SPECIAL LAW

- The subject includes the definition of Special Penal Laws (SPLS) that
define and penalize crimes not included in the Revised Penal Code or the
Criminal Law.
- These crimes are of a nature different from those defined and
punished in the RPC.
- Special Laws dealing with new crimes and extraordinary forms of
criminality have abounded/prospered such that a more focused volume is
desirable. (Boade 2015)

Establish the Relationship between Special Laws and the Revised Penal Code

* Special Penal Laws (SPLs) are laws that define and penalize crimes not
included in the Revised Penal Code (RPC) (Sec. 3, Act 3326).

* These crimes are of a nature different from those defined and punished in the
RPC. for instance, RA 9165 amending the Dangerous Drugs Act. R.A. 6425, as
amended by R.A. 7659 covered under any provisions of the RPC.

* It is a purely special hence, the RPC has no suppletory application. On the other
hand, laws merely amending the provisions of the RPC are not considered
special penal laws.
For example, P.D. 5.33. the Anti-Cattle Rusting Law, amended Arts. 308, 309,
and 310. Thus, cattle rusting remains malum in se. (Taer v. CA, GR No. 85204
June 18. 1990)

* Special laws which are intended merely as amendment to certain Provisions of

the Revised Penal Code are mala in se and Still to its Provision

* Plunder is a malum in se which requires proof of criminal intent as held in the

case of Estrada V. Sandiganbayan, G.R NO. 148560 November 19, 2001. Hence,
the application of mitigating and extenuating circumstances in the Revised Penal
Code to prosecute under Ant-Plunder indicates quite clearly that means rea is an
element of plunder since the degree of responsibility of the offender is
determined by his criminal intent.

* Crimes mala prohibita are acts or omissions which are made evil because there
is a law prohibiting the same. They are generally punished by Special laws. The

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 1

fact that positive law forbids them makes these acts Wrong. In this case, the only
question has the law been violated? Or, has the prohibited act been committed?
When the act is legal. Intent of the offender is immaterial. (Dunlao V. CA. G.R.
No 111343. Aug. 22, 1996

MALA IN SE MAL PROHIBITA

Requires proof of criminal intent Intent of the offender is immaterial
Act is inherently wrong or immoral Act is merely prohibited by law.
Good faith is a proper defense Good faith is not a defense
Stages of execution is considered Stages of execution is not
considered
Degree of participation is taken into Degree of participation is not taken
consideration into consideration
Modifying circumstances are Modifying circumstances are not
appreciated appreciated
Punished Under The Revised Penal Punished Under Special Laws.
Code

Sources of Special Law & Criminal Law

1. The Revised Penal Code or Act no. 3815 which took effect on January 1,
1932 and its amendments
2. Special Laws passed by the Legislative department (Senate an Congress)
and signed by the President of the Philippines, Philippine Assembly,
National Assembly, Batas Pambansa,
3. Republic Acts passed by Legislative Department and signed by the
President of the Philippines
4. Presidential Decrees passed during the Martial Law regime of Marcos
5. Executive Orders signed by the Presidents of the Philippines

Limitation on the power of Congress to Enact Penal Laws or Criminal Laws

1. It cannot enact an ex post facto law nor a bill of attainder. (Art 3, sec 22,Phil
Constitution)
2. A penal law must be of general application. (Art 14, Civil Code); and
3. It cannot provide for a cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment nor can it
impose excessive fines. (Art 3, sec 19 Philippine Constitutions)

Ex post-facto law

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 2

 – law that punishes an act although such act is not yet punishable at the
time of commission (Retroactivity).
- Retroactivity of a law can be made only if it is favorable to the accused who
is not a habitual delinquent (Doctrine of Pro Reo).

Bill of Attainder
- law that punishes a crime without due process or trial.

I. Read carefully. Choose the incorrect answer, write the letter on the blank
(2pts each)
1. ___Special laws is the subject that….
a. Includes the definition of criminal law
b. Penalize crimes not included in the revised Penal Code.
c. laws deals with old crimes and extraordinary forms of
criminality.
2. ____Some limitations on the power of congress to enact penal laws include
the following.
a. it cannot provide for a cruel degrading or
inhuman punishment.
b. it cannot impose excessive fines
c. it can enact an ex post-facto law nor a bill attainder

II. Write the letter of the correct answer (2pts each)

3. It is a law that punished a crime without due process or trial

4. It is law can be made only if it is favorable to the accused who is
not a habitual delinquent.
5. It is a law that punishes an act although such act is not yet
punishable at the time of commission
a. Ex post-facto law b. Retroactive
c. Bill of attainder d. None of the above

