaged for more than 90 days, in consequence
of the physical injuries inflicted
4. When the injured person becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for more
than thirty days, as a result of the physical injuries inflicted
1. There are 3 periods herein:
1. Incapacitated for the work which he was habitually engaged -
permanently unable
2. Incapacitated for the work which he was habitually engaged -
more than 90 days
3. Incapacitated for labor (any and all kinds of work) - more than 30
 3.
days. (that’s why this is shorter)

NOTES:
1. Serious v. Less Serious v. Slight
1. In all of these crimes, intent to injure is present.
2. The difference lies with the GRAVITY OF THE INJURY
2. “Impotent”
1. This means the offended party cannot have an erection. However, it also
includes sterility, which means incapable of producing children.
3. “Blind”; “An eye”
1. “Blind” means complete blindness of both eyes. If just one eye, then it
falls in “an eye.”
4. What if he still has eyesight but blurred?
1. He is not “blind” nor did he “lose an eye” or “the use thereof.”
2. Hence, to become serious physical injuries, the blurriness of his eyesight
must render him unable to perform the work in which he is habitually
engaged permanently or for more than 90 days, or it must render him
unable to perform any kind of labor for more than 30 days.
5. “Hear”
1. It means both ears cannot hear. If just the hearing of one ear was lost then
it falls under “loses any member of his body.”
6. What if an ear was cut off, but he can still hear?
1. It is covered by “deformed” already.
7. “Deformed”; Requisites: (PPV)
1. Physical ugliness
2. Permanent and definite abnormality
3. Visible
1. Example is scar on the face constitutes deformity.
8. “Loses any other member of his body”
1. Any part of the body, no matter how small it is, will constitute as serious
physical injury if it was lost. As example, losing a toe is serious; losing a
pinky finger is serious; and losing a nail is serious.
9. “Labor” and “Habitually Engaged,” distinguished
1. Labor is broader than habitually engaged. A person can still perform work
but he may be incapacitated for the work which he is habitually engaged.
1. As example, A hit B with a baseball bat. B was a “kargador” in a rice
mill. Because of the hit, B developed a chronic pain on his back,
leading to his resignation in the job.
1. What is the crime? Here, there was serious physical injuries
because the injury rendered him incapacitated for the work which
he was habitually engaged.
2. However, was he incapacitated for labor? No, he can still work for
other jobs.
 2. Another is A hit B on his right knee. B is a professional athlete. The hit
resulted into a torn ACL.
1. What is the crime? It is serious physical injuries, because a torn
ACL will render him incapable for the work which he was habitually
engaged for more than 90 days.
2. However, was he incapacitated for labor? No, he can still work for
other jobs.
2. If he is able to work, although he needs medical attention, the crime is
never “serious” physical injuries, even if medical attention lasts for 200
days. The injury will only be “less serious” physical injuries.
10. If robbery is committed and the offended party suffers serious physical
injuries, the crime/s committed is/are:
1. Special complex crime of robbery with serious physical injuries
1. if the injured person is not responsible for the commission of the
robbery
2. Separate crimes of robbery and serious physical injuries
1. if the injured person is the robber or otherwise responsible for the
commission of the robbery.
2. This will be discussed further in Crimes against Property. (Article 294)
11. Evidence of the length of period is essential
1. Where the category of the crime of serious physical injuries depends on
the period of illness or incapacity for labor, there must be evidence of of
the length of such period.
2. If there is no evidence, the crime is only slight physical injuries.
12. Qualifying circumstances:
1. Offense committed against persons enumerated in the crime of parricide
1. spouse, parent, or child, illegitimate or illegitimate, ascendant, or
descendant
2. With the attendance of any of the circumstances in the article defining the
crime of murder.
1. AA-SW-PT-FMC-C-CS
3. However, the qualified penalties are not applicable to parents who inflict
serious physical injures upon their children by excessive chastisement.

Article 264. Administering injurious substances or beverages.

1. If the accused did not know that injurious nature of the substance, he is not
liable under this Article. There is no crime because of lack of intent.

Article 265. Less serious physical injuries.

1. Less serious physical injuries

1. Incapacitate for labor for 10 to 30 days
 2. Require medical attendance for 10 days or more (indefinite)
2. Qualified less serious physical injuries (IIPR)
1. Insult or offend the injured person;
2. Ignominy to the offense;
3. Offender’s Parent, Ascendant, Guardian, Curator, or Teacher was injured;
or
4. Person of Rank or persons in authority provided the crime does not
constitute as direct assault.
1. As example, the offender did not know that he is a person in authority;
or
2. Another is the offended party was not engaged in the performance of
his duties nor occasion of the same at the time the injuries were
inflicted.
1. What if he knew that the person was a person in authority?
1. There is complex crime of direct assault with less serious
physical injuries.
3. “Habitually engaged” only appears in serious physical injuries.
1. What if he became incapacitated for the work which he was habitually
engaged for ONLY 90 days?
1. This is not provided by RPC. However, just opt for serious physical
injuries still.
4. “Medical attendance” only applies to less serious physical injuries and slight
physical injuries.
5. There must be proof as to the period of the required medical attendance. In
the absence of proof, the crime is slight physical injuries.
6. You need to DIVIDE habitually engaged and labor to AVOID confusion
1. HE (Serious); MA (Less Serious); MA (Slight)
2. L (31); L (10-30); L (9) (Slight)

Article 266. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment.

1. Punishable acts: (99NI)

1. Incapacitated for labor for 1 to 9 days;
2. Require Medical attendance for 1 to 9 days;
3. Not prevent the offended party from engaging in his habitual work Nor
require medical assistance
4. Offender shall Ill-treat another by deed without causing any injury.
2. When there is no evidence of actual injury, it is only slight physical
injuries. (Li v People, 2004)
3. In the absence of evidence as to the duration of the offended party’s
incapacity for labor or medical attendance, the crime is only slight
physical injuries. (People v Arranchado, 1960)
 4. Supervening events converting the crime into serious physical injuries after
the filing of information for slight physical injuries can still be the subject of
amended of the information. (People v Manolong, 1950; Criminal Procedure -
Rule 117, Sec. 7)
5. Example of paragraphs 2 and 3 is slapping the face of another without causing
a dishonor.
6. What if physical injuries were inflicted with intent to insult?
1. Serious physical injuries - generic aggravating circumstance of ignominy,
using Article 14(17)
2. Less serious physical injuries - qualifying aggravating circumstance, as
explicitly stated
3. Slight physical injuries - separate crimes of slander by deed and slight
physical injuries. It must be remember that slight physical injuries is a light
felony and slander by deed is a less grave felony so there can be no
complex crime.

Crime Injury Days

Serious Physical Injuries
Less Serious Physical
injuries
Slight Physical Injuries
Incapacity from habitual Permanent
work
Incapacity from habitual Over 90 days (91)
work
Incapacity from labor Over 30 days (31)
Incapacity from labor 10-30 days
Medical attendance 10 to indefinite
Incapacity from labor 1-9 days
Medical attendance 1-9 days

Chapter Three - Rape

Intent to lie (consent)

Rape Rape by Qualified Qualified Qualified Simple
sexual sexual Rape Seduction Seduction; Seduction
intercours assault (V1) incest (V2)
e (RA
8353, as
amended
by RA
11648)
By a person By a person By a person Any person Any person Any person
who shall who shall who shall against a against her against a
have carnal have carnal have carnal minor(can sister or minor(can
knowledge knowledge knowledge be descendant be
with with another with another committed (can be committed
another person (can person (can by a committed by a
8353, as
amended
by RA
11648)
By a person By a person By a person Any person Any person Any person
who shall who shall who shall against a against her against a
have carnal have carnal have carnal minor(can sister or minor(can
knowledge knowledge knowledge be descendant be
with with another with another committed (can be committed
another person (can person (can by a committed by a
be be woman; the woman; the
person by a
committed committed victim can victim can
(can be woman; the
by a by a be a man) be a man)
committed woman; the woman; the victim can
by a victim can victim can be a man)
woman; the be a man) be a man)
victim can
be a man)
Sexual Sexual Sexual Seduction Seduction Seduction
intercourse assault, by intercourse (sexual (sexual (sexual
inserting: intercourse intercourse) intercourse
1) Penis ) )
into the
mouth/anal
2) Object
or
instrument
into the
genital/anal
Any of the Any of the Any of the Consent Consent Consent
following following following
instances instances qualified
apply: apply: aggravating
1) Using 1) Using circumstan
force/ force/ ces apply:
threat/ threat/
intimidation intimidation As to Age
(moral (moral and/or
ascendanc ascendanc Relationsh
y) y) ip
2) Under 16 2) Under 16 1) Under
years of years of 18 +
age age PASC3
3) Deprived 3) Deprived 2) Full view
of reason of reason of SPC3
4) 4) 3) Below 7
Demented Demented years of
5) 5) age
Unconsciou Unconsciou
s s As to PNP
6) 6) 4) Custody
of reason of reason of SPC3
4) 4) 3) Below 7
Demented Demented years of
5) 5) age
Unconsciou Unconsciou
s s As to PNP
6) 6) 4) Custody
Fraudulent Fraudulent of the law
machinatio machinatio enforceme
n or grave n or grave nt
abuse of abuse of 5)
authority authority Committed
by law
enforceme
nt + took
advantage
of his
position

As to
Knowledge
of
offender
and the
personal
circumsta
nce of the
offended
party
6) Religious
engaged in
legitimate
religious
vocation
AND such
is known
7) Knew of
STD and
transmitted
it
8) When by
reason or
on
occasion,
the victim
suffered
permanent
physical
MUTILATIO
N or
DISABILITY
 the victim
suffered
permanent
physical
MUTILATIO
N or
DISABILITY
9) Knew of
pregnancy
10) Knew
of mental
disability/
emotion/
physical
Provided, T Provided, T The The By means
hat there hat there offender is offended of deceit
shall be no shall be no a person in party is the
criminal criminal public offender’s
liability on liability on authority, sister/
the part of a the part of a priest, descendant
person person
home-
having having
servant,
carnal carnal
knowledge knowledge domestic,
of another of another guardian,
person person teacher, or
sixteen sixteen (16) any person
(16) years years of age who, in any
of age when the capacity,
when the age shall be
age difference entrusted
difference
between the with the
parties is education
between
not more or custody
the parties than three
is not of the
(3) years, minor
more than and the
three (3) seduced
sexual act in
years, and question is
the sexual proven to be
act in consensual,
question is non-
proven to abusive,
be and non-
consensua exploitative:
l, non- Provided,
abusive, further, That
if the victim
and non-
is under
exploitativ
thirteen (13)
e: Provided years of
, age, this
further, Tha exception
l, non- Provided,
abusive, further, That
if the victim
and non-
is under
exploitativ
thirteen (13)
e: Provided years of
, age, this
further, Tha exception
t if the shall not
victim is apply. (It
under seems that
thirteen the
(13) years exception
of age, will also not
this apply for 14
exception and 15-year
shall not old victims)
apply. (It
seems that
the
exception
will also
not apply
for 14 and
15-year
old
victims)
As used in As used in The Whether or The
this Act, this Act, offended not he/she offended
non- non-abusive party must is a virgin party must
abusive shall mean be sixteen or over 18 be sixteen
shall mean the absence (16) and years old (16) and
the of undue over but over but
influence, under
absence of under
intimidation, eighteen
undue eighteen
fraudulent years of age
influence, machination years of
intimidation s, coercion, age
, fraudulent threat,
machinatio physical,
ns, sexual,
coercion, psychologic
threat, al, or mental
physical, injury or
sexual, maltreatmen
psychologi t, either with
cal, or intention or
mental through
injury or neglect,
during the
maltreatme
conduct of
nt, either
sexual
with activities
cal, or intention or
mental through
injury or neglect,
during the
maltreatme
conduct of
nt, either
sexual
with activities
intention or with the
through child victim.
neglect, On the other
during the hand, non-
conduct of exploitative
sexual shall mean
activities there is no
with the actual or
child attempted
victim. On act or acts
the other of unfairly
hand, non- taking
advantage
exploitative
of the child's
shall mean
position of
there is no vulnerability,
actual or differential
attempted power, or
act or acts trust during
of unfairly the conduct
taking of sexual
advantage activities.
of the
child's
position of
vulnerabilit
y,
differential
power, or
trust during
the
conduct of
sexual
activities.

Mere lewd design

Acts of Acts of Unjust vexation Forcible
lasciviousness lasciviousness abduction
with consent of
OP
Any person Man against a Any act Abduction of
woman woman
Acts of Acts of Annoy/Harass/ With lewd design
lasciviousness lasciviousness Irritate
 Acts of Acts of Unjust vexation Forcible
lasciviousness lasciviousness abduction
with consent of
OP
Any person Man against a Any act Abduction of
woman woman
Acts of Acts of Annoy/Harass/ With lewd design
lasciviousness lasciviousness Irritate
(gratify sexual
desire)
Against a person of Against a woman Against any Against her will or
either sex person Under 12 years old
Lewd design With lewd design NO lewd design
Under any of the Under any of the
circumstances circumstances
under rape under seduction
(qualified/simple)
Forcible abduction, related to Rape
Crime Reason
Forcible abduction absorbs attempted All the time. Why? Because attempted
rape rape also has lewd design.
Consummated rape absorbs forcible When the primary objective was to
abduction rape
Complex crime of rape through forcible When the primary objective was ONLY
abduction lewd design, and rape was also
committed later on (necessary means)
Child abuse law
Child abuse, meaning Other Acts of Neglect, Abuse
Cruelty, or Exploitation, or Other
Conditions Prejudicial to the Child’s
Development
Any act, by deed or word Any person (ACEC)
Which debases, demeans, or degrades Shall commit any other acts of child
Abuse, Cruelty, or Exploitation, or
The intrinsic worth or dignity Be responsible for other Conditions
prejudicial to the child’s development.
(Sec. 10(a)
Of a child as a human being (Sec. 3(b))
Sexual abuse under Child abuse Who are liable for Sexual under Chid
abuse
Children a) Those who engage/promote/
facilitate/induce child prostitution
Whether male or female b) Those who commit the act of sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct with
a child exploited in prostitution or
subjected to other sexual abuse:
For money, profit, consideration, or Provided, That when the victim is
due to the coercion or influence under 16 years old, the perpetrator

Children
Whether male or female
For money, profit, consideration, or
due to the coercion or influence
Of any adult, syndicate, or group
Indulge in sexual intercourse or
lascivious conduct
Shall be deemed as a child exploited in
prostitution or other sexual abuse.
(Sec. 5, Art. III, RA 7610)
abuse
a) Those who engage/promote/
facilitate/induce child prostitution
b) Those who commit the act of sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct with
a child exploited in prostitution or
subjected to other sexual abuse:
Provided, That when the victim is
under 16 years old, the perpetrator
shall be prosecuted under Art. 266
(rape) or Art. 336 (acts of
lasciviousness) of the RPC, for rape or
lascivious conduct, as the case may
be
Provided, That the penalty for
lascivious conduct when the victim is
under 16 years old shall be reclusion
temporal in its medium period.

Under 7 7 but under 16 16 but under 18 and above

(nursery to or demented 18 or 18 but (college
prep) (as amended with special student)
by RA 11648) circumstance
(grade 1 to s (grade 11 to
10) 12)
Acts of Acts of Same Lascivious Inapplicable
lasciviousness Lasciviousness conduct under
(exploited) under Article Section 5(b) of
336 of the R.A. No. 7610:
RPC in relation reclusion
to Section 5(b) temporal in its
of R.A. No. medium period
7610: reclusion to reclusion
temporal in its perpetua
medium period
(need to
relate, as RPC
is the proper
crime, but RA
7610 is the
proper
penalty)
Sexual assault Sexual Same Lascivious Inapplicable
 prep) (as amended with special student)
by RA 11648) circumstance
(grade 1 to s (grade 11 to
10) 12)
Acts of Acts of Same Lascivious Inapplicable
lasciviousness Lasciviousness conduct under
(exploited) under Article Section 5(b) of
336 of the R.A. No. 7610:
RPC in relation reclusion
to Section 5(b) temporal in its
of R.A. No. medium period
7610: reclusion to reclusion
temporal in its perpetua
medium period
(need to
relate, as RPC
is the proper
crime, but RA
7610 is the
proper
penalty)
Sexual assault Sexual Same Lascivious Inapplicable
(exploited) Assault under Conduct
Article 266-A, under Section
paragraph 2 5(b) of R.A.
of the RPC in No. 7610:
relation to reclusion
Section 5(b) temporal in its
of RA 7610: medium
reclusion period to
temporal in its reclusion
medium period perpetua
(need to
relate, as RPC
is the proper
crime, but RA
7610 is the
proper
penalty)
(People v
Tulagan, 2019)

Sexual Qualified rape Statutory rape Sexual Abuse Inapplicable

intercourse under Art. under Art. under Section
(exploited) 266-B: death 266-A: 5(b) of R.A.
penalty is reclusion No. 7610:
imposed (no perpetua is reclusion
need to imposed (no temporal in its
relate, as RA need to medium
7610 states relate, as RA period to
that RPC will 7610 states reclusion
govern) that RPC will perpetua
 penalty)
(People v
Tulagan, 2019)

Sexual Qualified rape Statutory rape Sexual Abuse Inapplicable

intercourse under Art. under Art. under Section
(exploited) 266-B: death 266-A: 5(b) of R.A.
penalty is reclusion No. 7610:
imposed (no perpetua is reclusion
need to imposed (no temporal in its
relate, as RA need to medium
7610 states relate, as RA period to
that RPC will 7610 states reclusion
govern) that RPC will perpetua
govern)
Acts of Acts of Same Lascivious Acts of
lasciviousness Lasciviousness Conduct lasciviousness
(not under Article under Section
exploited) 336 of the 5(b) of R.A.
RPC in relation No. 7610:
to Section 5(b) reclusion
of R.A. No.
temporal in its
7610: reclusion
medium
temporal in its
medium period period to
(need to relate, reclusion
as RPC is the
proper crime,
but RA 7610 is
the proper
penalty)
(CHECK
ANSWER
KEY)
Sexual assault Sexual Assault Same Lascivious Rape by
(not under Article Conduct under sexual assault
exploited) 266-A, Section 5(b) of
paragraph 2 of R.A. No. 7610:
the RPC in reclusion
relation to temporal in its
Section 5(b) of medium period
RA 7610: to reclusion
reclusion
temporal in its
medium period
(need to
relate, as RPC
is the proper
crime, but RA
7610 is the
proper
penalty)
(People v
 penalty)
(CHECK
ANSWER
KEY)
Sexual assault Sexual Assault Same Lascivious Rape by
(not under Article Conduct under sexual assault
exploited) 266-A, Section 5(b) of
paragraph 2 of R.A. No. 7610:
the RPC in reclusion
relation to temporal in its
Section 5(b) of medium period
RA 7610: to reclusion
reclusion
temporal in its
medium period
(need to
relate, as RPC
is the proper
crime, but RA
7610 is the
proper
penalty)
(People v
Tulagan, 2019)
(CHECK
ANSWER
KEY)

Sexual Qualified rape Statutory rape Rape by Rape by

intercourse under Art. 266- under Art. 266- sexual sexual
(not B: death A: reclusion intercourse intercouse
exploited) penalty is perpetua is under the RPC
imposed (no imposed (no (People v
need to relate, need to relate, Tulagan)
as RA 7610 as RA 7610
states that states that
RPC will RPC will
govern) govern)
NOTE: NOTE:
Statutory rape Statutory rape
or Simple or Simple rape
rape can be can be
Qualified rape Qualified rape
because of because of
UNDER 18+
UNDER 18 +
RELATIONSHI
RELATIONSHI
P
P (father,
ascendant,
etc.)
NOTE: there
shall be no
criminal
 RELATIONSHI
P
P (father,
ascendant,
etc.)
NOTE: there
shall be no
criminal
liability on the
part of a
person having
carnal
knowledge of
another
person
sixteen (16)
years of age
when the age
difference
between the
parties is not
more than
three (3)
years, and
the sexual act
in question is
proven to be
consensual,
non-abusive,
and non-
exploitative:
Provided,
further, That if
the victim is
under
thirteen (13)
years of age,
this
exception
shall not
apply. (RA
11648)

Crimes held obsolete by Child Abuse Law

Consented Simple Seduction Qualified Reason
abduction Seduction; abuse
of authority or
confidence (V1)
Abduction of Man against Man against In all these
woman woman woman instances, the
crime will be
Consented Simple Seduction Qualified Reason
abduction Seduction; abuse
of authority or
confidence (V1)
Abduction of Man against Man against In all these
woman woman woman instances, the
crime will be
SEXUAL ABUSE
under RA 7610.
With lewd design Seduction (sexual Seduction (sexual
intercourse) intercourse)
Consent Consent Consent
With a woman over Woman is over 12, Woman is over 16,
12, under 18 but under 18 but under 18
Virgin (Physical) Single Virgin (physical)
Through fraud/ With abuse of
deceit (promise to
authority/custody
marry) (person in
authority/priest/
home-servant/
domestic/
guardian/teacher)
Other special penal laws for crimes against chastity
Voyeurism Voyeurism Reasonable Child Who is a
(V1) (V2) expectation pornography child under
of privacy the Anti-
Child
Pornography
Act?
Act of taking a Act of selling,1) belief that Any Below 18
photo or copying, he could Representati years of age
video exhibiting, disrobe in on
coverage broadcasting, privacy,
sharing, or without
exhibiting concern that
an image of
his private
area would be
captured
Of persons The photo or 2) Whether Over 18 years
performing a video coverage circumstances visual/audio/ of age, but
sexual act, or of such sexual which a written, unable to fully
the private act or similar reasonable take care of
area of a activity person would himself from
person, believe that his abuse,
private area neglect,
would not be cruelty,
visible to the because of
public, physical or
regardless of
 an image of
his private
area would be
captured
Of persons The photo or 2) Whether Over 18 years
performing a video coverage circumstances visual/audio/ of age, but
sexual act, or of such sexual which a written, unable to fully
the private act or similar reasonable take care of
area of a activity person would himself from
person, believe that his abuse,
private area neglect,
would not be cruelty,
visible to the because of
public, physical or
regardless of mental
whether he is
disability
in a public or
private place.
Without the Without the By electronic/ Person,
latter’s consent written mechanical/ regardless of
consent of the digital/other age,
person portrayed,
involved depicted, or
presented as
a child
Under Notwithstandi Of child Computer-
circumstances ng that the engaged in generated
where there is consent to real or (digital or
reasonable take the simulated manual)
expectation of photo or explicit images or
privacy video sexual graphics of a
coverage was activity person
given by such represented
person or made to
appear as a
child
Sexual Safe Spaces Safe Spaces Qualified gender-
Harassment (Gender-based (Gender-based based sexual
sexual online sexual harassment (CG-
harassment in harassment) MSPBM-U)
public places) (GUO)
(GUP)
Work/Training/ The act of The act of PLACE of
Education harassment is harassment is commission
environment Gender-based Gender-based 1. If the act takes
place in a
Common carrier
or PUV, where the
perpetrator is the
driver of the
 sexual online sexual harassment (CG-
harassment in harassment) MSPBM-U)
public places) (GUO)
(GUP)
Work/Training/ The act of The act of PLACE of
Education harassment is harassment is commission
environment Gender-based Gender-based 1. If the act takes
place in a
Common carrier
or PUV, where the
perpetrator is the
driver of the
vehicle and the
offended party is
a passenger;
(Common-
>Driver)
2. If the act takes
place in the
premises of a
Government
agency, and the
perpetrator is a
government
employee.
(Government-
>Government)
Moral Unwanted and Unwanted and PERSON of the
ascendancy/ uninvited sexual uninvited sexual victim
authority over actions or actions or 3. Minor
another remarks, remarks, 4. Senior citizen
regardless of its regardless of its 5. PWD
motive motive 6. Breastfeeding
mother nursing
her child
7. Diagnosed with
Mental problem,
tending to impair
consent
Sexual favor, Committed in the Committed Online, UNIFORMED
whether or not streets or in Public whether publicly offender
accepted places or through direct 8. If the
and private perpetrator is a
messages member of the
Uniformed
services, while he
was in uniform;
(Uniform-
>Uniform)
1) Condition for
 7. Diagnosed with
Mental problem,
tending to impair
consent
Sexual favor, Committed in the Committed Online, UNIFORMED
whether or not streets or in Public whether publicly offender
accepted places or through direct 8. If the
and private perpetrator is a
messages member of the
Uniformed
services, while he
was in uniform;
(Uniform-
>Uniform)
1) Condition for
employment/re-
employment/
terms/conditions
2) Impair labor
rights
3) Result in (IHO)
environment
GITO: If the sexual favor was accepted by the student, the crime is RA 7610
(influence), and not only Sexual harassment.