1. C. 2. C. II. 3. C 4. B. 5. A.

Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act RA 3019, As Amended

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 3

Persons covered under this act
All public officers which include elective and appointive officials and
employees Permanent or temporary, whether in the classified or unclassified or
exempt service receiving compensation, even nominal from the government (Sec.
2, RA 3019).
Government includes;
1. National government
2. Local government
3. GOCCs
4 Other instrumentalities or agencies
5. Their branches

PUNISHABLE ACTS
Punishable acts under Sec. 3 of RA 3019
1. A public officer:
a. Persuading, inducing, or influencing another public officer to:
i. Perform an act constituting a violation of the Rules and Regulations duly
promulgated by competent authority, or
ii. An offense in connection with the official duties of the latter.

Example: The act of Former Comelec Chaiman Benjamin Abalos in bribing

Romulo Neri with the amount of 200 Million Pesos in exchange for the approval
of the NBN Project (Neri v. Senate Committee on Accountability of Public
Officers and Investigation, G.R. No. 180643, March 25, 2008).
b. Allowing himself to be persuaded, induced or influenced to commit
such violation or offense (Sec 3 (a), RA 3019).

2. Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present, share,

percentage, or benefit, for himself or for any other person, in connection with any
contract or transaction between the Government and any other party, wherein
the public officer in his official capacity has to intervene under the law (Sec. 3 (b),
RA 3019)
Elements
a. The offender is a public officer;
b. He requested and/or received, directly or indirectly, a gift, Present or
consideration;

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 4

c. The gift, present or consideration was for the benefit of the said public officer
or
for any other person;
d. It was requested and/or received m connection with a contract or
transaction with the Government; and
e. The public officer has the right to intervene in such contract or transaction in
his official capacity.

3. Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present or other

pecuniary or material benefit, for himself or for another, from any person for
whom the public officer, in any manner or capacity, has secured or obtained, or
will secure or obtain any Government permit or license, in consideration for the
help given or to be given (Sec. 3 (). RA 3019).
NOTE. This is a special form of bribery.

4. Accepting or having any member of his family accept employment in a private

enterprise which has pending official business with him during the pendency
thereof or within one year after its termination.
Elements
a. The public officer accepted, or having any of his family member accept
any employment in a private enterprise;
b. Such private enterprise has a pending official business with the public
Officer; and,
c. It was accepted during:
i. The pendency thereof, or
ii. Within 1 year after its termination.

5. Causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or giving
any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the
discharge of his official, administrative or judicial functions through manifest
partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence (Sec. 3 (e), RA 3019).
(BAR 1990, 1991 1997, 2005, 2009)
Elements:
a. The accused must be a public officer discharging administrative, judicial or
official functions;
b. He must have acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith or
Inexcusable negligence, and
c. That his action caused;

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 5

 i. Any undue injury to any party, including the government, or
ii.. Giving any private pay unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference
in the discharge of his functions.
Since bad faith is an element, good faith and lack of malice is a valid defense.

6. Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request, without sufficient

justification to act within a reasonable time on any matter pending before him
(Sec. 3, RA 2019)

Elements
a. Offender is a public officer
b. Public officer neglected or refused to act without sufficient justification after
due demand or request has been made on him;
c. Reasonable time has elapsed from such demand or request without the
public officer having acted on the matter pending before him; and
d. Such failure to act is for the purpose of
i. Obtaining (directly or indirectly) from any person interested in the matter
some pecuniary or material benefit or advantage,
ii. Favoring his own interest, or
iii. Giving undue advantage in favor of or discriminating against any other
interested party.
The neglect or delay of public function must be accompanied by an express or
implied demand of any benefit or consideration for himself or another. Absent
such demand, the officer shall be merely administratively liable.

7. Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any contract or transaction

manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the public
officer profited or will profit thereby (Sec. 3 (g) RA 3019).

Elements
a. Accused is a public officer;
b. The public officer entered into a contract or transaction on
behalf of the government; and
c. Such contract or transaction is grossly and manifestly
disadvantageous to the government (the threshold of the
crime).

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 6

8. Directly or indirectly having financial or pecuniary interest in any business,
contract or transaction in which he:
a. Intervenes or takes part in his official capacity. (Intervention must be
actual and in the official capacity of the public officer), or
b. Is prohibited by the constitution or by law from
having any interest (Sec. 3 (h), RA 3019).

9. Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for personal gains, or having a

material interest in any transaction or act which:
a. Requires the approval of a board, panel or group of which he is member
and which exercises discretion in such approval, or
b. Even if he votes against the same or does not participate in the action of the
board, committee, panel or group (Sec 3 (i), RA 3019)
Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against those public officials
responsible for the approval of manifestly unlawful, inequitable, or irregular
transaction or acts by the board, panel or group to which they belong.

10. Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit, privilege or benefit in

favor of:
a. Any person not qualified to or not legally entitled to such license, permit.
privilege or benefit, or
b. A mere representative or dummy of one who is not so qualified or entitled
(Sec.3 ), RA 3019).

11. a. Divulging valuable information of a;

i. Confidential character
ii. Acquired by his office or by him on account of his official position to
unauthorized person
b. Releasing such information in advance of its authorized released date (Sec 3
(k). RA 3019).

The following persons shall also be punished with the public officer and shall be
permanently or temporarily disqualified, in the discretion of the Court, from
transacting business in any form with the Government;
1. Person giving the gift, present, share percentage or benefit in par. 2 and 3.
2. Person offering or giving to the public officer the employment mentioned
in par 4.

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 7

 3. Person urging the divulging or untimely release of the confidential
information in par. 11.

Question. Mayor Adalim was charged with murder. He was transferred from the
provincial jail and detained him at the residence of Armbil, Jr. Considering that Sec. 3(e)
of RA No. 3019 punishes the giving by a public officer of unwarranted benefits to a
private party. Does the fact that a Mayor was the recipient of such benefits take
petitioners‘ case beyond the ambit of said law?

A: NO. In drafting the Anti-Graft Law, the lawmakers opted to use 'private party'
rather than "private person to describe the recipient of the unwarranted benefits,
advantage or preference for a reason. A private person simply pertains, to one who is not
a public officer while a private party in more comprehensive in scope to mean either a
private person or a public officer acting in a private capacity to protect his personal
interest. When Mayor Adalim was transferred from the provincial jail and was detained
at Ambil, Jr.’s residence, they accorded such privilege to Adalim, not in his official
capacity as A mayor, but as a detainee charged with murder. Thus, for purposes or
applying the provisions of Section 3(e). RA No. 3019, Adalim was a private party (Ambil
Jr. V. People G.R No. 175457, July 2011

NOTE: The requirement before a private person may be indicted for violation of Section
3 of RA 3019 is that such private person must be alleged to have acted in conspiracy with
a public officer. The law, however, does not require that such person must, in all
instances, be indicted together with the public officer. If circumstances exist where the
pubic officer may no longer be charged in court, as in the present case where the pubic
officer has already died, the private person may be indicted alone (People v. Go, G.R. No.
168539, March 25, 2014).

Gross inexcusable negligence

Gross inexcusable negligence means that the public officer did not take any
more into consideration all other circumstances.
Evident bad faith
Evident bad faith is something that is tantamount to fraud or having ill-
motive or with furtive design. It connotes a manifest deliberate intent on the part
of the accused to do wrong or cause damage.
"Undue injury"
the term “undue injury “ in the context of Sec. 3 (e) of the Ant-Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act punishing the act of "causing undue injury to any party, has a

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 8

meaning akin to that civil law concept of actual damage (Guadines v.
Sandiganbayan and People, G.R. No. 164891, June 6, 2011).

Question: In violation of Sec. 3(e) of RA No. 3019, "causing any undue injury to any
party including the Government; and "giving any private party any unwarranted
benefits, must both circumstance be present to convict the accused of the said crime?

A: NO. The Supreme Court has clarified that the use of the disjunctive word “or”
connotes that either act of
(a) "causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government' and
(b) "giving any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference,
qualifies as a violation of Sec. 3(e) of RA No. 3019, as amended. The use of the
disjunctive or Connotes that the two modes need not be present at the same time. In other
words, the presence of one would suffice for conviction (Alvarez V. People, G.R. No.
192591, June 29, 2011).