Article 266-A. Rape; When And How Committed.

1. Classification of Rape
1. Rape by sexual intercourse - carnal knowledge of a woman against her
will; the offender is always a man
2. Rape by sexual assault - committed when the offender inserts his penis
into another person’s mouth or anal orifice, or when the offender inserts
an instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of another person;
the offender may be a man or a woman.
2. For rape by sexual assault, inserting an object into another person’s mouth is
not rape. It will probably be acts of lasciviousness.
3. “Force, threat, or intimidation”
1. Physical resistance is not an essential element of rape. Rape victims react
differently. Some may offer strong resistance while others may be too
intimidated to offer any resistance at all. The use of a weapon, by itself, is
strongly suggestive of force or at least intimidation, and threatening the
victim with a knife, much more poking it at her, as in this case, is sufficient
to bring her into submission. Thus, the law does not impose upon the
private complainant the burden of proving resistance. (People v Penilla,
2013)
2. A victim’s reaction after a harrowing experience (rape) is subjective and
not everyone responds in the same way. There is no standard form of
 2.

behavior that can be anticipated of a rape victim following her sexual

abuse. People respond differently to emotional stress, particularly minor
children subjected to such level of emotional trauma. (People v Tuando,
2016)
3. In rape, silence does not negate sexual molestation, especially for minors.
She cannot be expected to act like an adult who has courage and
intelligence. Hence, her failure to resist the sexual aggression and to
immediately report the incident to the authorities do not undermine her
credibility. (People v Entrampas, Leonen)
4. Testimonies of child victims in rape are given full weight and credence.
The accused can be convicted on his sole testimony provided credible,
natural, convincing and consistent. (People v Gutierez, Leonen)
5. Failure to shout or to resist does not negate rape. (People v Gacusan,
Leonen)
6. Recantations are viewed unfavorably especially in rape cases. They can be
easily obtained for money/intimidation. (People v ZZZ, Leonen)
4. “Moral ascendancy” or “influence” as SUBSTITUTE for the element of
force or intimidation
1. Furthermore, despite the absence of any evident force and intimidation,
the same is still appreciated in the case at bar because it is doctrinally
settled that the moral ascendancy of an accused over the victim renders
it unnecessary to show physical force and intimidation since, in rape
committed by a close kin, such as the victim’s father, stepfather, uncle, or
the common-law spouse of her mother, moral influence or ascendancy
takes the place of violence or intimidation. (People v Alinganga, 2013;
People v Gacusan, Leonen)
2. For qualified rape.
5. “Deprived of reason or is otherwise unconscious”
1. “Deprived of reason” has been construed to encompass those suffering
from mental abnormality, deficiency, or retardation. Thus, a mental
retardate is a person “deprived of reason,” not one who is
“demented.” (People v Baay, 2017)
2. “Otherwise unconscious” includes a woman who was asleep, or passed
out due to administration of drugs, or passed out due to the amount of
alcohol ingested.
3. However, there is no rape if liquor or drug was used to induce the victim’s
consent so as to incite her passion and it did not deprive her of will
power.
6. “Demented”
1. As used in Article 12, a person suffering from dementia is an imbecile. An
imbecile is one who, while advanced in age, has a mental development
comparable to that of children between two and seven years old.
7. REMEMBER: In case the offender KNOWS that the victim is demented/
 7.
deprived of reason, qualified rape is committed, under paragraph 10.
8. “Under 12 years of age”
1. According to Leonen, “under 12 years of age” covers chronological age
AND mental age. Hence, an offender who rapes a 16-year old woman, with
a mental capacity of a 6-year old, is liable for QUALIFIED rape. (People v
Francia, 2017, Leonen; People v Corpuz, Leonen; People v Quintos,
Leonen)
2. If under 12 but at least 7, it is statutory rape.
3. If under 7, it is qualified rape.
4. In either case, whether 12 or 7, absence of consent is conclusively
presumed. (People v De Guzman, 2018)
5. Correlate this to Child Abuse Law later.
9. “Instrument or object”
1. This includes fingers. Hence, rape by sexual assault may be committed by
using the fingers of the offender into the genital or anal orifice of another.
2. Rape by sexual assault is also called as “instrument or object rape,”
“gender-free rape,” or “homosexual rape.” (Ricalde v People, Leonen)
3. Mere insertion of an instrument to the mouth, the crime is only acts of
lasciviousness. (Ricalde v People, Leonen)
10. “Inserting”
1. The law says “inserting.” Hence, penetration is ESSENTIAL in rape by
sexual assault, and not merely a brush or graze of its surface. (People v
Dela Cruz, 2008)
1. As example, if the penis of the man merely grazed the mouth of the
woman, there is no consummated rape by sexual assault. It was only
attempted. However, if the tip of the penis already went into her
mouth, the crime is consummated.
11. Acts of Execution of Rape by sexual intercourse
1. Consummated rape
1. The law may now be considered as settled that complete, or total
penetration of complainant's private organ is not necessary to
consummate the crime of rape. The SLIGHTEST PENETRATION or
MERE GRAZING will suffice in rape by sexual intercourse. Neither
is the rupture of the hymen essential for the offense of consummated
rape. It is enough that there is proof of entrance of the male organ
within the LABIA MAJORA of the pudendum. Therefore, it is
unnecessary to show to what extent penetration of the woman's body
has been made. It is adequate if the woman's body is entered. (People
v Dedace, 2000; People v Austria, Leonen)
2. Labia majora or the outer lips of the female organ composed of the
outer convex surface and the inner surface. (Reyes)
3. Hence, the findings of the medicolegal officer are not indispensable.
Rape can be proven without his findings. (People v Austria, Leonen)
 2. Frustrated rape
1. There is no frustrated rape, because the slightest penetration or mere
touching of the genitals consummates the crime of rape. (People v
Sampior, 2000)
3. Attempted rape
1. Thus, for there to be an attempted rape, the accused must have
commenced the act of penetrating the vagina of the victim but for
some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance,
the penetration, however slight, is not completed. (People v Bon,
2006)
1. Why? Because intent to lie must be shown in rape by sexual
intercourse.
2. Example of attempted rape:
1. In People v Tayaba, attempted rape was committed by the
accused after raising the dress of the woman then asleep and
placing himself on top of her, and when the woman was awakened
the accused threaten her with a knife, but because of her
continued shouting, and offering of resistance, a neighbor came
to her rescue. (People v Tayaba, 1935)
12. Sweetheart doctrine
1. It is well settled that being sweethearts does not negate the commission
of rape because such act does not give the appellant license to have
sexual intercourse against her will, and will not exonerate him from the
criminal charge of rape. (People v Olesco, 2011)
13. Marital rape
1. Sexual intercourse, albeit within the realm of marriage, constitutes rape if
not consensual. (People v Jumawan, 2014)
14. Rape shield Rule
1. In prosecutions for rape, evidence of complainant's past sexual conduct,
opinion thereof or of his/her reputation shall NOT be admitted unless, and
only to the extent that the court finds, that such evidence is material and
relevant to the case. (Sec. 6, RA 8505 - Rape Victim Assistance and
Protection Act of 1998)

Article 266-B. Penalties. (QUALIFIED RAPE)

Three (3) Special aggravating circumstances

1. Committed with the use of deadly weapon
2. Committed by two or more persons
3. When by reason or one occasion of the rape, the victim has become insane

Two (2) Special Complex Crimes

1. Attempted rape with homicide
 1. When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason of or
on occasion of the attempted rape; and
2. Rape with homicide
1. When by reason of or on occasion of the consummated rape, homicide is
committed.
2. What if rape is attempted and homicide is also attempted?
1. There is no special complex crime. Instead, there are separate crimes.
3. What is the meaning of homicide?
1. “Homicide” must be understood in its generic sense. Hence, it
includes murder. Even if any or all of the circumstances of treachery,
evident premeditation, and abuse of superior strength are alleged and
duly established by the prosecution, the same would not qualify the
killing to murder. The crime would still be rape with homicide. (People
v Laog, 2011)

Groupings of Qualified Rape (10 paragraphs)

As to Age and/or Relationship

1. The victim is:
1. Under 18 years of age; AND
2. The offender is the:
1. Parent
2. Ascendant
3. STEP-parent
4. COMMON-LAW spouse of the parent of victim
5. Relative by consanguinity or affinity WITHIN THE THIRD DEGREE
(TITO)
2. The victim was raped in FULL VIEW of her:
1. Spouse
2. Parent
3. Child
4. Relative by consanguinity (only) WITHIN THE THIRD DEGREE
3. The victim is below 7 years of age

As to PNP
4. The victim is under the custody of the police/military/law enforcement
5. Committed by a member of AFP/PNP/law enforcement, and he took advantage
of his position

As to Knowledge of offender and the personal circumstance of the offended

party
6. The victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious vocation AND such is
known to the offender (at the time)
 7. The offender knew that he is afflicted with HIV/AIDS/STD and the disease
was transmitted
8. When by reason or on occasion, the victim suffered permanent physical
MUTILATION or DISABILITY
9. The offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party (at the time)
10. The offender knew of the mental disability, emotional disorder, and/or
physical handicap of the offended party (at the time)

NOTES:
1. For under 18, and under 7, remember that this covers chronological age
AND mental age. (People v Buclao, Leonen)
2. Note that there are two requisites for qualified rape - age and relationship.
(People v Armodia, Leonen)
1. Under 18 + parent/ascendant/guardian/relative by consanguinity affinity
within 3rd degree/common law spouse of parent/step-parent
1. Common law spouse and step-parent are the similar. The only
difference is there is MARRIAGE in the latter.
3. The statement that the victim is “the minor daughter” of the offender is not
enough. It is essential that the information states the exact age of the
victim at the time of the commission of the crime. (People v Baniguid, 2000)
4. The relationship of the stepdaughter and the stepfather presupposes a
VALID MARRIAGE between the victim’s mother and the offender, i.e., they
were married after the dissolution of the marriage of the victim’s mother to
her father. (People v Melendres, 2000)
5. “Common-law” spouse means both of them must have NO legal
impediment to marry each other. If one is married, and they were living
together, they are not “common-law” spouses. The relationship is between a
paramour and a married person.
1. In that case, the “paramour” is NOT liable for qualified rape.
6. YEBRA: People v Buclao/ People v Armodia, Leonen cases
1. Sex; Woman; Force/No Consent; Under 18; Parent (Minority and
Relationship)
7. For mental disability, this includes “deprived of reason” AND “demented.”
Hence, if the offender KNEW of the same, the crime is qualified rape.
8. There can be rape with serious physical injuries.
9. There can be rape with less serious physical injuries. (People v.
Castromero, 1997)
10. There are separate crimes of rape and slight physical injuries.

Article 266-C. Effect of Pardon.

1. As a rule, forgiveness or pardon by the offended party does not extinguish

criminal liability. One exception is Art. 266-C.
 2. Pardon under Art. 266-C: (MW)
1. The subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the offended
party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty already imposed.
2. The subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party shall
extinguish the criminal action or the penalty.
3. The crime shall not be extinguished or the penalty shall not be abated if the
marriage is void ab initio. (Art. 266-C)
4. Compare the pardon in crimes against chastity AND rape
1. Under rape, the liability CANNOT be extinguished by mere pardon/
forgiveness. There must be an element of marriage, i.e., subsequent
marriage or the wife to her husband
2. Since rape is now categorized as crimes against persons, the marriage
ONLY extinguishes the penal action as to the principal, i.e. the husband,
but not as to his co-principals, accomplices and accessories. (Reyes)
1. The law is silent, so their criminal liability subsists.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________
J. Crimes against chastity

Chapter One - ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE

Adultery/Concubinage
Adultery Concubinage
Woman is Married Man is Married
Sexual intercourse with a man other That he committed any of the following
than her husband acts: (CSC)
1) Conjugal dwelling;
2) Sexual intercourse under
scandalous circumstances, ; or
3) Cohabiting as husband and wife;
As regards the paramour, he knew that As regards the paramour, she knew
she was marreid that he was married.
Special penal law related to Adultery/Concubinage
VAWC; Meaning VAWC; (Sec. 5(e) - VAWC; (Sec. 5(i) -
mere deprivation of emotional or mental
support) anguish) (RSCS)
Violence against women Woman, with whom the Woman, with whom the
and their children refers offender has or had offender has or had
to any act or a series of dating or sexual dating or sexual
acts committed by ANY relations, and/or her relations, and/or her
person against: child; and child; and

1) a woman who is his The offender causes on

 VAWC; Meaning VAWC; (Sec. 5(e) - VAWC; (Sec. 5(i) -
mere deprivation of emotional or mental
support) anguish) (RSCS)
Violence against women Woman, with whom the Woman, with whom the
and their children refers offender has or had offender has or had
to any act or a series of dating or sexual dating or sexual
acts committed by ANY relations, and/or her relations, and/or her
person against: child; and child; and

1) a woman who is his The offender causes on

wife, the woman and/or child
2) former wife, or mental or emotional
3) against a woman with anguish, public ridicule or
whom the person has or humiliation; and
had a sexual or dating
relationship, or
4) with whom he has a
common child, or
5) against her child
whether legitimate or
illegitimate.
Depriving the woman or They were caused through
her children of financial acts of Repeated verbal
Support legally due her and emotional abuse,
or her family, or denial of financial
deliberately providing the Support or Custody of
woman's children minor children or access
insufficient financial to the children or Similar
support. such acts or omissions.
(People v Reyes, 2019)
Similar act includes
marital infidelity.
COMMENT: Sec. 5(e) is
necessarily included in
Sec. 5(i)

Article 333. Who are guilty of adultery.

1. Persons liable:
1. The married woman who engages in sexual intercourse with a man other
than her husband; and
2. The man who, knowing of the marriage of the woman, has sexual
intercourse with her.
1. Adultery is committed even if the marriage be subsequently declared
 1.
void. (Article 333)
2. “Sexual intercourse”
1. It means penetration by the penis of a vagina.
2. Each occasion of sexual intercourse constitutes a crime of adultery.
(People v Zapata, 1951)
3. “With a man other than her husband”
1. Adultery can only be committed if the married woman had sexual
intercourse with a man. It cannot be committed by a married woman who
had sex with another woman.
4. There is no crime of frustrated adultery.
1. Is there attempted adultery? Yes, as when the husband, catches the man
on top of his wife, but before the man was able to insert his penis inside
her vagina.
5. Adultery is not a continuing offense.
6. Mitigating circumstances
1. If the person guilty of adultery committed this offense while being
abandoned without justification by the offended spouse; and
2. The husband’s illicit relationship does not solve, but may only
mitigate the wife’s liability for adultery. (People v Florez, 1964)

Article 334. Concubinage.

1. Persons liable:
1. The married man;
2. The woman who knew that the man was married.
2. “Conjugal dwelling”
1. It is the home of the husband and the wife, even if the wife happens to be
temporarily absent on any account.
3. “Scandal”
1. It consists of any reprehensible word or deed that offends public
conscience, redounds to the detriment of the feelings of honest persons,
and gives occasion to the neighbour’s spiritual damage or ruin.
4. “Cohabit”
1. It means to dwell together, in the manner of husband and wife, for some
period of time, as distinguished from occasional transient interviews for
unlawful intercourse. (People v Pitoc, 1922)
5. GITO: In Concubinage, nullity of marriage is not prejudicial question. it must
also be held that parties to the marriage should not be permitted to judge for
themselves its nullity, for the same must be submitted to the judgment of the
competent courts and only when the nullity of the marriage is so declared can
it be held as void, and so long as there is no such declaration the presumption
is that the marriage exists for all intents and purposes. Therefore, he who
cohabits with a woman not his wife before the judicial declaration of nullity of
 the marriage assumes the risk of being prosecuted for concubinage. (Beltran v
People, 2000)
6. YEBRA: Validity of the first marriage is NOT a prejudicial question to adultery/
concubinage because at the time of sexual intercourse, she was a “married
woman.” Further, the provision stats “even if the marriage be subsequently
declared void.”

RA 9262 - Anti-Violence against Woman and Children Act

SECTION 3. Definition of Terms.

As used in this Act,

(a) "Violence against women and their children" refers to any act or a series of
acts committed by ANY person against:
1. a woman who is his wife,
2. former wife, or
3. against a woman with whom the person has or had a sexual or dating
relationship, or
4. with whom he has a common child, or
5. against her child whether legitimate or illegitimate, within or without the family
abode, which result in or is likely to result in physical, sexual, psychological
harm or suffering, or economic abuse including threats of such acts, battery,
assault, coercion, harassment or arbitrary deprivation of liberty.

(e) "Dating relationship" refers to a situation wherein the parties live as husband
and wife without the benefit of marriage or are romantically involved over time and
on a continuing basis during the course of the relationship. A casual acquaintance
or ordinary socialization between two individuals in a business or social context is
not a dating relationship.

(f) "Sexual relations" refers to a single sexual act which may or may not result in
the bearing of a common child.

(h) "Children" refers to those below eighteen (18) years of age or older but are
incapable of taking care of themselves as defined under Republic Act No. 7610. As
used in this Act, it includes the biological children of the victim and other children
under her care.

SECTION 5. Acts of Violence Against Women and Their Children.

The crime of violence against women and their children is committed through any
of the following acts:
1. Physical violence
1. Causing physical harm to the woman or her child;
 2. Threatening to cause the woman or her child physical harm;
3. Attempting to cause the woman or her child physical harm;
4. Placing the woman or her child in fear of imminent physical harm;

2. Psychological violence
1. Attempting to compel or compelling the woman or her child to engage in
conduct which the woman or her child has the right to desist from or
desist from conduct which the woman or her child has the right to engage
in, or attempting to restrict or restricting the woman's or her child's
freedom of movement or conduct by force or threat of force, physical or
other harm or threat of physical or other harm, or intimidation directed
against the woman or child. This shall include, but not limited to, the
following acts committed with the purpose or effect of controlling or
restricting the woman's or her child's movement or conduct:
1. Threatening to deprive or actually depriving the woman or her child of
custody to her/his family;
2. Depriving or threatening to deprive the woman or her children of
financial support legally due her or her family, or deliberately
providing the woman's children insufficient financial support;
3. Depriving or threatening to deprive the woman or her child of a legal
right;
4. Preventing the woman in engaging in any legitimate profession,
occupation, business or activity or controlling the victim's own money
or properties, or solely controlling the conjugal or common money, or
properties (Sec. 5(e)
2. Inflicting or threatening to inflict physical harm on oneself for the purpose
of controlling her actions or decisions;
3. Causing or attempting to cause the woman or her child to engage in any
sexual activity which does not constitute rape, by force or threat of force,
physical harm, or through intimidation directed against the woman or her
child or her/his immediate family;
4. Engaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless conduct, personally or
through another, that alarms or causes substantial emotional or
psychological distress to the woman or her child. This shall include, but
not be limited to, the following acts:
1. Stalking or following the woman or her child in public or private
places;
2. Peering in the window or lingering outside the residence of the woman
or her child;
3. Entering or remaining in the dwelling or on the property of the woman
or her child against her/his will;
4. Destroying the property and personal belongings or inflicting harm to
animals or pets of the woman or her child; and
 5. Engaging in any form of harassment or violence. (Sec. 5(h))
5. Causing mental or emotional anguish, public ridicule or humiliation to
the woman or her child, including, but not limited to, repeated verbal
and emotional abuse, and denial of financial support or custody of
minor children or access to the woman's child/children. (Sec. 5(i))

SECTION 6. Penalties.
The crime of violence against women and their children, under Section 5 hereof
shall be punished according to the following rules:
1. Acts falling under Section 5(a) constituting attempted, frustrated or
consummated parricide or murder or homicide shall be punished in
accordance with the provisions of the Revised Penal Code. If these acts
resulted in mutilation, it shall be punishable in accordance with the Revised
Penal Code; those constituting serious physical injuries shall have the penalty
of prison mayor; those constituting less serious physical injuries shall be
punished by prision correccional; and those constituting slight physical
injuries shall be punished by arresto mayor.
2. Acts falling under Section 5(b) shall be punished by imprisonment of two
degrees lower than the prescribed penalty for the consummated crime as
specified in the preceding paragraph but shall in no case be lower than arresto
mayor.
3. Acts falling under Section 5(c) and 5(d) shall be punished by arresto mayor;
4. Acts falling under Section 5(e) shall be punished by prision correccional;
5. Acts falling under Section 5(f) shall be punished by arresto mayor;
6. Acts falling under Section 5(g) shall be punished by prision mayor;
7. Acts falling under Section 5(h) and Section 5(i) shall be punished by prision
mayor.
1. If the acts are committed while the woman or child is pregnant or
committed in the presence of her child, the penalty to be applied shall be
the maximum period of penalty prescribed in the section.

SECTION 27. Prohibited defense.

Being under the influence of alcohol, any illicit drug, or any other mind-altering
substance shall not be a defense under this Act.

NOTES:
1. GITO: If RA 9262 applies, RPC will not apply. It’s one or the other. Same is
true for child abuse
2. “Any person”
1. Gender-neutral. Even women (lesbian) can be liable. (Go-Tan v Tan)
3. “Against her child”
1. RA 9262 does NOT cover the child of the accused, who is not a child of
the woman. Child abuse, however, shall apply.
 2. Further, an adult child of the woman is not covered by this Act, unless he
is incapable of taking care of himself.
4. Conspiracy is applicable under VAWC, i.e., the husband and the
paramour
1. Persons outside the relationship may be convicted under RA 9262. They
can be punished because of principle of conspiracy. E.g. husband and
mistress; in-law and husband. (Go-Tan v Spouses Tan; Garcia v Drilon)
5. Away-bati relationship
1. An "away-bati" or a fight-and-kiss thing between two lovers is a common
occurrence. Their taking place does not mean that the romantic relation
between the two should be deemed broken up during periods of
misunderstanding. Explaining what "away-bati" meant, Irish explained that
at times, when she could not reply to Rustan’s messages, he would get
angry at her. That was all. Hence, the relationship is still over time and on
a continuing basis. (Ang v CA, 2010)
2. Still considered as over time and on a continuing basis.
6. Requisites of 5(e) for deprivation of support (Relations; Deprivation of
support)
1. The offended party is a woman, with who the offender has dating or
sexual relations, and/or her child; and
2. Depriving or threatening to deprive the woman or her children of financial
support legally due her or her family, or deliberately providing the
woman's children insufficient financial support.
7. Requisites of 5(i) (Relations; Mental or Emotional; RSCS)
1. The offended party is a woman, with who the offender has dating or
sexual relations, and/or her child;
2. The offender causes on the woman and/or child mental or emotional
anguish, public ridicule or humiliation; and
3. They were caused through acts of Repeated verbal and emotional abuse,
denial of financial Support or Custody of minor children or access to the
children or Similar such acts or omissions. (RSCS) (People v Reyes, 2019)
8. Differentiate support under Sec. 5(e) and 5(i)
1. 5(e) - mere denial of financial support or deliberate providing of
insufficient financial support
2. 5(i) - there must be mental or emotional anguish due to the denial of
financial support or custody (e.g. the child was humiliated in school due to
failure to pay tuition fees) (Melgar v People, 2018)
3. Further, the penalty for Sec. 5(e) is prision correccional. The penalty for
Sec. 5(i) is prision mayor.
9. Sec. 5(i) is necessarily included in Sec. 5(e)
1. In this case, while the prosecution had established that Melgar indeed
deprived AAA and BBB of support, no evidence was presented to show
that such deprivation caused either AAA or BBB any mental or emotional
 1.

anguish. Therefore, Melgar cannot be convicted of violation of Section 5

(i) of RA 9262. This notwithstanding - and taking into consideration the
variance doctrine which allows the conviction of an accused for a crime
proved which is different from but necessarily included in the crime
charged - the courts a quo correctly convicted Melgar of violation of
Section 5 (e) of RA 9262 as the deprivation or denial of support, by itself
and even without the additional element of psychological violence, is
already specifically penalized therein. (Melgar v People, 2018)
10. Acharon v. People (for denial of support under Sec. (5)(e) and (5)(i))
1. Mere failure or an inability to provide financial support is not punishable by
R.A. 9262.
2. There must, therefore, be evidence on record that the accused willfully or
consciously withheld financial support legally due the woman for the
purpose of inflicting mental or emotional anguish upon her.
3. In other words, the actus reus of the offense under Section 5(i) is the
willful denial of financial support, while the mens rea is the intention to
inflict mental or emotional anguish upon the woman.
4. As Associate Justices Amy C. Lazaro-Javier and Mario V. Lopez pointed
out in their respective Opinions that the crimes penalized under Sections
5(i) and 5(e) of R.A. 9262 are mala in se, not mala prohibita, even though
R.A. 9262 is a special penal law.
5. As Associate Justice Rodil V. Zalameda put it simply during the
deliberations of this case, "poverty is not a crime xx x [and] the failure or
inability to provide support, without more, should not be the cause of a
man's incarceration."
1. In short, the accused has the ability to provide support, but he
willfully failed to do so.
11. Marital infidelity causing mental or emotional anguish
1. Psychological violence is just like the mental or emotional anguish caused
on the victim. what R.A. No. 9262 criminalizes is not the marital infidelity
per se but the psychological violence causing mental or emotional
suffering on the wife. (AAA v BBB, 2018)
12. Taking of conjugal properties without the consent of the woman; mental
or emotional anguish
1. Taking conjugal properties to his mother. 5(i) - mental or emotional
anguish. (AAA v People, 2018)
13. Surveillance of wife
1. Surveillance of the wife is akin to stalking, under Sec. 5(h). Further, both
the investigator and the husband are liable as conspirators since the law
states “personally or through another.”
14. Aggravating circumstances ADDED by VAWC; Applicable to RPC Crimes
(PP)
1. The woman or child is Pregnant
 2. The crime was committed in the Presence of the child.
15. If the infidelity was committed abroad, and the woman is in the Philippines,
can the action be filed in Philippine courts?
1. Yes. As correctly pointed out by AAA, Section 7 provides that the case
may be filed where the crime or any of its elements was committed at the
option of the complainant. While the psychological violence as the means
employed by the perpetrator is certainly an indispensable element of the
offense, equally essential also is the element of mental or emotional
anguish which is personal to the complainant. (AAA v BBB, 2018)
1. The emotion anguish happened in the Philippines, which is an
indispensable element of the offense.
16. Are foreigners covered by RA 9262?
1. Yes. In the case of Deck v. Wilsem Socorro, the SC held that a foreign
national who failed to provide support under the PH law is liable for
violation of RA 9262.
2. This is in keeping with the generality principle of criminal laws. Penal laws
are binding to all persons who live or or sojourn in the Philippines.
1. Yes, because any person.
17. Freedom to Intervene Principle
1. The following persons shall be exempt from any liability:
1. Any person
2. Private individual
3. Police officers
4. Barangay officials, Provided:
1. They responded
2. Without using any violence greater than necessary
3. Reason to ensure safety
4. Acted in accord with defense of stranger
18. Salary of accused may subjected to writ of execution
1. Notwithstanding any other laws to the contrary, the court shall order
an appropriate percentage of the salary or income of the respondent to
be withheld regularly by the employer for the same to be automatically
remitted directly to the woman.”
2. “Failure to remit or withhold or any delay without justifiable cause shall
render the respondent or his employer directly liable for indirect
contempt.” (Sec. 8(g), RA 9262)
3. In Republic v. Yahon, Sec 8 (g) of RA 9262 the word “employer” does not
distinguish whether it is private or public or the government. Even if it is in
conflict with other laws, later laws shall prevail against prior laws.
4. In Mabugay-Otamias v Republic, Leonen, 2016, Under Section 31 of PD
1638, Colonel Otamias' retirement benefits are exempt from execution.
Further, Sec 13(1) of Rule 39 states that The right to receive legal
support, or money or property obtained as such support, or any pension
 4.

or gratuity from the Government shall be exempt from execution. However,

this Court in Republic v. Yahon denied the Petition and discussed that
because Republic Act No. 9262 is the later enactment, its provisions
should prevail, thus: We hold that Section 8(g) of R.A. No. 9262, being a
later enactment, should be construed as laying down an exception to the
general rule above stated that retirement benefits are exempt from
execution. The law itself declares that the court shall order the
withholding of a percentage of the income or salary of the respondent by
the employer, which shall be automatically remitted directly to the woman
"[n]otwithstanding other laws to the contrary.”
19. Battered Woman Syndrome (People v. Genosa, 2004)
1. NOTE: The woman must experience two cycles to become a battered
woman.
2. More graphically, the battered woman syndrome is characterized by the
so-called "cycle of violence," which has three (3) phases:
1. the tension-building phase;
2. the acute battering incident; and
3. the tranquil, loving (or, at least, nonviolent) phase.
3. During the tension-building phase, minor battering occurs -- it could be
verbal or slight physical abuse or another form of hostile behavior. The
woman usually tries to pacify the batterer through a show of kind,
nurturing behavior; or by simply staying out of his way. What actually
happens is that she allows herself to be abused in ways that, to her, are
comparatively minor. All she wants is to prevent the escalation of the
violence exhibited by the batterer. This wish, however, proves to be
double-edged, because her "placatory" and passive behavior legitimizes
his belief that he has the right to abuse her in the first place. However, the
techniques adopted by the woman in her effort to placate him are not
usually successful, and the verbal and/or physical abuse worsens. Each
partner senses the imminent loss of control and the growing tension and
despair. Exhausted from the persistent stress, the battered woman soon
withdraws emotionally. But the more she becomes emotionally
unavailable, the more the batterer becomes angry, oppressive and
abusive. Often, at some unpredictable point, the violence "spirals out of
control" and leads to an acute battering incident.
4. The acute battering incident is said to be characterized by brutality,
destructiveness and, sometimes, death. The battered woman deems this
incident as unpredictable, yet also inevitable. During this phase, she has
no control; only the batterer may put an end to the violence. Its nature can
be as unpredictable as the time of its explosion, and so are his reasons for
ending it. The battered woman usually realizes that she cannot reason
with him, and that resistance would only exacerbate her condition.At this
stage, she has a sense of detachment from the attack and the terrible
 pain, although she may later clearly remember every detail. Her apparent
passivity in the face of acute violence may be rationalized thus: the
batterer is almost always much stronger physically, and she knows from
her past painful experience that it is futile to fight back. Acute battering
incidents are often very savage and out of control, such that innocent
bystanders or intervenors are likely to get hurt.
5. The final phase of the cycle of violence begins when the acute battering
incident ends. During this tranquil period, the couple experience
profound relief. On the one hand, the batterer may show a tender and
nurturing behavior towards his partner. He knows that he has been
viciously cruel and tries to make up for it, begging for her forgiveness and
promising never to beat her again. On the other hand, the battered woman
also tries to convince herself that the battery will never happen again; that
her partner will change for the better; and that this "good, gentle and
caring man" is the real person whom she loves.
20. Knutson v. Hon. Sarmiento-Flores, July 12, 2022
1. SC: Abusive Mothers can be Offenders under VAWC Law; Fathers can
File Case on Behalf of Abused Children
2. Mothers who abuse their children can be offenders under the Anti-
Violence Against Women and Their Children (VAWC) Act, and fathers can
apply for remedies under the law on behalf of the abused children. Thus
ruled the Supreme Court En Banc in an 18-page Decision penned by
Justice Mario V. Lopez, granting the Petition for Certiorari filed by Randy
Michael Knutson on behalf of his minor daughter. The petition challenged
the ruling of the Taguig City Regional Trial Court (RTC) which had
dismissed Knutson’s petition under Republic Act 9262, or the VAWC Act,
for the issuance of Temporary and Protection Orders against Rosalina
Knutson (Rosalina), the mother of his daughter. The High Court also
granted a permanent protection order in favor of the daughter.
3. On December 7, 2017, Knutson petitioned the Taguig City RTC for
Temporary and Protection Orders against Rosalina, alleging that Rosalina
placed their daughter in a harmful environment deleterious to the latter’s
physical, emotional, moral, and psychological development. The RTC
dismissed Knutson’s petition on the ground that protection and custody
orders under the VAWC Act could not be issued against a mother who
allegedly abused her own child. The RTC added that the remedies under
the law were not available to Knutson, the father, because he was not a
“woman victim of violence.” Knutson moved for reconsideration of the
dismissal, but was also denied by the RTC, prompting him to file a
Petition for Certiorari before the Supreme Court alleging grave abuse of
discretion on the part of the RTC. In granting Knutson’s petition, the
Supreme Court ruled that while the VAWC Act excludes men as victims,
this does not mean the law denies a father of its remedies solely because
 of his gender or the fact that he is not a “woman victim of violence.”
4. The Court held that Section 9(b) of the VAWC Act explicitly allows
“parents or guardians of the offended party” to file a petition for
protection orders. This provision was further incorporated in the law’s
implementing rules as well as in A.M. No. 04-10-11-SC or the Rule on
Violence Against Women and Children, the Court said. The Court further
explained that the law speaks in clear language when it used the word
“parents” pertaining to the father and the mother of the woman or child
victim. The law did not qualify on who between the parents of the victim
may apply for protection orders, held the Court.
5. In the case of Knutson, it is clearly stated in the title of his petition for
issuance of a protection order that he is acting on behalf of his minor
daughter. “There is no question that the offended party is [the
daughter], a minor child, who allegedly experienced violence and abuse.
Thus, [Knutson] may assist [his daughter] in filing the petition as the
parent of the offended party,” ruled the Court.
6. The Court added that Knutson is not asking for a protection order in his
favor. The petition he filed is “principally and directly for the protection
of the minor child and not the father.”
7. The Court also ruled that the VAWC Act covers situations where the
mother committed violent and abusive acts against her own child. “The
fact that a social legislation affords special protection to a particular
sector does not automatically suggest that its members are excluded
from violating such law,” ruled the Court. Citing Section 3 of the VAWC
Act, the Court noted that “violence against women and children” was
defined in the law as abusive acts “committed by any person.” “The
statute used the gender-neutral word ‘person’ as the offender which
embraces any person of either sex,” noted the Court.
8. “Logically, a mother who maltreated her child resulting in physical,
sexual, or psychological violence defined and penalized under [the
VAWC Act] is not absolved from criminal liability notwithstanding that the
measure is intended to protect both women and their children,” the Court
ruled.
9. Applying this to Knutson, the Court held that the RTC’s position that only
children under the care of the woman victim of violence can be protected
under the VAWC Act is a restrictive interpretation that “will frustrate the
policy of the law to afford special attention to women and children as
usual victims of violence and abuse.”
10. Such approach “will weaken the law and remove from its coverage
instances where the mother herself is the abuser of her child,” held the
Court, adding that this “negates not only the plain letters of the law and
the clear legislative intent as to who may be offenders but also
downgrades the country’s avowed international commitment to eliminate
 all forms of violence against children including those perpetrated by their
parents.”
11. The Court added that the RTC’s “consoling statement that the children
who suffered abuse from the hands of their own mothers may invoke
other laws except [the VAWC Act] is discriminatory. The supposed
reassurance is an outright denial of effective legal measures to address
the seriousness and urgency of the situation…[given that] only [the
VAWC Act] created the innovative remedies of protection and custody
orders. Other laws have no mechanisms to prevent further acts of
violence against the child.”
12. The Court concluded that in issuing its ruling, “the Court refuses to be
an instrument of injustice and mischief perpetrated against
vulnerablesectors of the society such as children victims of violence.
The Court will not shirk its bounden duty to interpret the law in keeping
with the cardinal principle that in enacting a statute, the legislature
intended right and justice to prevail.” (Courtesy of the Supreme Court
Public Information Office)

Chapter Two - RAPE AND ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS

Article 336. Acts of lasciviousness.

1. “Any person”;”Either sex”

1. The offender may be a man or a woman. The offended party may be a man
or a woman.
2. “Lascivious/Lewd”
1. What constitutes lewd or lascivious conduct must be determined from the
circumstances of each case. The presence or absence of the lewd design
is inferred from the nature of the acts themselves and the environmental
circumstances.
2. It is “lewd” if the act was done to gratify the sexual desire of the
offender. If it is merely an act done to harass, annoy, disturb, or vex a
person, it is not lewd. In the latter case, the crime is merely unjust
vexation.
3. There can be no attempted and frustrated stages of acts of lasciviousness.
Hence, it is a formal crime. (Reyes)
1. The crime of consummated rape necessarily absorbs acts of
lasciviousness, the essence of which is the commission of acts of
lewdness without any intention to lie with the woman. (People v Tabangao,
1999)
4. Intimidation need not be irresistible
1. As case law has it, intimidation need not necessarily be irresistible. It is
sufficient that some compulsion equivalent to intimidation annuls or
 1.

subdues the free exercise of the will of the offended party. This is
especially true in the case of young, innocent and immature girls who
could not be expected to act with equanimity of disposition and with
nerves of steel. Young girls cannot be expected to act like adults under
the same circumstances or to have the courage and intelligence to
disregard the threat. (People v Rellota, 2010)
5. If the act of the offender is unclear, it must be interpreted in favor of acts of
lasciviousness. This is based on the pro reo principle and the presumption of
innocence.

Attempted Rape Acts of Lasciviousness

Intent Based on the acts of the Based on the acts of the
offender, there is intent offender, there is no
to lie or have sex with intent to lie or have sex
the victim. with the victim. The
intent is merely to
commit lewd acts
against the victim.

Chapter Three - SEDUCTION, CORRUPTION OF MINORS AND WHITE SLAVE

TRADE

Article 337. Qualified seduction.

There are two (2) ways to commit qualified seduction:

1. Abuse of authority/confidence - Seduction of a virgin over twelve years and
under eighteen years of age, by persons who abuse their authority or the
confidence reposed in them; and
2. Incest - Seduction of a sister by her brother or by her ascendant, regardless
of her age of reputation.

Who are the offenders for the first way?

The following are those persons who abused their authority

1. Any person in public authority
2. Guardian
3. Teacher
4. Any person who, in any capacity, shall be entrusted with the education or
custody of the woman seduced

The following are those persons who abused their confidence

1. Priest,
2. House servant,
 3. Domestic, which means any person living under the same roof as a member of
the household, such as a boarder or house-guest, but not transients or
visitors. (People v Subingsubing, 1993)

NOTES for the first way:

1. “Virgin”
1. It means physical virginity.
2. Virginity is presumed if the girl is over 12 and under 18 years of age and of
good reputation. (Babanto v Zosa, 1983)
3. However, even if presumed, it must still be alleged as it is an essential
element of the crime. (Babanto v Zosa, 1983)
2. “Over twelve years and under eighteen years of age”
1. If she is under twelve years of age, it is considered statutory rape.
3. “Carnal knowledge”
1. If there is no sexual intercourse and only acts of lewdness are performed,
the crime is acts of lasciviousness with consent of offended party under
Article 339.
4. “Consented to the carnal knowledge”
1. There must be consent on the part of the woman. If there is none, the
crime is rape.
5. “House servant”;”Domestic”
1. House servant - “boy”, drivers, gardeners, security guards, and the like
2. Domestic - boarders, cousins living with the family, friend of the dad living
with the family, and the like.
3. In either case, the family and the offended child have confidence in him.
However, he abused the same by having consented sexual intercourse
with the offended child.

NOTES for the second way:

1. “Sister or descendant”
1. It means relative by consanguinity.
2. It includes half-sister or full-sister. There is no mention of affinity so it
does not apply to seduction.
3. “Descendant” can mean descendant in the direct line or collateral line.
Hence, an uncle by blood can commit seduction
2. “Regardless if she is a virgin, or over eighteen years of age”
1. Here, the law punishes incest relations. Hence, it is REGARDLESS of
virginity or age.

Article 338. Simple seduction.

1. “Good reputation”
1. In simple seduction, unlike that in a qualified case, the matter of virginity
 1.
of the offended party is not essential. It is only necessary that the
complainant be an unmarried woman and of chaste life and good
reputation. Under the law, simple seduction is not synonymous with loss of
virginity; a widow can be the victim of seduction. (People v Yap, 1968)
2. “Deceit”
1. Deceit generally takes the form of unfulfilled promise of marriage. (People
v Iman, 1935)
2. Another kind of deceit is unfulfilled promise to buy her jewelry.
3. But what if it is unfulfilled promise to pass her in the final examinations?
This is qualified seduction already. The teacher abused her authority to
have sex with her.
4. The gist of qualified seduction is the abuse of authority, confidence, or
relationship to commit the crime. In simple seduction, it is the use of
deceit. In either case, there must be consented sexual intercourse.
(Boado)

Qualified Seduction Simple Seduction

Virginity She must be a virgin She must only be of good
reputation. Virginity is
not essential.
Deceit Deceit is not necessary Deceit is necessary
Abuse Abuse of authority, Abuse of authority,
confidence, or confidence, or
relationship is necessary. relationship is not
necessary.
Offender There are specific The offender can be any
offenders, as person who acts with no
enumerated in Article abuse of authority,
337 confidence, or
relationship and who
uses deceit to have
carnal knowledge.
Each act of sexual intercourse does not warrant a separate act of deceit
under simple seduction

Upon the other hand, the fact that there should be different acts of intercourse,
consented by the woman in reliance upon the same promise of marriage would not
mean separate offenses of seduction, (cf. U.S. vs. Salud, 10 Phil. 208). Nowhere in
the information does it appear that every act of intercourse was the result of a
separate act of deceit. (People v Yap, 1968)

Article 339. Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the offended party.
 1. A woman who is exactly twelve (12) years of age is covered by seduction
1. There is an oversight in the law where the victim is exactly 12 years of age.
If the victim is under 12 years of age, the crime is rape, or unconsented
acts of lasciviousness under Article 336, or forcible abduction. Hence,
Article 399 stating “over 12 years of age” should be construed as 12 years
of age and over, thus construing the doubt in favor of the accused. This is
based on the pro reo principle.

Acts of Lasciviousness Acts of lasciviousness

with the consent of the
offended party
Acts of lasciviousness The offender commits The offender commits
acts of lasciviousness acts of lasciviousness
Person of the offender The offender may be a The offender may be a
man or a woman man or a woman
Person of the offended The offended party may The offended party must
party be a man or a woman only be a woman
If there was carnal The acts are committed The acts are committed
knowledge, what would under the circumstances under the circumstances
the crime be which, had there been which, had there been
carnal knowledge, will carnal knowledge, will
amount to rape amount to either
qualified seduction or
simple seduction.
Article 340. Corruption of minors.

Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution or corruption of

persons underage to satisfy the lust of another, shall be punished by prision
mayor, and if the culprit is a pubic officer or employee, including those in
government-owned or controlled corporations, he shall also suffer the penalty of
temporary absolute disqualification. (As amended by Batas Pambansa Blg. 92).

Article 341. White slave trade.

The penalty of prision mayor in its medium and maximum period shall be imposed
upon any person who, in any manner, or under any pretext, shall engage in the
business or shall profit by prostitution or shall enlist the services of any other for
the purpose of prostitution (As amended by Batas Pambansa Blg. 186.)

Chapter Four - ABDUCTION

Article 342. Forcible abduction.