Question.
Is proof of the extent of damage necessary to prove the crime?
A: NO. The Supreme Court held in Fonacier v. Sandiganbayan, that proof of the extent
Or quantum or damage is not essential. It is sufficient that the injury suffered or benefits
received can be perceived to be substantial enough and not merely negligible. Under the
second mode of the crime defined in Section 3(e) of RA No. 3019 therefore damage is not
required. In order to be found guilty under the second mode, it suffices that the accused
has given unjustified favor or benefit to another, in the exercise of his official,
administrative or judicial functions (Alvarez v. People, G.R. No. 192591, June 29, 2011)

Prohibited acts for private individuals under Sec 4. of RA 3019

it shall be unlawful:
1. For any person having family or close personal relation with any public
official to capitalize or exploit or take advantage of such family or personal
relation, by directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any present, gift,
material or pecuniary advantage from any person having some business,
transaction, application, request or contract with the government, in which
such public officer has to intervene (Sec. 4, RA 3019), and
Family relations include the spouse or relatives by consanguinity or affinity within
3rd civil degree. Close Personal relations include:
a. Close personal friendship

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 9

 b. Social and fraternal relations
c. Personal employment
2. For any person to knowingly induce or cause any public official to commit
any of the offenses defined in Sec. 3.

Other prohibited acts for the relatives

GR: 1t shall be unlawful for the spouse or relative by consanguinity or affinity
within the third civil degree of the President, Vice President, Senate President, or
Speaker of the House to intervene directly or indirectly in any business,
transaction, contract or application with the government.

XPN: This will not apply to

1. Any person who prior to the assumption of office of any of the above
officials to whom he is related, has been already dealing with the
Government along the same line of business,
2. Any transaction, contract or application already existing or pending at the
time of such assumption of public office
3. Any application filed by him the approval of which is not discretionary on
the part of the official or officials concerned but depends upon compliance
with requisites provided by law, Or rules or regulations issued pursuant
to law, or 4, Any act lawfully performed in an official capacity or in the
exercise of a profession (Sec 5 A 3019).

EXCEPTIONS
Exceptions to the provisions of RA 3019
1. Unsolicited gifts or presents of small or insignificant value offered or given
as a mere ordinary token of gratitude or friendship according to local
customs and usage, and
2. Practice of any profession, lawful trade or occupation by any private
persons or by any public officer who under the law may legitimately
practice this profession, trade or occupation during his incumbency except
where the practice of such profession, trade or Occupation involves
conspiracy with any other person or public official to commit any
violations of said Act (Sec. 14, RA 3019).

Court of competent jurisdiction over offenses punishable under this act

- It is the Sandiganbayan that has jurisdiction to try cases for violation of RA
3019. However, if the public officer is not occupying a position corresponding to

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 10

salary grade 27 or higher, jurisdiction shall be vested in the RTC (Sec. 4, PD No.
1606 as amended).

Necessity of Preventive Suspension

- In case of violation of RA 3019, the public officer must be placed under
preventive Suspension. it is mandatory but not automatic. There must be a pre
suspension hearing. The Sandiganbayan must determine whether the
information filed by the Ombudsman is sufficient in form and substance as to
bring about a conviction (Sec. 13, RA 3019)

What pre-conditions are necessary to be met or satisfied before preventive

suspension may be ordered?
- The pre-conditions necessary to be met or satisfied before a suspension may be
ordered are: (1) there must be proper notice requiring the accused to show cause
at a specific date of hearing why he should not be ordered suspended from office
pursuant to R.A. 3019, as amended; and (2) there must be a determination of a
valid information against the accused that warrants his suspension.

I. Read the paragraph carefully complete the sentence to make a complete

paragraph
________1. All public officers which included elective and appointive
official and employees permanent whether temporary.
These are the following. (3pts)
1. National government
2. Local Government
3. Small time business
4. Other instrumentation
5. Agencies and other branches
________2. Punishable acts under (2pts)
1. Sec 2 of RA 3019
2. Influencing another public officer
3. Act Under Sec 3 of RA 3019
4. None of the above

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 11

II. Who are the person that are punished with a public officer and are
permanently on temporarily disqualified, in the discretion of the court, from
transacting business in any form with the Government.? (5pts)
1. Person giving gift
2. Person offering or giving as a gift
3. Person urging the divulging or untimely release of the confidential
information.
4. All of the above

1. 3
2. 3
3. 4

Anti- Plunder Act RA 7080 as amended

Public officers mean any person holding any public office in the
Government of the Republic of the Philippines by virtue of an appointment,
election or contract (Sec. 1(2). RA 7080)
Government includes the National Government, and any of its
subdivisions, agencies or Instrumentalities, Including government-Owned or
controlled corporations and their subsidiaries.
Ill-gotten wealth - it is any asset, property, business enterprise or material
possession of any person, acquired by a public officer directly or indirectly
through dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or business associates.