Forcible Kidnapping Grave coercion

Abduction
Deprivation of In forcible In both, there is There is no intent
liberty abduction, there is “kidnapping”, to deprive liberty,
“kidnapping”, detention, or but merely to
detention, or deprivation of prevent the
deprivation of freedom. offended party
freedom. from doing
something not
prohibited by law
Lewd design The difference is In kidnapping, In grave coercion,
in forcible there is no lewd there is no lewd
abduction, the design. design.
taking was done
with lewd design.
1. “Woman, regardless of her age, civil status, or reputation”
1. What is punished in Forcible Abduction is the fact that she was taken away
against her will. Her personal circumstance is irrelevant.
2. “Against her will”
1. If the female is under twelve (12) years of age, she is considered incapable
of giving consent. Hence, the law considers that she was abducted
against her will.
3. “With lewd designs
1. The acts of lewdness need not be committed. The provision merely states
that the abduction must be with lewd designs.
2. Forcible abduction is a continuing crime. As such, the criminal action may
be instituted in the proper court of the province in which the offense is
continued. (People v Pineda, 1993)
4. Forcible abduction absorbs attempted rape
1. Attempted rape is ABSORBED by forcible abduction as the former
constitutes the element of lewd design. (People v Egan, 2002)
5. Consummated rape absorbs forcible abduction if primary objective was
to rape
1. There is no complex crime of forcible abduction with rape if the PRIMARY
OBJECTIVE of the accused when he took her away was to commit rape
already. The crime of rape absorbs the forcible abduction. (People v
Domingo, 2017)
6. Complex crime of rape through forcible abduction if primary objective
was lewd design
1. Hence, if the PRIMARY OBJECTIVE of the offender when he took the
woman away was merely to commit acts of lasciviousness and lewdness,
 1.

but later on, he had carnal knowledge with her, there is a complex crime of
rape through forcible abduction.
7. Complex crime of rape through forcible abduction for first rape; Separate
crime of rape for second rape
1. There is no doubt at all that the forcible abduction of the complainant
from in front of her house in Quezon City, was a necessary if not
indispensable means which enabled them to commit the various and the
successive acts of rape upon her person. It bears noting, however, that
even while the first act of rape was being performed, the crime of forcible
abduction had already been consummated, so that each of the three
succeeding (crimes of the same nature can not legally be considered as
still connected with the abduction — in other words, they should be
detached from, and considered independently of, that of forcible
abduction and, therefore, the former can no longer be complexed with the
latter. (People v Jose, 1971)
2. COMMENT: It means the first act of rape must be complexed with the
forcible abduction. The succeeding acts of rape shall be considered
independently and separately.
8. Correlation of conspiracy and complex crime of rape through forcible
abduction/rape
1. If they are in conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. Hence, the
complex crime of rape through forcible abduction and the succeeding
counts of rape shall be applied to all the conspirators, even though not all
of them actually had sex with the woman. (People v Jose, 1971)

Crime
Forcible abduction absorbs attempted
rape
Consummated rape absorbs forcible
abduction
Complex crime of rape through forcible
abduction
Article 343. Consented abduction.
Reason
All the time. Why? Because attempted
rape also has lewd design.
When the primary objective was to
rape
When the primary objective was ONLY
lewd design, and rape was also
committed later (necessary means)

NOTES:
1. Virginity (physical) is an essential element. It is settled that the virginity
mentioned in Article 343 of the Revised Penal Code, as an essential ingredient
of the crime of abduction with consent, should not be understood in its
material sense and does not exclude the idea of abduction of a virtuous
woman of good reputation, because the essence of the offense "is not the
wrong done to the woman, but the outrage to the family and the alarm
 produced in it by the disappearance of one of its members. (Valdepenas v
People, 1996)
2. There can be a complex crime of rape through consented abduction
1. When a 15-year old was induced by the accused to leave her home and
later was forcibly raped by the offender, the accused is guilty of complex
crime of rape through consented abduction. (People v Amante, 1926)
2. COMMENT: The crime of rape must not be the primary objective of the
offender. The primary objective must be merely to commit lascivious or
lewd acts against her. Otherwise, the crime is only rape.
3. As illustration, A, a 20-year old male, persuaded his 15-year old girlfriend, B,
to leave the school and go with him to the movie theatres. A did this with the
intent of kissing her and touching her private parts once the movie starts. The
girl consented to his persuasion. When the movie started, A kissed B and also
he grabbed her breasts. Later, on their way back to the school, A forcibly had
sex with B in his car. Despite B’s resistance, A was successful in having sexual
intercourse with her.
1. In this example, the primary objective of A in taking her away from her
school was to merely commit acts of lewdness against her. Later on, he
raped her, even though such was not his primary objective. Hence, there
is a complex crime of rape through consented abduction, because
consented abduction was the necessary means to commit the rape.
4. Can there be a complex crime of qualified seduction through consented
abduction?
1. Yes, if the primary objective was only lewd design, and the offender, who
has authority over the woman, has carnal knowledge with her later.

Crimes against chastity where the age and reputation of the victim are
immaterial:
1) Acts of lasciviousness against the NOTE: Age is NOT needed because
will of the offended party there is LACK OF CONSENT.
2) Qualified seduction if the offended
party is the sister or descendant of the
offender (INCEST)
3) Acts of lasciviousness with the
consent of the sister or descendant of
the offender (INCEST)
4) Forcible abduction
Crimes against chastity where the age and reputation of the victim are
important:
1) Qualified seduction NOTE: Age is needed because there is
consent.
2) Simple seduction
3) Consented abduction
 1) Qualified seduction NOTE: Age is needed because there is
consent.
2) Simple seduction
3) Consented abduction

Compare Acts of Lasciviousness to other related crimes

Rape becomes Acts of lasciviousness if there is no intent to lie
Qualified/Simple Seduction becomes Acts of lasciviousness if there is no intent
to lie
Forcible abduction or consented abduction absorbs acts of lasciviousness,
because in both, lewd design is an element

Chapter Five - PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO THE PRECEDING CHAPTERS OF

TITLE ELEVEN

Article 344. Prosecution of the crimes of adultery, concubinage, seduction,

abduction, rape and acts of lasciviousness.

The crimes of adultery and concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended spouse.
The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution without including both
the guilty parties, if they are both alive, nor, in any case, if he shall have consented
or pardoned the offenders.
The offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or acts of lasciviousness, shall not be
prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended party or her parents,
grandparents, or guardian, nor, in any case, if the offender has been expressly
pardoned by the above named persons, as the case may be.
In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness and rape, the marriage of
the offender with the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or remit
the penalty already imposed upon him. The provisions of this paragraph shall also
be applicable to the co-principals, accomplices and accessories after the fact of
the above-mentioned crimes.

1. Adultery and concubinage

1. The death of the paramour will not bar prosecution against the unfaithful
wife, because the requirement that both offenders must be included in the
charge is absolute only when both are still alive.
2. For pardon/consent, such must come before the institution of the criminal
action, and it must be directed to both the offenders. Otherwise, there is no
effective pardon.
3. Pardon is implied from sexual intercourse AFTER knowledge of the other
spouse’s infidelity. It is entirely consonant with reason and justice that if the
wife freely consents to sexual intercourse after she has full knowledge of the
husband’s guilt, her consent should operate as a pardon of his wrong.
 3.

(Bugayong v Ginez, 1956)

4. Meanwhile, consent must always be express. It cannot be implied.
5. Acquittal of one of the defendants will NOT automatically acquire the other:
1. One of the parties may be insane and the other is sane
2. The man may not know that the woman is married, under the crime of
adultery. A similar provision does not exist for concubinage
3. The death of the woman during the pendency of the action cannot defeat
the trial and conviction of the man.
6. Rape
1. It is now a crime against persons which may be prosecuted de officio. This
Article does not apply to Rape.
7. Complex crimes
1. In case of complex crimes, where one of the component offenses is a
public crime, the criminal prosecution may be instituted by the public
prosecutor. Since one of the component offenses is a public crime, the
latter should prevail because public interest is always paramount to
private interest. (People v Yu, 1961)
2. As example, the complex crime of rape through forcible abduction.
Rape is a crime against persons, so it can be filed by the prosecutor,
because public interest prevails over private interest.
8. Exclusive and Successive right to file the action for SAL
1. The right to file the action to the parent, grandparent, or guardian shall be
exclusive of all other persons and shall be exercised successively in the
order provided by law.
9. Pardon for private crimes mentioned in Article 344
1. Such pardon does not extinguish criminal liability. It is merely a bar to
criminal prosecution.
10. Pardon in crimes against Chastity
1. Pardon in adultery and concubinage must come before the institution of
criminal action and both offenders must be pardoned by the offended
party if said pardon is to be effective. (People v Infante, 1932) The same is
true for SAL.
2. If it is after the institution of criminal action, it is not effective anymore.
Under Article 23, “A pardon of the offended party does not extinguish
criminal action except as provided in Article 344 of this Code; but civil
liability with regard to the interest of the injured party is extinguished by
his express waiver.”
3. Pardon by the offended party, who is a minor, must have the
concurrence of both her parents. (People v Makilang, 2001) except
when the offended party has no parents or the offender is her own father
and mother is dead.
4. Marriage of the offender with the offended party extinguishes the criminal
action or remits the penalty already imposed, and it benefits the co-
 4.

principals, accessories, and accomplices. This means that marriage, as

a kind of pardon, extinguishes criminal liability, and it is not just a bar to
prosecution.

RA 7610 - AN ACT PROVIDING FOR STRONGER DETERRENCE AND SPECIAL

PROTECTION AGAINST CHILD ABUSE, EXPLOITATION AND DISCRIMINATION,
AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

GITO: Usual questions in Court are 1) Sec. 5(a), 2) Sec. 5(b), and 3) Sec. 10.

ARTICLE I

Section 3. Definition of Terms.

“Any act by deeds or words which debases, degrades or demeans the

intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being”
1. Although it is true that not every instance of laying of hands on the child
constitutes child abuse, petitioner's intention to debase, degrade, and
demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child can be inferred from the
manner in which he committed the act complained of.
2. To note, petitioner used a wet t-shirt to whip the child not just once but three
(3) times. Common sense and human experience would suggest that hitting a
sensitive body part, such as the neck, with a wet t-shirt would cause an
extreme amount of pain, especially so if it was done several times. There is
also reason to believe that petitioner used excessive force. Otherwise, AAA
would not have fallen down the stairs at the third strike. AAA would likewise
not have sustained a contusion.
3. Indeed, if the only intention of petitioner were to discipline AAA and stop him
from interfering, he could have resorted to other less violent means. Instead of
reprimanding AAA or walking away, petitioner chose to hit the latter.
4. We find petitioner liable for other acts of child abuse under Article VI, Section
10(a) of Republic Act No. 7610, which provides that "a person who shall
commit any other acts of child abuse, cruelty or exploitation or be responsible
for other conditions prejudicial to the child's development shall suffer the
penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period. (Torres v People, 2017,
Leonen)
5. GITO: Usual accused for Section 10(a) are teachers.
6. COMMENT: The answer will be very factual. For the applicability of RA 7610,
the facts must show without reasonable doubt that the perpetrator intended
to degrade/debase/demean the intrinsic validity or worth of the child as a
human being. Otherwise, it is only a violation of the RPC (slight physical
injuries).
ARTICLE III - Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse

Section 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse.

1. “Coercion”; Compel
1. It means improper use of power to compel another to submit to the wishes
of the one who wields it. (People v Caoili, 2017)
2. “Influence”; Trust
1. It means improper use of power or trust in any way that deprives a person
of free will and substituted by another’s objective.
3. GITO: The persons can be teachers, relatives, boyfriends, etc.
4. Examples of “Influence”
1. Assurances of love, promise to use withdrawal method, and promise of
marriage are covered by “influence.” Hence, the child is subjected to
“other sexual abuse” under RA 7610. (Caballo v People, 2013)
2. In the case, Caballo repeatedly assured AAA of his love for her, and even,
promised to marry her. In addition, he also guaranteed that she would not
get pregnant since he would be using the "withdrawal method" for safety.
Irrefragably, these were meant to influence AAA to set aside her
reservations and eventually give into having sex with him, with which he
succeeded. (Caballo v People, 2013) Hence, Caballo's acts constitute
"coercion" and “influence,” making him liable under RA 7610.
3. Further, as an adult and the father of AAA's friend, Betty, Udang had
“influence” over AAA, which induced the latter to have drinks and later on
have sexual intercourse with him. AAA, born on May 20, 1990, was 12 and
13 years old when the incidents happened. (People v Udang, 2018,
Leonen)
5. GITO: If there is no force or intimidation, check if the child was “binola bola”.
If yes, he will be criminally liable under RA 7610. If RA 7610 is not present, it
will be hard to punish this.
6. Consent is immaterial if the child indulges in sexual intercourse or any
lascivious conduct due to the coercion or influence of an adult
1. In the case of Caballo v People, 2013, consent is immaterial in section 5,
RA 7610, because a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other
sexual abuse cannot validly give consent to sexual intercourse with
another person. A child is presumed to be incapable of giving rational
consent to any lascivious act or sexual intercourse. (Caballo v People,
2013)
2. Hence, the sweetheart defense is unacceptable. (Caballo v People, 2013)
7. In short, consent of the child prostitute is not a valid defense. (People v
Udang, 2018, Leonen)
8. Short summary of Sec. 5(a) to 5(c)
1. Sec. 5(a) punishes persons who FACILITATE the sexual intercourse/
 1.
lascivious conduct
2. Sec. 5(b) punishes persons who COMMIT the sexual intercourse/
lascivious conduct
3. Sec. 5(c) punishes persons who OWNS THE ESTABLISHMENT to commit
SI/LC.
9. No need for multiple acts of sexual abuse under RA 7610
1. The Court has already ruled that it is inconsequential that sexual abuse
under RA 7610 occurred only once. Section 3(b) of RA 7610 provides that
the abuse may be “habitual or not.” Hence, the fact that the offense
occurred only once is enough to hold Garingarao liable for acts of
lasciviousness in relation to RA 7610. (Garingarao v People, 2011)
10. Correct designation in rape by sexual intercourse, rape by sexual
assault, acts of lasciviousness, and RA 7610 - if the victim is a CHILD
PROSTITUTE
1. If under 7 years of age, and there was sexual intercourse, qualified rape
under RPC. Why? Because RA 7610 states that “when the victims is under
twelve (12) years of age, the perpetrators shall be prosecuted under
Article 335, paragraph 3, for rape.”
2. If under 12 years of age, and there was sexual intercourse, statutory rape
under RPC. Why? Because RA 7610 states that “when the victims is under
twelve (12) years of age, the perpetrators shall be prosecuted under
Article 335, paragraph 3, for rape.”
3. If more than 12 but under 18, and there was sexual intercourse, sexual
abuse under RA 7610. However, also charging rape will not violate double
jeopardy. (People v Udang, 2018, Leonen)
4. If under 12 years of age, and there was merely lewd acts, acts of
lasciviousness in relation to RA 7610. Why? Because RA 7610 states
that “Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal Code,
for rape or lascivious conduct, as the case may be: Provided, That the
penalty for lascivious conduct when the victim is under twelve (12) years
of age shall be reclusion temporal in its medium period”
5. If more than 12 but under 18, and there was merely lewd acts, lascivious
conduct under RA 7610. Why? Because it is the harsher penalty.
6. If under 12 years of age, and there was sexual assault, acts of
lasciviousness in relation to RA 7610. Why? Because RA 7610 states
that “Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal Code,
for rape or lascivious conduct, as the case may be: Provided, That the
penalty for lascivious conduct when the victim is under twelve (12) years
of age shall be reclusion temporal in its medium period.” (People v Jin)
7. If more than 12 but under 18, and there was sexual assault, lascivious
conduct under RA 7610. Why? Because it is the harsher penalty.
11. In short:
1. 7 + SI = qualified rape in relation to RA 7610
 2. 12 + SI = statutory rape in relation to RA 7610
3. 12/18 + SI = sexual abuse under RA 7610
4. 12 + LD = acts of lasciviousness in relation to RA 7610
5. 12/18 + LD = lascivious conduct under RA 7610
6. 12 + SA = acts of lasciviousness in relation to RA 7610
7. 12/18 + SA = lascivious conduct under RA 7610
12. QUESTION: What if it is attempted rape v RA 7610?
1. We adopt the same principles for consummated rape.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Section 6. Attempt To Commit Child Prostitution.

There is an attempt to commit child prostitution under Section 5, paragraph (a)

hereof when any person who, not being a relative of a child, is found alone with
the said child inside the room or cubicle of a house, an inn, hotel, motel, pension
house, apartelle or other similar establishments, vessel, vehicle or any other
hidden or secluded area under circumstances which would lead a reasonable
person to believe that the child is about to be exploited in prostitution and other
sexual abuse.
There is also an attempt to commit child prostitution, under paragraph (b) of
Section 5 hereof when any person is receiving services from a child in a sauna
parlor or bath, massage clinic, health club and other similar establishments. A
penalty lower by two (2) degrees than that prescribed for the consummated felony
under Section 5 hereof shall be imposed upon the principals of the attempt to
commit the crime of child prostitution under this Act, or, in the proper case, under
the Revised Penal Code.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
ARTICLE VI - Other Acts of Abuse

Section 10. Other Acts of Neglect, Abuse, Cruelty or Exploitation and Other
Conditions Prejudicial to the Child's Development.
1. Any person who shall commit any other acts of child abuse, cruelty or
exploitation or to be responsible for other conditions prejudicial to the child's
development including those covered by Article 59 of Presidential Decree No.
603, as amended, but not covered by the Revised Penal Code, as amended,
shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period.
2. Any person who shall keep or have in his company a minor, twelve (12) years
or under or who in ten (10) years or more his junior in any public or private
place, hotel, motel, beer joint, discotheque, cabaret, pension house, sauna or
massage parlor, beach and/or other tourist resort or similar places shall suffer
the penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period and a fine of not less than
Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000): Provided, That this provision shall not apply
to any person who is related within the fourth degree of consanguinity or
affinity or any bond recognized by law, local custom and tradition or acts in
 the performance of a social, moral or legal duty.
3. Any person who shall induce, deliver or offer a minor to any one prohibited by
this Act to keep or have in his company a minor as provided in the preceding
paragraph shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its medium period and a
fine of not less than Forty thousand pesos (P40,000); Provided, however, That
should the perpetrator be an ascendant, stepparent or guardian of the minor,
the penalty to be imposed shall be prision mayor in its maximum period, a fine
of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000), and the loss of parental
authority over the minor.
4. Any person, owner, manager or one entrusted with the operation of any public
or private place of accommodation, whether for occupancy, food, drink or
otherwise, including residential places, who allows any person to take along
with him to such place or places any minor herein described shall be imposed
a penalty of prision mayor in its medium period and a fine of not less than Fifty
thousand pesos (P50,000), and the loss of the license to operate such a place
or establishment.
5. Any person who shall use, coerce, force or intimidate a street child or any
other child to;
1. Beg or use begging as a means of living;
2. Act as conduit or middlemen in drug trafficking or pushing; or
3. Conduct any illegal activities, shall suffer the penalty of prision
correccional in its medium period to reclusion perpetua.

For purposes of this Act, the penalty for the commission of acts punishable under
Articles 248, 249, 262, paragraph 2, and 263, paragraph 1 of Act No. 3815, as
amended, the Revised Penal Code, for the crimes of murder, homicide, other
intentional mutilation, and serious physical injuries, respectively, shall be reclusion
perpetua when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age.

The penalty for the commission of acts punishable under Article 337, 339, 340
and 341 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal Code, for the crimes of
qualified seduction, acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the offended party,
corruption of minors, and white slave trade, respectively, shall be one (1) degree
higher than that imposed by law when the victim is under twelve (12) years age.
The victim of the acts committed under this section shall be entrusted to the care
of the Department of Social Welfare and Development.

RA 9775 - AN ACT DEFINING THE CRIME OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY,

PRESCRIBING PENALTIES THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Section 3. Definition of Terms.

(a) "Child" refers to a person below eighteen (18) years of age or over, but is
unable to fully take care of himself/herself from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or
condition.
For the purpose of this Act, a child shall also refer to:
1. a person regardless of age who is presented, depicted or portrayed as a child
as defined herein; and
2. computer-generated, digitally or manually crafted images or graphics of a
person who is represented or who is made to appear to be a child as defined
herein.

(b) "Child pornography" refers to any representation, whether visual, audio, or

written combination thereof, by electronic, mechanical, digital, optical, magnetic or
any other means, of child engaged or involved in real or simulated explicit sexual
activities.

(c) "Explicit Sexual Activity" includes actual or simulated -

1. sexual intercourse or lascivious act including, but not limited to, contact
involving genital to genital, oral to genital, anal to genital, or oral to anal,
whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
2. bestiality;
3. masturbation;
4. sadistic or masochistic abuse;
(5) lascivious exhibition of the genitals, buttocks, breasts, pubic area and/or anus;
or
(6) use of any object or instrument for lascivious acts

(h) "Grooming" refers to the act of preparing a child or someone who the offender
believes to be a child for sexual activity or sexual relationship by communicating
any form of child pornography. It includes online enticement or enticement
through any other means.

(i) "Luring" refers to the act of communicating, by means of a computer system,

with a child or someone who the offender believes to be a child for the purpose of
facilitating the commission of sexual activity or production of any form of child
pornography.

(j) "Pandering" refers to the act of offering, advertising, promoting, representing

or distributing through any means any material or purported material that is
intended to cause another to believe that the material or purported material
contains any form of child pornography, regardless of the actual content of the
material or purported material.

Section 4. Unlawful or Prohibited Acts.

It shall be unlawful for any person:
(j) To willfully access any form of child pornography;
(k) To conspire to commit any of the prohibited acts stated in this section.
(l) To possess any form of child pornography.

Section 5. Syndicated Child Pornography

The crime of child pornography is deemed committed by a syndicate if carried out

by a group of three (3) or more persons conspiring or confederating with one
another and shall be punished under Section 15(a) of this Act.

Section 8. Jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction over cases for the violation of this Act shall be vested in the Family
Court which has territorial jurisdiction over the place where the offense or any of
its essential elements was committed pursuant to Republic Act No. 8369,
otherwise known as "Family Courts Act of 1997”.

COMMENT: Family Court since this is a “child.” This is true even if the “child” is an
adult that is portrayed as a child, or a computer-generated child.

NOTES:
1. GITO: If the child is seen live, the crime is indecent shows under RA 7610 or
the RPC (if live show na, and not through video).
2. Child pornography is malum in se. Criminal intent is necessary.
1. GITO: Hence, a parent who posts his naked baby online is not
automatically liable. There must be criminal intent to commit child
pornography. The representation must be shared for prurient interest.
2. Further, it is not an “explicit sexual acitivity.” It is not a “lascivious
exhibition of the genitals, buttocks, breasts, pubic area and/or anus.”
3. “Grooming”
1. GITO: Uses handsome man as picture in social media. “Liligawan” ang
child online. Then later, the child would be in love. Asked for nudes. Child
gave the same to the handsome man. This is already child pornography.
4. GITO: Mere possession (of course with intent) is punishable by law.

RA 7877 - Anti-Sexual Harassment Act

SECTION 3. Work, Education or Training -Related, Sexual Harassment

Defined.

Work, education or training-related sexual harassment is committed by:

 1. an employer, employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher,
instructor, professor, coach, trainor, or any other person who, having
authority, influence or moral ascendancy over another
2. in a work or training or education environment,
3. demands, requests or otherwise requires any sexual favor from the other,
4. regardless of whether the demand, request or requirement for submission is
accepted by the object of said Act.

(a) In a work-related or employment environment, sexual harassment is

committed when:
1. The sexual favor is made as a condition in the hiring or in the employment, re-
employment or continued employment of said individual, or in granting said
individual favorable compensation, terms of conditions, promotions, or
privileges; or the refusal to grant the sexual favor results in limiting,
segregating or classifying the employee which in any way would discriminate,
deprive or diminish employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect
said employee;
2. The above acts would impair the employee's rights or privileges under
existing labor laws; or
3. The above acts would result in an intimidating, hostile, or offensive
environment for the employee.

(b) In an education or training environment, sexual harassment is committed:

1. Against one who is under the care, custody or supervision of the offender;
2. Against one whose education, training, apprenticeship or tutorship is
entrusted to the offender;
3. When the sexual favor is made a condition to the giving of a passing grade, or
the granting of honors and scholarships, or the payment of a stipend,
allowance or other benefits, privileges, or consideration; or
4. When the sexual advances result in an intimidating, hostile or offensive
environment for the student, trainee or apprentice.

Any person who directs or induces another to commit any act of sexual
harassment as herein defined, or who cooperates in the commission thereof by
another without which it would not have been committed, shall also be held liable
under this Act.

SECTION 7. Penalties.

Any person who violates the provisions of this Act shall, upon conviction, be
penalized by imprisonment of not less than one (1) month nor more than six (6)
months, or a fine of not less than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000) nor more than
Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000), or both such fine and imprisonment at the
discretion of the court.

Any action arising from the violation of the provisions of this Act shall prescribe in
three (3) years.

NOTES:
1. COMMENT: The basic is boss and worker. We apply Anti-Sexual Harassment
Act for this. It gets trickier for teacher and student.
2. GITO: If the teacher influenced the minor student to have sex/commit
lascivious conduct and they committed the same, the crime is RA 7610
already. That is NOT a mere “sexual favor,” as provided under Anti-Sexual
Harassment Act.
1. If it was a mere sexual favor, the crime is sexual harassment.

RA 11313 - Safe Spaces Act of 2019

ARTICLE I - GENDER-BASED STREETS AND PUBLIC SPACES SEXUAL

HARASSMENT

Section 4. Gender-Based Streets and Public Spaces Sexual Harassment.

Elements for gender-based harassment in the streets or in public places:

(GUP)
1. The act of harassment is Gender-based
2. Unwanted and uninvited sexual actions or remarks, regardless of its motive
3. The place of commission must be in the streets or in Public places

What do they include:

1. Gender-based streets and public spaces sexual harassment includes
catcalling, wolf-whistling, unwanted invitations, misogynistic, transphobic,
homophobic and sexist slurs, persistent uninvited comments or gestures on a
person’s appearance, relentless requests for personal details, statement of
sexual comments and suggestions, public masturbation or flashing of private
parts, groping, or any advances, whether verbal or physical, that is unwanted
and has threatened one’s sense of personal space and physical safety, and
committed in public spaces such as alleys, roads, sidewalks and parks.
2. Acts constitutive of gender-based streets and public spaces sexual
harassment are those performed in buildings, schools, churches, restaurants,
malls, public washrooms, bars, internet shops, public markets, transportation
terminals or public utility vehicles.

ARTICLE II - GENDER-BASED ONLINE SEXUAL HARASSMENT

Section 12. Gender-Based Online Sexual Harassment.

Elements of gender-based online sexual harassment: (GUO)

1. The act of harassment is Gender-based
2. Unwanted and uninvited sexual actions or remarks, regardless of its motive
3. The act was committed Online, whether publicly or through direct and private
messages

What do they include:

1. Gender-based online sexual harassment includes acts that use information
and communications technology in terrorizing and intimidating victims through
physical, psychological, and emotional threats, unwanted sexual misogynistic,
transphobic, homophobic and sexist remarks and comments online whether
publicly or through direct and private messages,
2. invasion of victim’s privacy through cyberstalking and incessant messaging,
uploading and sharing without the consent of the victim, any form of media
that contains photos, voice, or video with sexual content,
3. any unauthorized recording and sharing of any of the victim’s photos, videos,
or any information online, impersonating identities of victims online or posting
lies about victims to harm their reputation, or filing, false abuse reports to
online platforms to silence victims.
ARTICLE III - QUALIFIED GENDER-BASED STREETS, PUBLIC SPACES AND
ONLINE SEXUAL HARASSMENT

Section 15. Qualified Gender-Based Streets, Public Spaces and Online Sexual
Harassment. -The penalty next higher in degree will be applied in the following
cases: (Place, Special needs, uniformed offender)

PLACE of commission
● If the act takes place in a Common carrier or PUV, including, but not limited to,
jeepneys, taxis, tricycles, or app-based transport network vehicle services,
where the perpetrator is the Driver of the vehicle and the offended party is a
passenger; (Common->Driver)
● If the act takes place in the premises of a Government agency offering
frontline services to the public and the perpetrator is a Government employee.
(Government->Government)

SPECIAL needs victim

● If the offended party is a Minor, a Senior citizen, or a person with Disability
(PWD), or a breastfeeding Mother nursing her child;
● If the offended party is diagnosed with a Mental problem tending to impair
consent;
UNIFORMED offender
● If the perpetrator is a member of the Uniformed services, such as the PNP and
the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), and the act was perpetrated while
the perpetrator was in Uniform; (Uniform->Uniform)

ARTICLE IV - GENDER-BASED SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE

COMMENT: This will likely be asked in Labor Law.

Section 16. Gender-Based Sexual Harassment in the Workplace. -The crime of

gender-based sexual harassment in the workplace includes the following:
● An act or series of acts involving any unwelcome sexual advances, requests or
demand for sexual favors or any act of sexual nature, whether done verbally,
physically or through the use of technology such as text messaging or
electronic mail or through any other forms of information and communication
systems, that has or could have a detrimental effect on the conditions of an
individual’s employment or education, job performance or opportunities;
● A conduct of sexual nature and other conduct-based on sex affecting the
dignity of a person, which is unwelcome, unreasonable, and offensive to the
recipient, whether done verbally, physically or through the use of technology
such as text messaging or electronic mail or through any other forms of
information and communication systems;
● A conduct that is unwelcome and pervasive and creates an intimidating,
hostile or humiliating environment for the recipient: Provided, That the crime
of gender-based sexual harassment may also be committed between
peers and those committed to a superior officer by a subordinate, or to a
teacher by a student, or to a trainer by a trainee; and
● Information and communication system refers to a system for generating,
sending, receiving, storing or otherwise processing electronic data messages
or electronic documents and includes the computer system or other similar
devices by or in which data are recorded or stored and any procedure related
to the recording or storage of electronic data messages or electronic
documents.

ARTICLE V - GENDER-BASED SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN EDUCATIONAL AND

TRAINING INSTITUTIONS

Section 21. Gender-Based Sexual Harassment in Educational and Training

Institutions.— All schools, whether public or private, shall designate an officer-in-
charge to receive complaints regarding violations of this Act, and shall, ensure that
the victims are provided with a gender-sensitive environment that is both
respectful to the victims’ needs and conducive to truth-telling.
Every school must adopt and publish grievance procedures to facilitate the filing
of complaints by students and faculty members. Even if an individual does not
want to file a complaint or does not request that the school take any action on
behalf of a student or faculty member and school authorities have knowledge or
reasonably know about a possible or impending act of gender-based sexual
harassment or sexual violence, the school should promptly investigate to
determine the veracity of such information or knowledge and the circumstances
under which the act of gender-based sexual harassment or sexual violence were
committed, and take appropriate steps to resolve the situation. If a school knows
or reasonably should know about acts of gender-based sexual harassment or
sexual violence being committed that creates a hostile environment, the school
must take immediate action to eliminate the same acts, prevent their recurrence,
and address their effects.

ARTICLE VII - FINAL PROVISIONS

Section 36. Prescriptive Period.— Any action arising from the violation of any of
the provisions of this Act shall prescribe as follows:
(a) Offenses committed under Section 11(a) of this Act shall prescribe in one (1)
year;
(b) Offenses committed under Section 11(b) of this Act shall prescribe in three (3)
years;
(c) Offenses committed under Section 11(c) of this Act shall prescribe in ten (10)
years;
(d) Offenses committed under Section 12 of this Act shall be imprescriptible; and
(e) Offenses committed under Sections 16 and 21 of this Act shall prescribe in five
(5) years.

COMMENT: The Safe Spaces Act amended two (2) things from Anti-Sexual
Harassment Acts, namely:

1. In Safe Spaces Act, sexual harassment can also be done: (PESTS)

1. between Peers
2. by the Employee to the employer,
3. by the Student to the teacher,
4. by the Trainee to the trainer,
5. by the Subordinate to the superior officer (Peers or Superior can violate
the Act)
2. In Safe Spaces Act, the prescriptive period is now five (5) years and not
merely three (3) years.

COMMENT: When in doubt, rule in favour of there is sexual harassment. The

reason is the possible crime is entirely based on whether the offended party
suffered emotional, mental, or psychological distress or fear for her personal
safety or invasion of her personal space.

RA 9995 - Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009

Section 3. Definition of Terms. - For purposes of this Act, the term:

(d) "Photo or video voyeurism" means:

1. The act of taking photo or video coverage of a person or group of persons
performing sexual act or any similar activity or of capturing an image of the
private area of a person or persons without the latter's consent, under
circumstances in which such person/s has/have a reasonable expectation of
privacy, or
2. The act of selling, copying, reproducing, broadcasting, sharing, showing or
exhibiting the photo or video coverage or recordings of such sexual act or
similar activity through VCD/DVD, internet, cellular phones and similar means
or device without the written consent of the person/s involved,
notwithstanding that consent to record or take photo or video coverage of
same was given by such person's.

(e) "Private area of a person" means the naked or undergarment clad genitals,
public area, buttocks or female breast of an individual.

(f) "Under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of

privacy" means believe that he/she could disrobe in privacy, without being
concerned that an image or a private area of the person was being captured; or
circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that a private area of
the person would not be visible to the public, regardless of whether that person is
in a public or private place.

Section 4. Prohibited Acts.

It is hereby prohibited and declared unlawful for any person:

(a) To take photo or video coverage of a person or group of persons performing

sexual act or any similar activity or to capture an image of the private area of a
person/s such as the naked or undergarment clad genitals, public area, buttocks
or female breast without the consent of the person/s involved and under
circumstances in which the person/s has/have a reasonable expectation of
privacy;

(b) To copy or reproduce, or to cause to be copied or reproduced, such photo or

video or recording of sexual act or any similar activity with or without
consideration;

(c) To sell or distribute, or cause to be sold or distributed, such photo or video or

recording of sexual act, whether it be the original copy or reproduction thereof; or

(d) To publish or broadcast, or cause to be published or broadcast, whether in

print or broadcast media, or show or exhibit the photo or video coverage or
recordings of such sexual act or any similar activity through VCD/DVD, internet,
cellular phones and other similar means or device.

The prohibition under paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) shall apply notwithstanding that
consent to record or take photo or video coverage of the same was given by such
person/s. Any person who violates this provision shall be liable for photo or video
voyeurism as defined herein.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
GITO: Two (2) consents are required:
1. Consent to the capturing or recording and
2. Consent to the selling/uploading/publishing.

If there are 2 consents, are they exempt from criminal liability? No, they are still
criminally liable for indecent shows under the RPC.

1. Mere “pamboboso” in a room - Unjust Vexation. Is it a violation of Safe Spaces

Act? No, because it is NOT in a public space
2. “Pamboboso” then “hipo” - Acts of lasciviousness
3. Video coverage of a person performing sexual activity or the private area while
“namboboso” - Anti-photo and video voyeurism
4. if the person who captured/uploaded without the consent of the other is a
person with sexual or dating relationship with the offended party - VAWC
under RA 9262, because it is “pyschological violence causing mental or
emotional anguish”

COMMENT: So there are two (2) crimes - Voyeurism and VAWC

_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________
K. Crimes against civil status of persons
Bigamy Marriage contracted Performance of illegal
against provisions of marriage ceremony
laws
Any person contracts a Any person contracts a Priest/minister/civil
second marriage marriage authority
1) Before former Not being covered by Authorized to solemnize
marriage is legally bigamy marriage
dissolved, or
 marriage ceremony
laws
Any person contracts a Any person contracts a Priest/minister/civil
second marriage marriage authority
1) Before former Not being covered by Authorized to solemnize
marriage is legally bigamy marriage
dissolved, or
2) Before the absent
spouse has been
declared presumptively
deed judicially
He knew at the time of He solemnized an illegal
marriage that: (RI) marriage ceremony.
1) Requirements of the
law were not complied
with; or
2) Disregards a legal
Impediment.

Chapter Two - ILLEGAL MARRIAGES

Article 349. Bigamy.

1. “Before former marriage is legally dissolved”
1. The RPC does not state “during the subsistence of a first marriage.” It
states “before the former marriage is legally dissolved.” Hence, as long as
there is no judicial declaration of nullity or annulment or marriage, a
person is prohibited from contracting a subsequent marriage.
2. Further, a marriage is PRESUMED VALID until declared as void ab initio.
(Mercado v Tan, 2000) Hence, a judicial declaration is necessary.
3. If a person intends to contract a second marriage, he must first secure a
judicial declaration of nullity of the first marriage. If they proceed without
such declaration, bigamy is committed, regardless of evidence of nullity of
the first marriage. (Vitangcol v People, Leonen) Why? Because the former
marriage is still not legally dissolved.
4. Is the pending petition for declaration of nullity of the former marriage a
prejudicial question for the crime of bigamy?
1. No. A prejudicial question requires that the resolution of the civil case
determines whether or not the criminal case will proceed.
2. Here, despite the pendency of the petition, the case for bigamy will
proceed, because all the elements of the crime can be proven, such
as the second marriage, and contracting the same before the former
marriage is legally dissolved. Further, marriages are presumed valid
until declared void ab initio. Hence, it is not a prejudicial question.
5. What about the pending petition for declaration of nullity of the second
marriage?
1. No. It is not a prejudicial question.
2. A declaration of the nullity of the second marriage on the ground of
 2.
psychological incapacity is of no moment insofar as the RPC is
concerned.
3. Since a second marriage contracted during the subsistence of a valid
marriage is already void, such nullity is not an argument for the
avoidance of criminal liability for bigamy. (Tenebro v CA, 2004)
6. GITO: However, if the second marriage is being annulled due to the
ground of force or intimidation, there is a prejudicial question. If the
second marriage is done with force, there is no intent to commit bigamy.
Hence, there is no crime. (Zapanta v Montesa, 1962)
2. Bigamy is a public crime, so it may be initiated by any person.
3. Persons liable as accomplice:
1. The person who falsely vouched for the capacity of either of the
contracting parties
2. The second spouse, whether man or woman, who knowingly consents or
agrees to be married to another already bound by a prior marriage.
(Santiago v People, 2015)
4. Meanwhile, the solemnizing officer who knew of the prior marriage shall be
punished under Article 352 - performance of illegal marriage ceremonies.
5. Prescription
1. The prescriptive period for the crime of bigamy does not commence from
the commission thereof but from the time of its discovery by the
complainant spouse. While it may be conceded that the bigamous
marriage was celebrated publicly in church and recorded in the Office of
the Civil Registrar, the rule on constructive notice cannot apply.
(Regalado)
2. The provisions on bigamy does not apply to persons married under the
Muslim Code. (PD 1083, Article 180)

Bigamy Adultery/Concubinage
Nature of the offense Crime against status; Crime against chastity;
public offense private crime
Who may file the Any person Only the offended
complaint spouse
Effect of pardon No effect Bars the prosecution of
the case (not extinguish)
Manner of commission Celebration of the For adultery, mere sexual
second marriage while intercourse; For
the first marriage was not concubinage, sexual
legally dissolved or the scandalous/keep
absentee spouse is not conjugal home/cohabit
declared as other place
presumptively dead
Article 350. Marriage contracted against provisions of laws.

Article 352. Performance of illegal marriage ceremony.

1. Authority to solemnize marriages

1. Article 352 presupposes that the priest or minister or civil authority is
authorized to solemnise marriages.
2. If the accused is not authorized to solemnize marriages and he performs
an illegal marriage ceremony, he is liable under Article 177 - usurpation
of authority or public function. (Reyes)
H. Crimes against personal liberty and security
Title Nine - CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY AND SECURITY

Chapter One - CRIMES AGAINST LIBERTY

Section One. - Illegal Detention

Kidnapping and Slight illegal Kidnapping and Inducing a minor
serious illegal detention failure to return a to abandon his
detention minor home
Private individual Private individual Any person Any person

Kidnap/detain/ Kidnap/detain/ Entrusted with Induced the minor

deprive liberty of deprive liberty of the custody of
another another the minor, i.e.,
teacher/maid/
other parent
Any of the Without Fails to return the To abandon his
following attendance of any minor to his home
circumstances circumstances parents/guardians
applies: (3MSSR) enumerated in
1) Kidnapping the previous
lasted more than article.
3 days
2) Minor, except
parent, public
officer, or female
3) Serious
physical injuries/
threats to kill
4) Simulating
public authority
5) Purpose is to
extort Ransom,
even if none of the
circumstances
deprive liberty of the custody of
another another the minor, i.e.,
teacher/maid/
other parent
Any of the Without Fails to return the To abandon his
following attendance of any minor to his home
circumstances circumstances parents/guardians
applies: (3MSSR) enumerated in
1) Kidnapping the previous
lasted more than article.
3 days
2) Minor, except
parent, public
officer, or female
3) Serious
physical injuries/
threats to kill
4) Simulating
public authority
5) Purpose is to
extort Ransom,
even if none of the
circumstances
above are present
Parent not
entrusted with
custody - only
liable for Art.
270-271; Females
- can only be
liable for SID
Public officer -
arbitrary detention
(with exceptions)
Special complex crimes under Article 267:
Kidnapping with serious physical injuries, under Art. 267(3);
Kidnapping with murder or homicide under the last paragraph of the article
which states “when the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of the
detention”; and
Kidnapping with rape under the last paragraph of the article which states “or is
raped.”
Kidnapping with homicide/rape Robbery with homicide/rape
“When the victim is killed or dies as “When by reason or on occasion of
a consequence of the detention or is the robbery, homicide was
raped” committed, or when the robbery
shall have been accompanied by
rape, arson, or intentional
mutilation”
1. In kidnapping with homicide, the 1. In robbery with homicide/rape, the
Kidnapping with homicide/rape
“When the victim is killed or dies as
a consequence of the detention or is
raped”
1. In kidnapping with homicide, the
deceased must only be the victim.
Why? The provision states “When the
victim is…” Hence, if a third person was
killed, there are separate crimes. If
both the victim and the third person
died, the separate crimes are
kidnapping with homicide AND
homicide.
2. In kidnapping with homicide, the
victim may die even through heart
attack. The words are “killed or dies.”
3. In kidnapping with rape, the rape
must happen during the kidnapping.
The counts of rape are immaterial.
4. If the original intent is to kill the victim,
there is ONLY HOMICIDE. The
kidnapping of the victim is MERELY
INCIDENTAL to the original intent to kill.
Robbery with homicide/rape
“When by reason or on occasion of
the robbery, homicide was
committed, or when the robbery
shall have been accompanied by
rape, arson, or intentional
mutilation”
1. In robbery with homicide/rape, the
deceased may be a third person. Why?
The provision states “homicide was
committed,” and “accompanied by
rape.” Further, if both the victim and
the third person died, the crime is only
robbery with homicide.
2. In robbery with homicide, the victim
may ALSO die through heart attack.
“Homicide” must be understood in its
generic sense.
3. In robbery with rape, the rape must
ALSO happen during the robbery. The
counts of rape are ALSO immaterial.
4. If the original intent is to kill the victim,
and he was robbed as an afterthought,
there are SEPARATE crimes of homicide
and robbery.

5. If the original intent is to rape, the 5. If the original intent is to rape the
crime is ONLY RAPE/SEXUAL ABUSE victim, and she was robbed as an
UNDER RA 7610. The kidnapping of the afterthought, there are SEPARATE crimes
victim is MERELY INCIDENTAL to the of rape and robbery.
original intent to rape.
Kidnapping with Rape Rape
Original intent The original intent of the The original intent is to
taking is merely to rape the victim. Hence,
deprive her of liberty. the crime is only rape,
Later, as a consequence despite the abduction of
of the kidnapping, she the victim.
was raped.
Complex crime Special complex crime One crime
Attempted rape Attempted rape shall be N/A
considered as a separate
crime as the law merely
states “or is raped.”
Multiple rape There is only ONE special Separate crimes.
 of the kidnapping, she the victim.
was raped.
Complex crime Special complex crime One crime
Attempted rape Attempted rape shall be N/A
considered as a separate
crime as the law merely
states “or is raped.”
Multiple rape There is only ONE special Separate crimes.
complex crime of
kidnapping with rape
REGARDLESS of the
number of rapes
committed. The several
rapes are absorbed.
Kidnapping Arbitrary detention
Classification Crimes against personal Crimes against the
liberty fundamental law of the
State
Offender 1) Private individual Public officer
2) Public officer who
has no authority to
detain persons
3) Public officer who
has authority to detain
persons but acted in a
purely private capacity
Manner of commission Unlawfully kidnaps, Detains a person without
detains, or otherwise legal ground
deprives a person of
liberty
Kidnapping for ransom Highway Robbery (PD 532)
It may or may not be be committed in a It must be committed in a Philippine
Philippine highway highway
There must be specific target. The crime must be done
indiscriminately against any person in
PH highway, without a predetermined
target.

Article 267. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention.

Only four (4) important notes for kidnapping:

1. Police officers (purely private capacity)
2. Kidnapping for ransom
 3. Kidnapping with homicide/rape/spinj.
4. Original intent is to kidnap/to kill/to rape

Kidnap for Ransom

1. The essential element or act which makes the offense kidnapping is the
deprivation of an offended party’s liberty under ANY of the four circumstances
enumerated. (People v Suarez, 1948)
2. However, when the kidnapping or detention was committed for the purpose
of extorting ransom, any of the four circumstances enumerated is NOT
necessary. The crime is already kidnapping for ransom. Further, actual
demand or payment of the ransom are NOT necessary to consummate the
crime. (People v Muit, 2008)
1. PURPOSE consummates kidnapping for ransom. It does not need actual
demand or payment.
3. YEBRA: Terrorism v kidnapping for ransom - in terrorism, the government was
extorted

Special complex crimes under Article 267:

1. Kidnapping with serious physical injuries, under Art. 267(3);
2. Kidnapping with homicide under the last paragraph of the article which
states “when the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of the detention”;
and
3. Kidnapping with rape under the last paragraph of the article which states “or
is raped.”

NOTES:
1. “Private individual” ; “Public officer” (Abduction is done in PURELY
PRIVATE CAPACITY; it is NOT in relation to his office)
1. In People v. Santiano, members of the Philippine National Police were
convicted of kidnapping with murder. On appeal, they contended that they
cannot be charged with kidnapping considering that they were public
officers. This Court rejected the argument and said that "in ABDUCTING
and taking away the victim, [the accused] did so neither in furtherance of
official function nor in the pursuit of authority vested in them. It is not, in
fine, in relation to their office, but in PURELY PRIVATE CAPACITY, that
they [committed the crime]."(Osorio v Navera, 2018, Leonen)
2. A public officer who detains a person for the purpose of extorting ransom
cannot be said to be acting in an official capacity. In People v. Santiano,
this Court explained that public officials may be prosecuted under Article
267 of the Revised Penal Code if they act in their private capacity. (People
v Borja, 2017, Leonen)
3. COMMENT: Note the words “purely private capacity.”
2. “Deprive him of liberty”
 1. The prevailing jurisprudence on kidnapping and illegal detention is that the
curtailment of the victim's liberty need not involve any physical restraint
upon the victim's person. (People v Fabro)
2. It is not necessary that the victim be placed in an enclosure. (People v
Baldogo, 2003)
3. It need not involve physical restraint, and need not be in an enclosure or
treated harshly. (People v Fabro)
4. Although the victim initially consented to go to a place with the offender,
but was thereafter prevented through force from leaving the place, there
is kidnapping. (People v Acosta, 1960; People v. Pickwell, 2003)
5. The fact that the victim voluntarily went with the accused [does] not
remove the element of deprivation of liberty [if] the victim went with the
accused on a false inducement without which the victim would not have
done so." Rizaldo would not have gone with the accused-appellants had
they not misrepresented themselves as Philippine Drug Enforcement
Agency agents who allegedly caught him selling illegal drugs. (People v
Avancena, Leonen) There is still “deprivation of liberty.”
3. “Serious Physical Injuries”
1. Thus, there is no special complex crime of kidnapping with serious
physical injuries
4. “Ransom”
1. It is the money, price, or consideration paid or demanded for the
redemption of a captured person or persons; it is a payment that releases
from captivity the person captured. (People v Mamantak, 2008)
2. There is kidnapping when the accused demanded and received money (as
payment for debt) as requisite for releasing the person. (People v Tomio,
September 30, 1991)
3. YEBRA: Any consideration of value was extorted, not necessarily money,
amounts to kidnapping for ransom. It can be favor.
5. “When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of the detention”
1. Regardless of whether the killing was purposely sought for or was merely
an afterthought, the kidnapping with homicide or murder was committed.
(People v Montanir, 2011)
2. Take note of the word “dies.” The person kidnapped does not have to be
killed. If he dies, as when he suffers a heart attack, the offender
committed the special complex crime of kidnapping with homicide or
murder. This is in keeping with Article 4(1).
3. The law is explicit in stating that the person killed is the victim himself.
Hence, if the person killed is not the kidnap victim, but a THIRD PERSON,
it shall be treated as a separate crime of homicide AND kidnapping. If
such third person is a policeman trying to rescue the person kidnapped,
the crimes are the complex crime of homicide through direct assault and
the crime of kidnapping. It can never be a special complex crime. (Boado)
 4. A woman was kidnapped, ransom was demanded, and then later was killed
when she was about to escape. What crime was committed? Kidnapping
for Ransom with Homicide. (People vs. Ramos: Oct. 12, 1998)
6. When murder absorbs the kidnapping
1. Further, if the primary and ultimate purpose of the accused is to kill the
victim, the incidental deprivation of the victim’s liberty does not constitute
the felony of kidnapping but is merely a preparatory act to the killing.
Hence, the deprivation of liberty is merged into, or absorbed by the killing
of the victim (homicide). (People v Delim, 2003)
2. Hence, there is no kidnapping with murder, but only murder, when a 3-
year old child was gagged, hidden in a box where he died and a ransom
was asked. The demand for ransom did not convert the offense to
kidnapping with murder. It is only a part of the diabolic scheme of the
defendant to murder the child, to conceal his body and then demand
money before the discovery of the cadaver. The defendant was well ware
that the child would be suffocated to death in a few seconds after she left.
(People v Lora, 1982)
7. “Subjected to torture or dehumanising acts”
1. Does the Anti-Torture Act absorb Kidnapping? No, they will be separately
charged. Under Section 15 of RA 9745, “Torture as a crime shall not
absorb or shall not be absorbed by any other crime or felony committed as
a consequence, or as a means in the conduct or commission thereof. In
which case, torture shall be treated as a separate and independent
criminal act whose penalties shall be imposable without prejudice to any
other criminal liability provided for by domestic and international
laws.” (Anti-Torture Act)
1. NOTE: This merely applies to public officers (military etc.)
8. Terrorism
1. A person who commits an act punishable as Kidnapping, thereby sowing
and creating a widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the
populace, in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful
demand constitutes the crime of terrorism. (Sec. 3, RA 9372)
1. Fear, Panic, and Coercion to an unlawful demand
2. Example is kidnapping a senator/justice/President.
9. There is ATTEMPTED RAPE WITH HOMICIDE. However, there is no
ATTEMPTED KIDNAPPING WITH HOMICIDE. For the latter case, there will be
separate crimes.

COMMENT: Except for the crime of terrorism under the Human Security Act, the
special penal laws DO NOT absorb the crimes under the RPC. They shall be
punished separately.

Article 268. Slight illegal detention.

If the offender shall: (RWB)
1. voluntarily Release the person so kidnapped or detained within three days
from the commencement of the detention,
2. Without having attained the purpose intended, and
3. Before the institution of criminal proceedings against him, the penalty shall be
prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods and a fine not exceeding
seven hundred pesos.

“The same penalty shall be incurred by anyone who shall furnish the place for the
perpetration of the crime.”

This is an Article where the accomplice is treated as a co-principal to the crime.

Article 269. Unlawful arrest.

The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed
upon any person who, in any case other than those authorized by law, or without
reasonable ground therefor, shall arrest or detain another for the purpose of
delivering him to the proper authorities.

Elements: (ADU)

1. The offender Arrests or detains another

2. The purpose of the offender is to Deliver him to the proper judicial authorities
3. The arrest or detention is Unauthorized by law or there is no reasonable
ground therefore.

“Shall be imposed upon any person”

The offender is any person, whether a private person or public officer. However,
for the latter, the public officer must not be vested with authority to arrest or
detain a person or if so vested, he must not act in his official capacity. Otherwise,
the crime is arbitrary detention. (Reyes)

Other illegal detention Unlawful arrest

Purpose The purpose is merely to The purpose is to deliver
detain him or to deprive the person detained to
him of his liberty the proper judicial
authorities. However, the
detention is unauthorized
or there is no reasonable
ground therefore
 Other illegal detention Unlawful arrest
Purpose The purpose is merely to The purpose is to deliver
detain him or to deprive the person detained to
him of his liberty the proper judicial
authorities. However, the
detention is unauthorized
or there is no reasonable
ground therefore
Delay in the delivery of Unlawful arrest
the person detained to
the proper judicial
authorities
Person of the offender Public officer who is Any person who is not
vested with authority to such public officer
detain persons and acts
under official capacity
Manner of commission The detention is The detention is
authorized and with unauthorized or without
reasonable ground, but reasonable ground
the offender delays in the therefore.
delivery to the proper
judicial authorities
Purpose of the offender Purpose of arrest is to Purpose of arrest is to
deliver the victim to deliver the victim to
proper authority and file proper authority and file
the charge, but the the charge
offender delays in
making such delivery

Section Two. - Kidnapping of minors

Article 270. Kidnapping and failure to return a minor.

If the person who kidnapped the child is his parent, the crime can NEVER be Art.
267, since Art. 267 states “except the parent.”

COMMENT: Instead, the crime would either be Art. 270 or Art. 271.

If the person who kidnapped is the grandparent, the crime would likely be Art. 267.

COMMENT: In exceptional circumstances, the crime can also be Art. 270 if the
grandparents were entrusted with the custody of the chid.
Kidnapping and failure to return a minor is NECESSARILY INCLUDED in Kidnapping
and Serious Illegal Detention of Minor, but what differentiates them are the
following:

Kidnapping and serious Kidnapping and failure

illegal detention to return a minor
Offender The offender is NOT The offender is
entrusted with the entrusted with the
custody of the minor custody of the minor
person person
Act punished What is punished is the What is punished is the
illegal detaining or deliberate failure of the
kidnapping or deprivation offender having the
of liberty of the minor custody to restore him to
his parents or guardian.
Article 271. Inducing a minor to abandon his home.

Inducement must be a) actual, b) committed with criminal intent, and c)

determined by a will to cause damage. (Reyes)
The crime committed may be exploitation of a minor depending on the purpose of
the inducement.

NOTES:
1. To induce
1. Means to influence, to prevail on, to move by persuasion, or to incite by
motives.
2. The father or the mother may commit crimes under Articles 270 and 271-
where they are living separately and the custody of the minor children has
been given to one of them. (Reyes)
3. It is not necessary that the minor actually abandons the home. Mere
inducement consummates the crime.
4. The minor should not leave his home on his own free will. If he did, the
accused is not liable for the crime of inducing a minor to abandon his home.
5. COMMENT: As illustration, A and B are lovebirds who are still minors. A
wanted to elope with B, so she insisted that B should leave his home, while he
was still living with his parents. Is A liable under Article 271? Yes.

NOTE:
1. Pinahiram ang bata sa tatay - tinakas ng tatay - 270
2. Hindi pinahiram sa tatay- kinuha ng tatay sa bahay - 267
3. Ininduce ng tatay na tumakas ang bata sa bahay - 271

Section Three. - Slavery and Servitude

Article 272. Slavery.

The penalty of prision mayor and a fine of not exceeding 10,000 pesos shall be
imposed upon anyone who shall purchase, sell, kidnap or detain a human being for
the purpose of enslaving him.
If the crime be committed for the purpose of assigning the offended party to some
immoral traffic, the penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period.

Element: (PE)

1. The offender Purchases, Sells, Kidnaps, or Detains a human being

2. The purpose of the offender is to Enslave such human being.

Article 273. Exploitation of child labor.

The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods and a fine
not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed upon anyone who, under the pretext of
reimbursing himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant, guardian or person
entrusted with the custody of a minor, shall, against the latter's will, retain him in
his service.

Elements: (RAD)

1. The offender Retains a minor in his service;

2. It is Against the will of the minor; and
3. It is under pretext of reimbursing himself of a Debt incurred by an ascendant,
guardian, or person entrusted with the custody of the minor.

Article 274. Services rendered under compulsion in payment of debt.

The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its
minimum period shall be imposed upon any person who, in order to require or
enforce the payment of a debt, shall compel the debtor to work for him, against his
will, as household servant or farm laborer.

Elements: (CAR)

1. The offender Compels a debtor to work for him, either as a household servant
or farm laborer;
2. It is Against the will of the debtor;
3. The purpose is to Require or enforce the payment of a debt.
COMMENT: Just resort to Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act.

Chapter Two - CRIMES AGAINST SECURITY

Section One. - Abandonment of helpless persons and exploitation of minors.

Article 275. Abandonment of person in danger and abandonment of one's

own victim.

The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon:

1. Any one who shall fail to render assistance to any person whom he shall find in
an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying, when he can render such
assistance without detriment to himself, unless such omission shall constitute a
more serious offense.
2. Anyone who shall fail to help or render assistance to another whom he has
accidentally wounded or injured.
3. Anyone who, having found an abandoned child under seven years of age, shall
fail to deliver said child to the authorities or to his family, or shall fail to take him to
a safe place.

Punishable Acts: (UWA)

1. By failing to render assistance to any person whom the offender finds in an

Uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying when he can render such
assistance without detriment to himself, unless such omission shall constitute
a more serious offense;
2. By failing help or render assistance to another whom he has accidentally
wounded or injured; and
3. Having found an abandoned child under seven years of age, by failing to
deliver said child to the authorities or to his family, or shall fail to take him to a
safe place.

Article 276. Abandoning a minor.

The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed
upon any one who shall abandon a child under seven years of age, the custody of
which is incumbent upon him.
When the death of the minor shall result from such abandonment, the culprit shall
be punished by prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods; but if the
life of the minor shall have been in danger only, the penalty shall be prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods.
The provisions contained in the two preceding paragraphs shall not prevent the
imposition of the penalty provided for the act committed, when the same shall
constitute a more serious offense.

Elements: (CSAN)

1. The offender has the Custody of a child

2. The child is under Seven years of age;
3. He Abandons such child; and
4. He has No intent to kill the child, when the latter is abandoned.

Article 277. Abandonment of minor by person entrusted with his custody;

indifference of parents.

The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed
upon anyone who, having charge of the rearing or education of a minor, shall
deliver said minor to a public institution or other persons, without the consent of
the one who entrusted such child to his care or in the absence of the latter,
without the consent of the proper authorities.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon the parents who shall neglect their
children by not giving them the education which their station in life require and
financial conditions permit.

Punishable acts:

1. Delivering said minor to a public institution or other persons, without the

consent of the one who entrusted such child to his care or in the absence of
the latter, without the consent of the proper authorities.
2. Neglecting his (offender’s) children by not giving them the education which
their station in life require and financial conditions permit.

Article 278. Exploitation of minors.

The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods and a fine
not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed upon:
1. Any person who shall cause any boy or girl under sixteen years of age to
perform any dangerous feat of balancing, physical strength, or contortion.
2. Any person who, being an acrobat, gymnast, rope-walker, diver, wild-animal
tamer or circus manager or engaged in a similar calling, shall employ in exhibitions
of these kinds children under sixteen years of age who are not his children or
descendants.
3. Any person engaged in any of the callings enumerated in the next paragraph
preceding who shall employ any descendant of his under twelve years of age in
such dangerous exhibitions.
4. Any ascendant, guardian, teacher or person entrusted in any capacity with the
care of a child under sixteen years of age, who shall deliver such child gratuitously
to any person following any of the callings enumerated in paragraph 2 hereof, or to
any habitual vagrant or beggar.
If the delivery shall have been made in consideration of any price, compensation,
or promise, the penalty shall in every case be imposed in its maximum period.
In either case, the guardian or curator convicted shall also be removed from office
as guardian or curator; and in the case of the parents of the child, they may be
deprived, temporarily or perpetually, in the discretion of the court, of their parental
authority.
5. Any person who shall induce any child under sixteen years of age to abandon
the home of its ascendants, guardians, curators, or teachers to follow any person
engaged in any of the callings mentioned in paragraph 2 hereof, or to accompany
any habitual vagrant or beggar.
Article 279. Additional penalties for other offenses. - The imposition of the
penalties prescribed in the preceding articles, shall not prevent the imposition
upon the same person of the penalty provided for any other felonies defined and
punished by this Code.

COMMENT: Just resort to Child Abuse law.

RA 9208 - Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003, as amended by RA 10364

COMMENT: When trafficking concerns children, the go-to law is Anti-Trafficking

in Persons Act.
Anti-Trafficking in Qualified trafficking (16 Qualified gender-based
Persons Act of 2003, as grounds) sexual harassment (8
amended by RA 10364 grounds)
The act of "recruitment, PERSONALITY of the PERSON of the victim
transportation, transfer victim 1. Minor
or harboring, or receipt 1) Child (knowledge is 2. Senior citizen
of persons, with or immaterial) 3. PWD
without the victim’s 2) Adoption is effected 4. Breastfeeding mother
consent or knowledge, through the Inter- nursing her child
within or across national Country Adoption Act of 5. Diagnosed with Mental
borders.” 1995" problem, tending to
impair consent

The means used which UNIFORMED UNIFORMED

include "threat or use of 3) Engage in prostitution 6. If the perpetrator is a
force, or other forms of with any member of the member of the
The means used which
include "threat or use of
force, or other forms of
coercion, abduction,
fraud, deception, abuse
of power or of position,
taking advantage of the
vulnerability of the
person, or, the giving or
receiving of payments or
benefits to achieve the
consent of a person
having control over
another; and
The purpose of
trafficking is exploitation
which includes
"exploitation or the
prostitution of others or
other forms of sexual
exploitation, forced labor
or services, slavery,
servitude or the removal
or sale of organs. (People
v Casio, 2014, Leonen)
NOTE: However, the act
of recruitment,
transportation, transfer,
harboring, adoption or
receipt of a child for the
purpose of exploitation
or when the adoption is
induced by any form of
consideration for
exploitative purposes
shall also be considered
as ‘trafficking in persons’
even if it does not
involve any of the
means set forth in the
preceding paragraph.
UNIFORMED UNIFORMED
3) Engage in prostitution 6. If the perpetrator is a
with any member of the member of the
Military or law Uniformed services,
enforcement agencies; while he was in uniform;
4) Offender is a member (Uniform->Uniform)
of the Military or law
enforcement agencies;
Numerous/Frequency PLACE of commission
of commission 7. If the act takes place in
5) Syndicate, or in large a Common carrier or
scale. PUV, where the
6) Traffics for sixty (60) perpetrator is the driver
or more days of the vehicle and the
offended party is a
passenger; (Common-
>Driver)
8. If the act takes place
in the premises of a
Government agency, and
the perpetrator is a
government employee.
(Government-
>Government)
PERSONALITY of the
offender
7) Spouse
8) Ascendant
9) Sibling
10)Guardian/exercises
authority
11) Public officer

NOTE: However, the act
of recruitment,
transportation, transfer,
harboring, adoption or
receipt of a child for the
purpose of exploitation
or when the adoption is
induced by any form of
consideration for
exploitative purposes
shall also be considered
as ‘trafficking in persons’
even if it does not
involve any of the
means set forth in the
preceding paragraph.
GITO: Hence, for
trafficking of children,
only the act and purpose
must be proven. There is
no need to prove the
means.
Qualified trespassing
into dwelling
Any person
Enters into the dwelling
of another
Against his will
By means of force/
violation
the perpetrator is a
government employee.
(Government-
>Government)
PERSONALITY of the
offender
7) Spouse
8) Ascendant
9) Sibling
10)Guardian/exercises
authority
11) Public officer
Injury inflicted to the
victim
12) Dies
13) Insane
14) Mutilation
15) HIV/AIDS
16) Directs the trafficking
victim to Carry out the
exploitative purpose of
trafficking.
Simple trespassing into Other forms of trespass
dwelling
Any person Any person
Enters into the dwelling Enters closed premises/
of another fenced estate of another,
that was uninhabited
Against his will Prohibition to enter is
manifest
Not secure permission of
the owner or caretaker
 manifest
By means of force/ Not secure permission of
violation the owner or caretaker

Trespass to dwelling Violation of domicile

The offender is a private person The offender is a public officer or
employee
Homicide and Robbery with violence Robbery with use of
trespassing against or intimidation force upon things and
of persons and trespassing
trespassing
If the original intent is to Dwelling becomes an Trespassing is inherent.
kill the person inside the aggravating
dwelling, there is only the circumstance.
crime of homicide/
murder. Dwelling will
become an aggravating
circumstance.
If the original intent is to
merely enter, and
someone was killed as an
afterthought, there are
separate crimes of
trespassing and
homicide/murder.
Ex: A trespassed the
house of B by means of
motor vehicle. Inside the
premises, he accidently
ran B through, causing
B’s death. What are the
crimes committed?
Murder and trespassing.
It cannot be Homicide
through reckless
imprudence because
there was intent to
commit the crime of
trespassing (Art. 4(1))
Grave threats (V1) Grave threats (V2) (TCN) Light threats (TNCA)
(TCCA)
The offender Threatens The offender Threatens The offender makes a
another with the infliction another with the infliction Threat
upon the latter’s person, upon the latter’s person,
honor, or property, or honor, or property, or
upon the latter’s family, upon the latter’s family,
Of a wrong amounting to Of a wrong amounting to a To commit a wrong that
a Crime; Crime; does Not constitute a
Grave threats (V1)
(TCCA)
The offender Threatens
another with the infliction
upon the latter’s person,
honor, or property, or
upon the latter’s family,
Of a wrong amounting to
a Crime;
There is a demand for
money or imposition of
any other Condition,
even though not
unlawful; and
The offender Attained or
not attained his purpose.
Grave Threats
The offender demands the money or
property, to be complied with IN THE
FUTURE.
Grave coercion (PVW)
The person Prevented
another from doing
something not prohibited
by law, or he Compelled
another from doing
something against the
latter’s will, whether it be
right or wrong;
By means of Violence,
threats, or intimidation;
and
Without any authority of
law.
Grave threats (V2) (TCN) Light threats (TNCA)
The offender Threatens The offender makes a
another with the infliction Threat
upon the latter’s person,
honor, or property, or
upon the latter’s family,
Of a wrong amounting to a To commit a wrong that
Crime; does Not constitute a
crime;
The threat is Not subject There is a demand for
to a condition. money or that other
Condition is imposed,
even though it is not
unlawful; and
The offender has
Attained or not attained
the purpose.
Robbery with violence against or
intimidation of persons
When the offender demands the
money or property ON THE SPOT, the
crime is not grave threats but robbery
with intimidation. (US v Osorio, 1912)
Light coercion (CSVA) Unjust vexation (AAN)
The offender is a Any act
Creditor;
He Seizes anything Annoys, vexes, harasses,
belonging to his debtor; irritates another person
By means of Violence or Provided there is No
a display of material force, threat, violence, or
force producing intimidation from the
intimidation; and offender.
The purpose of the
offender is to Apply the
same to the payment of
the debt.
 Without any authority of By means of Violence or Provided there is No
law. a display of material force, threat, violence, or
force producing intimidation from the
intimidation; and offender.
The purpose of the
offender is to Apply the
same to the payment of
the debt.
Grave Coercion Kidnapping and Illegal Detention
There is no intent to deprive liberty, There is intent to deprive liberty. e.g. A
but merely to prevent the offended did not allow B to leave the house.
party from doing something not
prohibited by law. e.g. A allowed B to
leave the house, but he was compelled
to return to the same later in the
afternoon by means of threats and
intimidation.
Anti-Wire Tapping Act
Any person
not authorized by ALL persons to a private communication
tap wire/cable or use device
to secretly overhear/intercept/record such communication
by using dictaphone/walkie-talkie/tape recorder
Data Privacy Act
Any person + process personal information + without consent of data subject
Any persons + knowingly + breaches in any way into any system where personal
and sensitive personal information is stored. (Hacking San Beda website)

Any person + after knowledge of breach + obligation to notify + fails to notify

the Commission
Any personal information controller/processor + in bad faith + discloses +
unwarranted or false information

Any personal information controller/processor + discloses + personal

information not covered by the immediately preceding section
Any person + negligence + provided access to personal information without being
authorized
Any person information controller/processor + negligently dispose + the personal
information + area accessible to the public/in its container for trash collection.
NOTE: Extraterritoriality principle also applies to criminal acts. This can be a
question for criminal law.

SECTION 3. Definition of Terms.

As used in this Act:

(a) Trafficking in Persons refers to:
1. he act of recruitment, obtaining, hiring, providing, offering, transportation,
transfer, maintaining, harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the
victim’s consent or knowledge, within or across national borders
2. By means of threat, or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction,
fraud, deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage of the
vulnerability of the person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or benefits
to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person
3. For the purpose of exploitation which includes at a minimum, the exploitation
or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor
or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs.

The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring, adoption or receipt of a child

for the purpose of exploitation or when the adoption is induced by any form of
consideration for exploitative purposes shall also be considered as ‘trafficking in
persons’ even if it does not involve any of the means set forth in the preceding
paragraph.

Very easy:
Persons
1. Act = Recruitment etc. -> persons -> with/without consent/knowledge
2. Means = by means of threat/coercion/fraud etc.
3. Purpose = for purpose of EXPLOITATION -> sexual/forced labor/sale of organs

Children
1. Act = Recruitment/Adoption etc. -> child
2. Purpose = purpose of EXPLOITATION
3. No Means = not involve any of the means set forth

COMMENT: In simpler words, recruit + person + consent + threat + exploitation

GITO: Trafficking is mala in se. Hence, if the matching was done in good faith, and
not for purposes of exploitation, there is no crime of trafficking in persons.

Application of the Requisites

The Court of Appeals found that AAA and BBB were recruited by accused when
their services were peddled to the police who acted as decoys. AAA was a child at
the time that accused peddled her services. AAA also stated that she agreed to
work as a prostitute because she needed money. Accused took advantage of
AAA’s vulnerability as a child and as one who need money, as proven by the
testimonies of the witnesses. (People v Casio, 2014, Leonen)
Further, if the trafficked person is a child, the crime is “qualified” trafficking.
(People v Casio, 2014, Leonen)

Consent/Knowledge is not a defense in Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act

Anna, a 15-year old child, went with Greta to Malate. Greta was a well-known pimp
in the area. Greta never offered Anna to her customers as she is her friend. But
one time, Greta asked Anna if she wanted to earn. She would earn 500 pesos if
she would go with the male customers in the nearby hotel. Anna agreed. In the
hotel, the foreigner had sex with her. Greta’s defense is Anna consented to the
transaction.
Is Greta liable for trafficking despite the consent of Anna?
Yes, because the Act states that Trafficking in Persons is committed by
“recruitment or hiring of persons, with or without the victim’s consent or
knowledge.” Hence, consent of the victim is not a defense in Anti-Trafficking in
Persons Act. Greta is liable for qualified trafficking because Anna was a minor at
the time of trafficking.

Elements of trafficking in persons, for children

GITO: Hence, for minors, only two (2) things have to be proven: the act and the
purpose. The means is immaterial. Under, People v Casio, the recruitment,
transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of a child for the purpose of
exploitation shall also be considered as "trafficking in persons" even if it does not
involve any of the means set forth in the preceding paragraph. (People v Casio,
2014, Leonen)

When is trafficking consummated?

GITO: There is no need for the purpose (e.g. sexual intercouse) to be
consummated. Trafficking is consummated when the transaction has been
consummated. “Pag nagkabilihan na,” it is consummated. However, it must be
clearly proven that the transaction was for the purpose mentioned in Anti-
Trafficking in Persons.

The importance of the third element, i.e., for purpose of exploitation

1. Mere matching of woman to a foreigner for marriage is NOT automatically
trafficking. This is because the purpose of the matching is still unclear.
2. What if a minor was knowingly married to a foreigner? There is no trafficking,
absent the purpose of exploitation. The crime is marriage contracted against
provision of laws for the contracting parties. The crime is performance of
illegal ceremony for the solemnizing officer.

Debt bondage
GITO: May katulong ka, tapos lagi advance pa-sweldo mo. Now she wants to leave
the house despite having outstanding balance. You prevented her from leaving the
house due to such balance, and at the same time, you did not specify the amount
of the salary that goes to the outstanding balance/debt. Is there trafficking? Yes,
debt bondage.

GITO: Trafficking absorbs kidnapping. Why? Because kidnapping is necessarily

included in trafficking in persons.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
SECTIO 4-A. Attempted Trafficking in Persons.

Where there are acts to initiate the commission of a trafficking offense but the
offender failed to or did not execute all the elements of the crime, by accident or
by reason of some cause other than voluntary desistance, such overt acts shall be
deemed as an attempt to commit an act of trafficking in persons. As such, an
attempt to commit any of the offenses enumerated in Section 4 of this Act shall
constitute attempted trafficking in persons.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SECTION 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons.

The following are considered as qualified trafficking: (CI-MM-S60-SASGAP-

DIMA-C)

Child (CI)
● When the trafficked person is a Child;
● When the adoption is effected through Republic Act No. 8043, otherwise
known as the "Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995" and said adoption is for
the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor,
slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage;

Military/Law enforcement (MM)

● When the trafficked person is recruited to engage in prostitution with any
member of the Military or law enforcement agencies;
● When the offender is a member of the Military or law enforcement agencies;

Numerous/Longevity (S60)
● When the crime is committed by a Syndicate, or in Large scale. Trafficking is
deemed committed by a syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3) or
more persons conspiring or confederating with one another. It is deemed
committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more persons,
individually or as a group;
● When the offender commits one or more violations of Section 4 over a period
of sixty (60) or more days, whether those days are continuous or not;
Family Member (SASGAP)
● When the offender is a Spouse, an Ascendant, parent, Sibling, Guardian or a
person who exercises Authority over the trafficked person or when the offense
is committed by a Public officer or employee;

Injury to the trafficked victim (DIMA)

● When by reason or on occasion of the act of trafficking in persons, the
offended party Dies, becomes Insane, suffers Mutilation or is afflicted with
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) or the Acquired Immune Deficiency
Syndrome (AIDS); and

??? (C)
● When the offender directs or through another manages the trafficking victim
in Carrying out the exploitative purpose of trafficking.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Knowledge of minority is immaterial for Qualified trafficking
Accused-appellants likewise argue that the prosecution failed to prove their
knowledge of AAA's minority at the time the crime was committed. As observed by
the CA, under Section 6(a) of R.A. No. 9208, Trafficking in Persons automatically
becomes qualified upon proof that the trafficked person is a minor or a person
below 18 years of age. Evidently, knowledge of the accused-appellants with regard
to AAA's minority is inconsequential with respect to qualifying the crime of
Trafficking in Persons. (People v Bandajo, 2018)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SECTION 8. Prosecution of Cases.
Any person who has personal knowledge of the commission of any offense under
this Act, the trafficked person, the parents, spouse, siblings, children or legal
guardian may file a complaint for trafficking.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SECTION 9. Venue.
A criminal action arising from violation of this Act shall be filed where the offense
was committed, or where any of its elements occurred, or where the trafficked
person actually resides at the time of the commission of the offense: Provided,
That the court where the criminal action is first filed shall acquire jurisdiction to
the exclusion of other courts.

Very easy:
1. Committed
2. Elements occurred
3. Trafficked persons actually resides at the time of commission
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SECTION 11. Use of Trafficked Persons.
Any person who buys or engages the services of a trafficked person for
prostitution shall be penalized with the following, Provided, That the Probation Law
(Presidential Decree No. 968) shall not apply:

1. If an offense under paragraph (a) involves sexual intercourse or lascivious

conduct with a child, the penalty shall be reclusion temporal in its medium
period to reclusion perpetua or seventeen (17) years to forty (40) years
imprisonment and a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos
(P500,000.00) but not more than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00);
2. If an offense under paragraph (a) involves carnal knowledge of, or sexual
intercourse with, a male or female trafficking victim and also involves the use
of force or intimidation, to a victim deprived of reason or to an unconscious
victim, or a victim under twelve (12) years of age, instead of the penalty
prescribed in the subparagraph above the penalty shall be a fine of not less
than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) but not more than Five million pesos
(P5,000,000.00) and imprisonment of reclusion perpetua or forty (40) years
imprisonment with no possibility of parole; except that if a person violating
paragraph (a) of this section knows the person that provided prostitution
services is in fact a victim of trafficking, the offender shall not be likewise
penalized under this section but under Section 10 as a person violating
Section 4; and if in committing such an offense, the offender also knows a
qualifying circumstance for trafficking, the offender shall be penalized under
Section 10 for qualified trafficking. If in violating this section the offender also
violates Section 4, the offender shall be penalized under Section 10 and, if
applicable, for qualified trafficking instead of under this section.

GITO: In the use of trafficked persons, it must only be use. If you induced
someone to look for a girl to have sexual intercourse, the crime is trafficking
already. Why? Because it was actually you who directed that a child or woman be
subjected to sexual exploitation.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SECTION 12. Prescriptive Period.
Trafficking cases under this Act shall prescribe in ten (10) years: Provided,
however, That trafficking cases committed by a syndicate or in a large scale as
defined under Section 6, or against a child, shall prescribe in twenty (20) years.

The prescriptive period shall commence to run from the day on which the
trafficked person is delivered or released from the conditions of bondage, or in
the case of a child victim, from the day the child reaches the age of majority, and
shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information and shall
commence to run again when the proceedings terminate without the accused
being convicted or acquitted or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not
imputable to the accused.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Section 17. Legal Protection to Trafficked Persons.
Trafficked persons shall be recognized as victims of the act or acts of trafficking
and as such shall not be penalized for crimes directly related to the acts of
trafficking enumerated in this Act or in obedience to the order made by the
trafficker in relation thereto. In this regard, the consent of a trafficked person to
the intended exploitation set forth in this Act shall be irrelevant.

Very easy:
Trafficking persons -> victims of trafficking -> not penalize for crimes related to
acts of trafficking
Consent of trafficked person irrelevant.

Trafficked persons are exempt from criminal liability

Totoy was recruited to Marawi to work as a construction worker. However, he was
actually engaged as a member of the Maute group and he killed a military officer.
Can he be charged for murder or homicide?
No. Trafficked persons shall be recognized as victims of the act or acts of
trafficking and as such shall not be penalized for crimes directly related to the
acts of trafficking enumerated in this Act or in obedience to the order made by the
trafficker in relation thereto. In this regard, the consent of a trafficked person to
the intended exploitation set forth in this Act shall be irrelevant. (Sec. 17, RA 9208)

COMMENT: Enumerate the requisites of trafficking first (act, means, purpose),

then state this exemption by law.

GITO: This is a possible question.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
"SEC. 26-A. Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction.

The State shall exercise jurisdiction over any act defined and penalized under this
Act, even if committed outside the Philippines and whether or not such act or acts
constitute an offense at the place of commission, the crime being a continuing
offense, having been commenced in the Philippines and other elements having
been committed in another country, if the suspect or accused:
1. Is a Filipino citizen; or
2. Is a permanent Resident of the Philippines; or
3. Has committed the act against a Filipino citizen.

Very easy:
1. Exercise jurisdiction -> even if committed outside Philippines + whether or not
offense in the place -> crime being a continuing offense and commenced
in PH
2. If accused is Filipino/Resident of PH; or committed against Filipino
No prosecution may be commenced against a person under this section if a
foreign government, in accordance with jurisdiction recognized by the Philippines,
has prosecuted or is prosecuting such person for the conduct constituting such
offense, except upon the approval of the Secretary of Justice.

The government may surrender or extradite persons accused of trafficking in the

Philippines to the appropriate international court if any, or to another State
pursuant to the applicable extradition laws and treaties.

GITO: Take note that the crime must “commence” in the Philippines, and other
elements were committed outside. Being a Filipino alone is not enough.

Section Two. - Trespass to dwelling

Article 280. Qualified trespass to dwelling.

Any private person who shall enter the dwelling of another against the latter's will
shall be punished by arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos.

If the offense be committed by means of violence or intimidation, the penalty shall

be prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine not
exceeding 1,000 pesos.

The provisions of this article shall not be applicable:

1. to any person who shall enter another's dwelling for the purpose of preventing
some serious harm to himself, the occupants of the dwelling or a third person,
nor
2. shall it be applicable to any person who shall enter a dwelling for the purpose
of rendering some service to humanity or justice, nor
3. to anyone who shall enter cafes, taverns, inn and other public houses, while
the same are open.

Elements: (PEA)

1. The offender is a Private person

2. He Enters the dwelling of another; and
3. The entrance is Against the will of the owner or occupant.

Qualified trespass
4. When the trespass was committed by means of violence/intimidation. In this
case, the crime is qualified trespass, and not simple trespass.
“Dwelling”

Means any building or structure exclusively devoted for rest and comfort. It is not
necessary that it be the permanent dwelling of the person. (Reyes)

“Against the will”

To commit trespass, the entrance by the accused should be against the express or
implied/presumed prohibition of the occupant. Lack of permission or consent
does not amount to prohibition. (People v De Peralta, 1921)

Whoever enters the dwelling of another at late hour of the night after the inmates
have retired and closed their doors does so against their will. Prohibition in this
case is presumed. (US v Villanueva, 1911)

COMMENT: This is the same as violation of domicile.

However, if trespass was committed by means of violence or intimidation,

prohibition is not necessary. The crime would already be qualified trespass. (US v
Abanto, 1911) Common sense that it is against their will since they was violence/
intimidation.

“Owner or occupant”

The owner of the dwelling may even commit trespass to dwelling. As example, the
lessor enters the house leased to another against the will of the lessee. (Reyes)

If a person was killed after trespass by the offender, the following crimes are
committed:
1. If the original intent is to enter, and the offender killed as an afterthought -
separate crimes of homicide and trespass to dwelling
2. If the original intent is to kill when he entered - crime of homicide with
dwelling as aggravating circumstance.

If the offender is a public officer or employee, the crime committed is violation of

domicile. (Reyes)

In robbery with force upon things, trespass is inherent. (Reyes)

In robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons, is it inherent? No. It will

be treated as an aggravating circumstance of “dwelling.” Keep in mind that it will
not be treated as a separate crime. (Reyes)
“Any person who shall enter another's dwelling for the purpose of preventing
some serious harm to himself, the occupants of the dwelling or a third
person”
Example is if the person was being chased by a serial killer, or if the person wants
to save someone in the house who was being battered.

"Any person who shall enter a dwelling for the purpose of rendering some
service to humanity or justice”
Example is if the person wants to execute a warrantless arrest against persons
who are currently smoking drugs.

Dwelling is not aggravating in the following case:

1. When both the offender and the offended party are occupants of the same
house, and this is true even if the offender is a servant of the house (People v
Caliso)
2. When the robbery is committed by use of force upon things, dwelling is not
aggravating because it is an essential element of the crime. It is inherent.
3. However, it is aggravating if the robbery is with violence against or intimidation
of persons because this crime may be committed without trespassing the
sanctity of the offended party’s house.
4. Further, it is aggravating in robbery with homicide because this could be
accomplished without violating the dwelling of the victim. (People v Mesias,
1991)
5. In trespass to dwelling, dwelling is not aggravating because it is inherent in the
crime.
6. When the rape was committed in the ground floor of a two-story structure, the
lower floor being used as as video rental store and not a private place of
abode or residence. (People v Taño, 2000)

Indeterminate crime

It is our opinion that the attempt to commit an offense which the Penal Code
punishes is that which has a logical relation to a particular, concrete offense; that,
which is the beginning of the execution of the offense by overt acts of the
perpetrator, leading directly to its realization and consummation. The attempt to
commit an indeterminate offense, inasmuch as its nature in relation to its objective
is ambiguous, is not a juridical fact from the standpoint of the Penal Code. There is
no doubt that in the case at bar it was the intention of the accused to enter Tan
Yu's store by means of violence, passing through the opening which he had
started to make on the wall, in order to commit an offense which, due to the timely
arrival of policeman Tomambing, did not develop beyond the first steps of its
execution. But it is not sufficient, for the purpose of imposing penal sanction, that
an act objectively performed constitute a mere beginning of execution; it is
necessary to establish its unavoidable connection, like the logical and natural
relation of the cause and its effect, with the deed which, upon its consummation,
will develop into one of the offenses defined and punished by the Code; it is
necessary to prove that said beginning of execution, if carried to its complete
termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external
obstacles nor by the voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and
necessarily ripen into a concrete offense. Thus, in case of robbery, in order that
the simple act of entering by means of force or violence another person's dwelling
may be considered an attempt to commit this offense, it must be shown that the
offender clearly intended to take possession, for the purpose of gain, of some
personal property belonging to another. (People v. Lamahang)

The circumstance may show that the trespasser has the intention to commit
another crime but if there is no overt act of crime intended to be done, what is
committed is only trespass to dwelling. (People v Lamahang, 1935)

Trespass to dwelling Violation of domicile

The offender is a private person The offender is a public officer or
employee

Article 281. Other forms of trespass.

The penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both, shall be
imposed upon any person who shall enter the closed premises or the fenced
estate of another, while either or them are uninhabited, if the prohibition to enter
be manifest and the trespasser has not secured the permission of the owner or the
caretaker thereof.

Elements: (EUMN)

1. The offender Enters the closed premises or the fenced estate of another;
2. The entrance is made while either of them is Uninhabited;
3. The prohibition to enter is Manifest; and
4. The trespasser has Not secured the permission of the owner or the caretaker
thereof.

Premises

It signifies a distinct and definite locality. It may mean a room, a shop, a building,
but in any case, the locality is fixed. It does not include vehicles, or vessels, or
airplanes.
COMMENT: Violation of domicile is limited to inhabited house. Hence, when a
public officer enters an uninhabited place, other forms of trespasses was
committed.

Trespass Other forms of trespass

Offender Offender is a private Offender is any person
person
Enclosure entered Offender enters a Offender enters a closed
dwelling house premises or fenced
estate
Nature of place The place is inhabited Either of them is
uninhabited
Act punished Entering the dwelling Entering the closed
against the will of the premises or the fenced
owner estate without securing
the permission of the
owner or caretaker
thereof
Prohibition to enter It may be express or It must be manifest
implied (express only)

Section Three. - Threats and Coercion

Article 282. Grave threats.

Any person who shall threaten another with the infliction upon the person, honor
or property of the latter or of his family of any wrong amounting to a crime, shall
suffer:

1. The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the crime be
threatened to commit, if the offender shall have made the threat demanding
money or imposing any other condition, even though not unlawful, and said
offender shall have attained his purpose.

If the offender shall not have attained his purpose, the penalty lower by two
degrees shall be imposed.

If the threat be made in writing or through a middleman, the penalty shall be

imposed in its maximum period.

2. The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos, if the threat
shall not have been made subject to a condition.

Elements of Grave Threats where they are subject to a condition: (TCCA)

1. The offender Threatens another with the infliction upon the latter’s person,
honor, or property, or upon the latter’s family, any wrong;
2. Such wrong amounts to a Crime;
3. There is a demand for money or imposition of any other Condition, even
though not unlawful; and
4. The offender Attained or not attained his purpose.

Elements of Grave Threats where they are NOT subject to a condition: (TCN)

1. The offender Threatens another with the infliction upon the latter’s person,
honor, or property, or upon the latter’s family, any wrong;
2. Such wrong amounts to a Crime
3. The threat is Not subject to a condition.

COMMENT: In simple words, the element is “threat of infliction of a wrong

amounting to a crime.”

“Wrong”

The act threatened to be committed by the offender must be a wrong. If the

accused threatened to file a civil action against the other party for the latter’s
refusal to pay his debt, there is no crime of grave threats because it is not a
“wrong.’

Essence of the crime of grave threats

Intimidation or promise of a FUTURE harm or injury, whether to the person, honor,

or property of the offended party or his family is the essence of the crime. (Reyes)

When Consummated

It is consummated the moment the threat comes to the KNOWLEDGE of the

person threatened. (Reyes)

Qualifying circumstance

1. If the threat be made in writing or

2. through a middleman
 Grave Threats
Mere threat of infliction upon the
person, honour, or property of another,
or his family, of any wrong amounting
to a crime
Grave Threats
The offender demands the money or
property, to be complied with IN THE
FUTURE.
Article 283. Light threats.
Kidnapping for Ransom
There is deprivation of liberty, and then
there is a threat of infliction upon the
person of another, or his family, of any
wrong amounting to a crime
Robbery with violence against or
intimidation of persons
When the offender demands the
money or property ON THE SPOT, the
crime is not grave threats but robbery
with intimidation. (US v Osorio, 1912)

Any threat to commit a wrong not constituting a crime, made in the manner
expressed in subdivision 1 of the next preceding article, shall be punished by
arresto mayor.

Elements: (TNCA)

1. The offender makes a Threat to commit a wrong

2. The wrong does Not constitute a crime;
3. There is a demand for money or that other Condition is imposed, even though
it is not unlawful; and
4. The offender has Attained or not attained the purpose.

COMMENT: In simple words, the element is “threat of infliction of a wrong not

constituting a crime, but with demand for money or imposition of condition.”

Blackmailing is an example of light threat. It is wrong but it may not constitute a

crime.

However, if the threat is to publish a libel concerning the offended party in

exchange for compensation, the crime is Article 356 - Threatening to publish and
offer to present such publication for a compensation.

COMMENT: Light threats only happen when the offender imposed a condition, as
provided in the first subdivision of Article 282. If there is no condition imposed,
there is no crime.

Grave threats Light threats

Act threatened to be It is a wrong amounting
committed to a crime
Demand for money The demand for money
or imposition of condition
is NOT necessary to
commit the crime
It is a wrong that does
not amount to a crime
The demand for money
or imposition of condition
is necessary to commit
the crime
 Grave threats Light threats
Act threatened to be It is a wrong amounting It is a wrong that does
committed to a crime not amount to a crime
Demand for money The demand for money The demand for money
or imposition of condition or imposition of condition
is NOT necessary to is necessary to commit
commit the crime the crime
Article 284. Bond for good behavior. - In all cases falling within the two next
preceding articles, the person making the threats may also be required to give bail
not to molest the person threatened, or if he shall fail to give such bail, he shall be
sentenced to destierro.

Article 285. Other light threats. - The penalty of arresto menor in its minimum
period or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos shall be imposed upon:

1. Any person who, without being included in the provisions of the next
preceding article, shall threaten another with a weapon or draw such weapon
in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful self-defense.

2. Any person who, in the heat of anger, shall orally threaten another with some
harm not constituting a crime, and who by subsequent acts show that he did
not persist in the idea involved in his threat, provided that the circumstances
of the offense shall not bring it within the provisions of Article 282 of this
Code.

3. Any person who shall orally threaten to do another any harm not constituting a
felony.

Other Light Threats Grave Threats and Light

threats
Demand/Condition No demand for money or In some cases, it may
imposition of condition have a demand or
imposition of condition
Threat The threat is not The threat is deliberate
deliberate
COMMENT: Hence, in the Bar, analyze the question using the mode of
cancellation. Does it fit grave threats? If no, does it fit light treats? If no, it will
probably be other light threats. It will probably be that deep, and will not become
unjust vexation.

Article 286. Grave coercions.

The penalty of prision correccional and a fine not exceeding Six thousand pesos
shall be imposed upon any person who, without any authority of law, shall, by
means of violence, threats or intimidation, prevent another from doing something
not prohibited by law, or compel him to do something against his will, whether it be
right or wrong.

“If the coercion be committed in violation of the exercise of the right of suffrage,
or for the purpose of compelling another to perform any religious act, to prevent
him from exercising such right or from so doing such act, the penalty next higher
in degree shall be imposed.”

Elements: (PCVW)

1. The person Prevented another from doing something not prohibited by law, or
he Compelled another from doing something against the latter’s will, whether
it be right or wrong;
2. The prevention or compulsion was effected by means of Violence, threats, or
intimidation; and
3. The person that restrained the will and liberty of another Without any
authority of law.

For prevention, the offended party must be prevented from doing something not
prohibited by law. If he was prevented from doing something prohibited by law, it is
not a crime.

For compulsion, there is criminal liability whether the offended party was
compelled to do a right or a wrong act.

COMMENT: Be cautious. Compulsion can sometimes lead to becoming a principal

by inducement because “he directly forced the principal by direct participation to
commit the act.” As example, “nakawin mo yung relo, kung hindi papatayin kita.” In
this case, the person who compelled the other to steal the watch is a principal by
inducement.

When preventing is NOT considered grave coercion, because it constitutes

another crime:

1. When a public officer prevents the ceremonies or manifestation of any religion

(Article 132)
2. When a public officer prevents the holding of a peaceful meeting (Article 131)
3. When a public officer prevents a person from joining a a lawful association or
from attending its meetings (Article 131)
4. When a public officer prevents a person from addressing, either alone or
together with others, any petition to the authorities for the correction of
abuses or redress of grievances (Article 131)
 5. When any person prevents the meeting of a legislative body or the
constitutional commission (Article 143)
6. When any person prevents a member of the legislative body or the
constitutional commission from attending the meeting (Article 145)
7. When any person, by means of violence, shall seize anything belonging to his
debtor for the purpose of applying the same to the payment of the debt
(Article 287)

In grave coercion, the act of preventing by force must be made at the time the
offended party was doing or about to do the act to be prevented. If the act was
already done or accomplished, and no violence was exerted, the crime is unjust
vexation.

When compelling is NOT considered grave coercion, because it constitutes

another crime:

1. When a public officer compels the person to change his residence. (Article
127 - Expulsion)
2. When a person kidnaps his debtor to compel him to pay (Article 267 -
Kidnapping)

COMMENT: The act constitutes “grave coercion” depending on the purpose. If

the purpose is to prevent a lawful act or to compel to do an act, by means of
violence, threat, or intimidation, it is grave coercion. In Filipino, it is either
“nangpigil” or “nangpilit.” If the purpose is not either of them, the crime is never
grave coercion.

Qualifying circumstances: (SR)

1. If the coercion be committed in violation of the exercise of the right of

Suffrage, or
2. For the purpose of Compelling another to perform any Religious act, or to
Prevent him from exercising such right or from so doing such act, the penalty
next higher in degree shall be imposed.

COMMENT: If the person who prevented the offended party from performing a
religious act is a PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE, the crime is “interruption of
religious worship.” If the offender is a PRIVATE PERSON, the crime is “qualified
grave coercion.”

Grave Coercion Unjust Vexation

There is violence, threat, or There must be NO violence, and
intimidation committed merely to annoy, irritate, or
disturb the offended party
 Grave Coercion Unjust Vexation
There is violence, threat, or There must be NO violence, and
intimidation committed merely to annoy, irritate, or
disturb the offended party
Grave Coercion Kidnapping and Illegal Detention
There is no intent to deprive liberty, There is intent to deprive liberty. e.g. A
but merely to prevent the offended did not allow B to leave the house.
party from doing something not
prohibited by law. e.g. A allowed B to
leave the house, but he was compelled
to return to the same later in the
afternoon by means of threats and
intimidation.
Grave Threats Grave Coercion Light coercion
1. Threat 1. Without authority of 1. Violence
2. Inflict against law 2. Creditor takes
the person, property, 2. By means of the property of debtor
honor violence, threat, 3. To apply to the
3. Person or his intimidation payment of debt
family 3. Prevent
4. Wrong amount another to do something
to a crime not prohibited by law;
5. If there is Compel another to do
demand + accomplished something against his
(one degree lower); If not will, whether right or
accomplished (two wrong
degrees lower); if no
demand (arresto mayor) i.e., (Prevent) do not
vote; do not go to
church; do not file a case
against me
i.e., (Compel) testify
against your brother;
vote for X candidate;
transition to Muslim

Correlate to PD 1829 - Obstruction of Justice Law

Section 1.

The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period, or a fine ranging from
1,000 to 6,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any person who knowingly
or willfully obstructs, impedes, frustrates or delays the apprehension of suspects
and the investigation and prosecution of criminal cases by committing any of the
following acts:

● preventing witnesses from testifying in any criminal proceeding or from

reporting the commission of any offense or the identity of any offender/s by
means of bribery, misrepresentation, deceit, intimidation, force or threats

COMMENT: The offender commits two (2) crimes: 1) Grave coercion; and 2)
Obstruction of Justice.

Article 287. Light coercions.

Any person who, by means of violence, shall seize anything belonging to his
debtor for the purpose of applying the same to the payment of the debt, shall
suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum period and a fine equivalent to
the value of the thing, but in no case less than 75 pesos.
Any other coercions or unjust vexations shall be punished by arresto menor or a
fine ranging from 5 pesos to 200 pesos, or both.

Elements for light coercion: (CSVA)

1. The offender must be a Creditor;

2. He Seizes anything belonging to his debtor;
3. The seizure of the thing be accomplished by means of Violence or a display of
material force producing intimidation; and
4. The purpose of the offender is to Apply the same to the payment of the debt.

Unjust vexation

It is any conduct which annoys, vexes, disturbs or irritates another, provided there
is no force, threat, violence, or intimidation from the offender.

Unjust vexation is distinguished from grave or light coercion by the absence of

violence. Hence, light coercion becomes unjust vexation when the element of
violence or intimidation is absent.

Light Coercion Robbery Estafa

If by means of violence, If the value of the
the property is applied to property seized is
the debt greater than the debt
(intent to gain is present)
and violence or
intimidation is employed
If there is no obligation
on the part of the
offended party but was
feigned; the deceit
caused damage to the
offended party
COMMENT: Hence, in the Bar, analyze the question using the mode of
cancellation. Does it fit grave coercion? If no, does it fit light coercion? If no, it will
probably be unjust vexation.
Grave Threats v Light Threats v Other Light Threats
Article 282 Grave
Threats Article 283 Light Article 284 Other
Threats Light Threats

Threatening upon A threat to commit 1. Any person

the person, honor, a wrong not without being
property of the constituting a included in the
latter, of his family crime with provisions of the
amounting to a condition next preceding
crime: mentioned in article shall
Article 282 threaten another
A. With with a weapon, or
condition Penalty next lower draw such in a
in degree to the quarrel, unless
1. Penalty crime he threated lawful self defense
next lower in to commit if he 2. Any
degree to the made the threat person who in the
crime he threated demanding heat of anger,
to commit if he money, imposing shall orally
made the threat other condition threaten another
demanding even not unlawful with some harm
money, imposing and shall have constituting a
other condition attained his crime and by
even not unlawful purpose; subsequent acts
and shall have show he did not
attained his If he did not persist in the idea
purpose; attain his provided not
2. If he did purpose, penalty included in Article
not attain his lower by 2 282
purpose, penalty degrees 3. Any
lower by 2 person who shall
degrees orally threated to
do another any
Qualified: harm not
1. Made in constituting a
writing; felony.
2. Through
middleman

B. Without
Condition
Article 282 Grave
Threats Article 283 Light Article 284 Other
Threats Light Threats

Threatening upon A threat to commit 1. Any person

the person, honor, a wrong not without being
property of the constituting a included in the
latter, of his family crime with provisions of the
amounting to a condition next preceding
crime: mentioned in article shall
Article 282 threaten another
A. With with a weapon, or
condition Penalty next lower draw such in a
in degree to the quarrel, unless
1. Penalty crime he threated lawful self defense
next lower in to commit if he 2. Any
degree to the made the threat person who in the
crime he threated demanding heat of anger,
to commit if he money, imposing shall orally
made the threat other condition threaten another
demanding even not unlawful with some harm
money, imposing and shall have constituting a
other condition attained his crime and by
even not unlawful purpose; subsequent acts
and shall have show he did not
attained his If he did not persist in the idea
purpose; attain his provided not
2. If he did purpose, penalty included in Article
not attain his lower by 2 282
purpose, penalty degrees 3. Any
lower by 2 person who shall
degrees orally threated to
do another any
Qualified: harm not
1. Made in constituting a
writing; felony.
2. Through
middleman

B. Without
Condition

If the threat
should not have
been made with or
subject to
condition
Grave Coercion v Light Coercion v Unjust Vexation
Article 286 Grave
Coercion Article 287 Light Unjust Vexation
Coercion

Any person who shall Requisites: Any other coercion

without authority and by
means of violence or 1. Any person NOTE: The offender’s
intimidation shall: who by violence act must have some
2. Shall seize caused annoyance,
1. “Preventive”: anything belonging to his irritation, vexation
Prevent another from debtor without violence
doing something not 3. For applying
prohibited by law; or the
2. “Compulsive”: same to the payment of
Compel him to do so debt
something against his
will whether right or
wrong
Qualified:

• If committed in violation
of
exercise of right to
suffrage, or to perform
any religious act or
prevent him from
exercising such right or
doing such right
Article 288. Other similar coercions; (Compulsory purchase of merchandise
and payment of wages by means of tokens.)

The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine ranging from 200 to 500 pesos, or both,
shall be imposed upon any person, agent or officer, of any association or
corporation who shall force or compel, directly or indirectly, or shall knowingly
permit any laborer or employee employed by him or by such firm or corporation to
be forced or compelled, to purchase merchandise or commodities of any kind.
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any person who shall pay the wages
due a laborer or employee employed by him, by means of tokens or objects other
than the legal tender currency of the laborer or employee.

Article 289. Formation, maintenance and prohibition of combination of

capital or labor through violence or threats.

The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 300 pesos shall be imposed
upon any person who, for the purpose of organizing, maintaining or preventing
coalitions or capital or labor, strike of laborers or lock-out of employees, shall
employ violence or threats in such a degree as to compel or force the laborers or
employers in the free and legal exercise of their industry or work, if the act shall
not constitute a more serious offense in accordance with the provisions of this
Code.

Chapter Three - DISCOVERY AND REVELATION OF SECRETS

Article 290. Discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence.

The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods and a fine
not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed upon any private individual who in
order to discover the secrets of another, shall seize his papers or letters and reveal
the contents thereof.
If the offender shall not reveal such secrets, the penalty shall be arresto mayor
and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos.
The provision shall not be applicable to parents, guardians, or persons entrusted
with the custody of minors with respect to the papers or letters of the children or
minors placed under their care or study, nor to spouses with respect to the papers
or letters of either of them.

Elements: (PSDI)

1. The offender is a Private individual or even a Public officer not in the exercise
of his official functions;
2. He Seizes the papers or letters of another;
3. The purpose is to Discover the secrets of such other person; and
4. The offender is Informed of the contents of the papers or letters seized.

Article 291. Revealing secrets with abuse of office.

The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed
upon any manager, employee, or servant who, in such capacity, shall learn the
secrets of his principal or master and shall reveal such secrets.

Elements: (MLR)

1. The offender is a Manager, employee, or servant

2. He Learns the secrets of his principal or master in such capacity; and
 3. He Reveals such secrets.

Article 292. Revelation of industrial secrets.

The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods and a fine
not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed upon the person in charge, employee
or workman of any manufacturing or industrial establishment who, to the prejudice
of the owner thereof, shall reveal the secrets of the industry of the latter.

Elements: (CERP)

1. The offender is a person in Charge, employee or workman of any

manufacturing or industrial establishment
2. The manufacturing or industrial Establishment has a secret of the industry
which the offender has learned
3. The offender Reveals such secrets
4. Prejudice is caused to the owner.

RA 4200 - AN ACT TO PROHIBIT AND PENALIZE WIRE TAPPING AND OTHER

RELATED VIOLATIONS OF THE PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES.

Section 1. It shall be unlawful for any person, not being authorized by all the
parties to any private communication or spoken word, to tap any wire or cable, or
by using any other device or arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept, or
record such communication or spoken word by using a device commonly known as
a dictaphone or dictagraph or dictaphone or walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or
however otherwise described:
It shall also be unlawful for any person, be he a participant or not in the act or acts
penalized in the next preceding sentence, to knowingly possess any tape record,
wire record, disc record, or any other such record, or copies thereof, of any
communication or spoken word secured either before or after the effective date of
this Act in the manner prohibited by this law; or to replay the same for any other
person or persons; or to communicate the contents thereof, either verbally or in
writing, or to furnish transcriptions thereof, whether complete or partial, to any
other person: Provided, That the use of such record or any copies thereof as
evidence in any civil, criminal investigation or trial of offenses mentioned in section
3 hereof, shall not be covered by this prohibition.

Section 2. Any person who willfully or knowingly does or who shall aid, permit, or
cause to be done any of the acts declared to be unlawful in the preceding section
or who violates the provisions of the following section or of any order issued
thereunder, or aids, permits, or causes such violation shall, upon conviction
thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than six months or more than
six years and with the accessory penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification
from public office if the offender be a public official at the time of the commission
of the offense, and, if the offender is an alien he shall be subject to deportation
proceedings.

Section 3. Nothing contained in this Act, however, shall render it unlawful or

punishable for any peace officer, who is authorized by a written order of the Court,
to execute any of the acts declared to be unlawful in the two preceding sections in
cases involving the crimes of treason, espionage, provoking war and disloyalty in
case of war, piracy, mutiny in the high seas, rebellion, conspiracy and proposal to
commit rebellion, inciting to rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to commit sedition,
inciting to sedition, kidnapping as defined by the Revised Penal Code, and
violations of Commonwealth Act No. 616, punishing espionage and other offenses
against national security:
1. Provided, That such written order shall only be issued or granted upon written
application and the examination under oath or affirmation of the applicant and
the witnesses he may produce and a showing:
1. that there are reasonable grounds to believe that any of the crimes
enumerated hereinabove has been committed or is being committed or is
about to be committed: Provided, however, That in cases involving the
offenses of rebellion, conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion, inciting
to rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to commit sedition, and inciting to
sedition, such authority shall be granted only upon prior proof that a
rebellion or acts of sedition, as the case may be, have actually been or are
being committed;
2. that there are reasonable grounds to believe that evidence will be
obtained essential to the conviction of any person for, or to the solution of,
or to the prevention of, any of such crimes; and
3. that there are no other means readily available for obtaining such
evidence.
The order granted or issued shall specify: (1) the identity of the person or persons
whose communications, conversations, discussions, or spoken words are to be
overheard, intercepted, or recorded and, in the case of telegraphic or telephonic
communications, the telegraph line or the telephone number involved and its
location; (2) the identity of the peace officer authorized to overhear, intercept, or
record the communications, conversations, discussions, or spoken words; (3) the
offense or offenses committed or sought to be prevented; and (4) the period of
the authorization. The authorization shall be effective for the period specified in
the order which shall not exceed sixty (60) days from the date of issuance of the
order, unless extended or renewed by the court upon being satisfied that such
extension or renewal is in the public interest.
All recordings made under court authorization shall, within forty-eight hours after
the expiration of the period fixed in the order, be deposited with the court in a
sealed envelope or sealed package, and shall be accompanied by an affidavit of
the peace officer granted such authority stating the number of recordings made,
the dates and times covered by each recording, the number of tapes, discs, or
records included in the deposit, and certifying that no duplicates or copies of the
whole or any part thereof have been made, or if made, that all such duplicates or
copies are included in the envelope or package deposited with the court. The
envelope or package so deposited shall not be opened, or the recordings
replayed, or used in evidence, or their contents revealed, except upon order of the
court, which shall not be granted except upon motion, with due notice and
opportunity to be heard to the person or persons whose conversation or
communications have been recorded.
The court referred to in this section shall be understood to mean the Court of First
Instance within whose territorial jurisdiction the acts for which authority is applied
for are to be executed.

Section 4. Any communication or spoken word, or the existence, contents,

substance, purport, effect, or meaning of the same or any part thereof, or any
information therein contained obtained or secured by any person in violation of the
preceding sections of this Act shall not be admissible in evidence in any judicial,
quasi-judicial, legislative or administrative hearing or investigation.

An extension telephone is not a wiretapping device

An extension telephone cannot be placed in the same category as a dictaphone,

dictagraph or the other devices enumerated in Section 1 of RA No. 4200 as the
use thereof cannot be considered as "tapping" the wire or cable of a telephone
line. The telephone extension in this case was not installed for that purpose. It just
happened to be there for ordinary office use. It is a rule in statutory construction
that in order to determine the true intent of the legislature, the particular clauses
and phrases of the statute should not be taken as detached and isolated
expressions, but the whole and every part thereof must be considered in fixing the
meaning of any of its parts. (see Commissioner of Customs v. Esso Estandard
Eastern, Inc., 66 SCRA 113,120).

Hence, the phrase "device or arrangement" in Section 1 of RA No. 4200, although

not exclusive to that enumerated therein, should be construed to comprehend
instruments of the same or similar nature, that is, instruments the use of which
would be tantamount to tapping the main line of a telephone. It refers to
instruments whose installation or presence cannot be presumed by the party or
parties being overheard because, by their very nature, they are not of common
usage and their purpose is precisely for tapping, intercepting or recording a
telephone conversation.

RA 10173 - Data Privacy Act of 2012

CHAPTER VIII - PENALTIES

SEC. 25. Unauthorized Processing of Personal Information and Sensitive

Personal Information. – (a) The unauthorized processing of personal information
shall be penalized by imprisonment ranging from one (1) year to three (3) years
and a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not
more than Two million pesos (Php2,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons who
process personal information without the consent of the data subject, or without
being authorized under this Act or any existing law.
(b) The unauthorized processing of personal sensitive information shall be
penalized by imprisonment ranging from three (3) years to six (6) years and a fine
of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than
Four million pesos (Php4,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons who process
personal information without the consent of the data subject, or without being
authorized under this Act or any existing law.

SEC. 28. Processing of Personal Information and Sensitive Personal

Information for Unauthorized Purposes. – The processing of personal
information for unauthorized purposes shall be penalized by imprisonment ranging
from one (1) year and six (6) months to five (5) years and a fine of not less than
Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than One million
pesos (Php1,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons processing personal
information for purposes not authorized by the data subject, or otherwise
authorized under this Act or under existing laws.
The processing of sensitive personal information for unauthorized purposes shall
be penalized by imprisonment ranging from two (2) years to seven (7) years and a
fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more
than Two million pesos (Php2,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons
processing sensitive personal information for purposes not authorized by the data
subject, or otherwise authorized under this Act or under existing laws.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SEC. 29. Unauthorized Access or Intentional Breach. – The penalty of
imprisonment ranging from one (1) year to three (3) years and a fine of not less
than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than Two million
pesos (Php2,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons who knowingly and
unlawfully, or violating data confidentiality and security data systems, breaks in
any way into any system where personal and sensitive personal information is
stored.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SEC. 30. Concealment of Security Breaches Involving Sensitive Personal
Information. – The penalty of imprisonment of one (1) year and six (6) months to
five (5) years and a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos
(Php500,000.00) but not more than One million pesos (Php1,000,000.00) shall be
imposed on persons who, after having knowledge of a security breach and of the
obligation to notify the Commission pursuant to Section 20(f), intentionally or by
omission conceals the fact of such security breach.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SEC. 31. Malicious Disclosure. – Any personal information controller or personal
information processor or any of its officials, employees or agents, who, with malice
or in bad faith, discloses unwarranted or false information relative to any personal
information or personal sensitive information obtained by him or her, shall be
subject to imprisonment ranging from one (1) year and six (6) months to five (5)
years and a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00)
but not more than One million pesos (Php1,000,000.00).

SEC. 32. Unauthorized Disclosure. – (a) Any personal information controller or

personal information processor or any of its officials, employees or agents, who
discloses to a third party personal information not covered by the immediately
preceding section without the consent of the data subject, shall he subject to
imprisonment ranging from one (1) year to three (3) years and a fine of not less
than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than One million
pesos (Php1,000,000.00).
(b) Any personal information controller or personal information processor or any of
its officials, employees or agents, who discloses to a third party sensitive personal
information not covered by the immediately preceding section without the consent
of the data subject, shall be subject to imprisonment ranging from three (3) years
to five (5) years and a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos
(Php500,000.00) but not more than Two million pesos (Php2,000,000.00).

SEC. 26. Providing Access to Personal Information and Sensitive Personal

Information Due to Negligence. – (a) Accessing personal information due to
negligence shall be penalized by imprisonment ranging from one (1) year to three
(3) years and a fine of not less than Five hundred thousand pesos
(Php500,000.00) but not more than Two million pesos (Php2,000,000.00) shall be
imposed on persons who, due to negligence, provided access to personal
information without being authorized under this Act or any existing law.
(b) Accessing sensitive personal information due to negligence shall be penalized
by imprisonment ranging from three (3) years to six (6) years and a fine of not less
than Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) but not more than Four
million pesos (Php4,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons who, due to
negligence, provided access to personal information without being authorized
under this Act or any existing law.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SEC. 27. Improper Disposal of Personal Information and Sensitive Personal
Information. – (a) The improper disposal of personal information shall be
penalized by imprisonment ranging from six (6) months to two (2) years and a fine
of not less than One hundred thousand pesos (Php100,000.00) but not more than
Five hundred thousand pesos (Php500,000.00) shall be imposed on persons who
knowingly or negligently dispose, discard or abandon the personal information of
an individual in an area accessible to the public or has otherwise placed the
personal information of an individual in its container for trash collection.
(b) The improper disposal of sensitive personal information shall be penalized by
imprisonment ranging from one (1) year to three (3) years and a fine of not less
than One hundred thousand pesos (Php100,000.00) but not more than One million
pesos (Php1,000,000.00) shall be imposed on persons who knowingly or
negligently dispose, discard or abandon the personal information of an individual
in an area accessible to the public or has otherwise placed the personal
information of an individual in its container for trash collection.
____________________________________________________________________________________
SEC. 33. Combination or Series of Acts. – Any combination or series of acts as
defined in Sections 25 to 32 shall make the person subject to imprisonment
ranging from three (3) years to six (6) years and a fine of not less than One million
pesos (Php1,000,000.00) but not more than Five million pesos (Php5,000,000.00).

SEC. 34. Extent of Liability. – If the offender is a corporation, partnership or any

juridical person, the penalty shall be imposed upon the responsible officers, as the
case may be, who participated in, or by their gross negligence, allowed the
commission of the crime. If the offender is a juridical person, the court may
suspend or revoke any of its rights under this Act. If the offender is an alien, he or
she shall, in addition to the penalties herein prescribed, be deported without
further proceedings after serving the penalties prescribed. If the offender is a
public official or employee and lie or she is found guilty of acts penalized under
Sections 27 and 28 of this Act, he or she shall, in addition to the penalties
prescribed herein, suffer perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification from
office, as the case may be.

SEC. 35. Large-Scale. – The maximum penalty in the scale of penalties

respectively provided for the preceding offenses shall be imposed when the
personal information of at least one hundred (100) persons is harmed, affected or
involved as the result of the above mentioned actions.

SEC. 36. Offense Committed by Public Officer. – When the offender or the person
responsible for the offense is a public officer as defined in the Administrative Code
of the Philippines in the exercise of his or her duties, an accessory penalty
consisting in the disqualification to occupy public office for a term double the term
of criminal penalty imposed shall he applied.
SEC. 37. Restitution. – Restitution for any aggrieved party shall be governed by the
provisions of the New Civil Code.
Anti-Wire Tapping Act
Any person + not authorized by + all
persons to a private communication +
tap wire/cable or secretly overhear by
using other device
Data Privacy Act
Any person + process personal
information + without consent of data
subject
DPA is broader than Anti-Wire Tapping
Act. Persons who did not commit wire
tapping may commit unauthorized
processing of personal infromation.
Any persons + knowingly + breaches
in any way into any system where
personal and sensitive personal
information is stored. (Hacking San
Beda website)
Any person + after knowledge of
breach + obligation to notify + fails to
notify the Commission
_________________________________________
_________
Any personal information controller/
processor + in bad faith + discloses +
unwarranted or false information
Any personal information controller/
processor + discloses + personal
information not covered by the
immediately preceding section
_________________________________________
_________
Any person + negligence + provided
access to personal information without
being authorized
_________________________________________
_________
Any person information controller/
processor + negligently dispose + the
personal information + area accessible
to the public/in its container for trash
collection.
 DPA is broader than Anti-Wire Tapping
Act. Persons who did not commit wire
tapping may commit unauthorized
processing of personal infromation.
Any persons + knowingly + breaches
in any way into any system where
personal and sensitive personal
information is stored. (Hacking San
Beda website)

Any person + after knowledge of

breach + obligation to notify + fails to
notify the Commission
_________________________________________
_________
Any personal information controller/
processor + in bad faith + discloses +
unwarranted or false information

Any personal information controller/

processor + discloses + personal
information not covered by the
immediately preceding section
_________________________________________
_________
Any person + negligence + provided
access to personal information without
being authorized
_________________________________________
_________
Any person information controller/
processor + negligently dispose + the
personal information + area accessible
to the public/in its container for trash
collection.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________