Acquisition of ill-gotten wealth

It is acquired by any combination or series of the following means or similar
schemes: (PREDICATE CRIMES)
1. Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or malversation of public
funds or raids on the public treasury;
2. By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift, share, percentage,
kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary benefit from any person and/or
entity in connection with any government contract or project or by reason
of the office or position of the public officer concerned;
3. By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of assets belonging
to the National government or any of its subdivisions, agencies or
instrumentalities or government-owned or controlled corporations and
their subsidiaries

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 12

 4. By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any shares of
stock, equity or any other form of interest or participation including the
promise of future employment-in any business enterprise or undertaking:
5. By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial monopolies or other
combinations and/or implementation of decrees and orders intended to
benefit particular persons or special interests, or
6. By taking undue'" advantage of official position, authority, relationship,
connection or influence to unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the
expense and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people and the
Republic or the Philippines (Sec. 1-(d), RA 7080).

Presumption under this law

When a public officer or employee acquires during his incumbency an
amount of property which is manifestly out of proportion of his salary and to his
other lawful income, such amount of property is then presumed prima facie to
have been unlawfully acquired. Thus, if the public official is unable to show to
the satisfaction of the court that he has lawfully acquired the property in
question, then the court shalt declare such property forfeited in favor of the State,
and by virtue of such judgment, the property aforesaid shall become property
forfeited in favor of the State (Garcia v. Republic, G.R. No. 170122, October 12,
2009).

Plunder
It is a crime committed by a public officer by himself or in connivance with
members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business associates,
subordinates or other persons, by amassing. accumulating or acquiring ill-gotten
wealth through a combination or series of overt acts in the aggregate amount or
total value of at least P50 million (Sec. 2, RA 7080, as amended by RĄ 7659).
(BAR 2014)
There must be at least 2 predicate crimes committed before one can be
convicted of plunder.

Elements of Plunder
1. That the offender is a public officer who acts by himself or in connivance
with members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business
associates, subordinates, or other persons
2. That he amassed, accumulated or acquired ill-gotten wealth through a
combination or series of the following overt or criminal acts:

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 13

 a) through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or malversation of public
funds or raids on the public treasury;
b) by receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift, share, percentage,
kickback or any other form of pecuniary benefits from any person and/or
entity in connection with any government contract or project or by reason
of the office or position of the public officer concerned.
c) by the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of assets belonging to
the National Government or any of its subdivisions, agencies or
instrumentalities of government-owned or -controlled corporations or their
subsidiaries
d) by obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any shares of
stock, equity or any other form of interest or participation including the
promise of future employment in any business enterprise or undertaking
e) by establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial monopolies or other
combinations and/or implementation Of decrees and orders intended to
benefit particular persons or special interests, by taking undue advantage
of official position, authority, relationship, connection or influence to
unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage
and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines,
and
3. That the aggregate amount or total value of the ill-gotten wealth amassed,
accumulated or acquired is at least P50,000,000.00 (Enrile v. People, G.R.
213455, August 11, 2015).

SERIES or COMBINATION

Combination refers to at least two different acts in the above enumeration.

Series refers to at least 3 overt acts covered by the enumeration.
Is it not necessary to prove each and every criminal act done by the accused to
commit the crime of plunder. it is sufficient to establish beyond reasonable doubt
a pattern of overt or criminal acts indicative of the overall unlawful scheme or
conspiracy (Sec. 4, RA 7080)

Pattern refers to every overt or criminal acts indicative of the overall unlawful
scheme or conspiracy tor purposes of establishing the crime of plunder.
The said acts are mentioned only as predicate acts of the crime of plunder and
the allegations relative thereto are not to be taken of to be understood as
allegations charging separate criminal offenses punished under the RPC, the

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 14

Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and Code of Conduct and Ethical
Standards for Public Officials and Employees. It bears stressing that the predicate
acts merely constitute acts of plunder and are not crimes separate and
independent of the crime of plunder (Serapio v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148468,
January 28, 2003).

I. Choose the best answer.

1. A It refers to every overt or criminal acts indicative of the overall unlawful
scheme or conspiracy tor purposes of establishing the crime of plunder.
2. D It is a crime committed by a public officer by himself or in connivance
with members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business
associates, subordinates or other persons, by amassing.
3. D There must be at least 2 predicate crimes committed before one can be
convicted.
4. D It is any asset, property, business enterprise or material possession of
any person, acquired by a public officer directly or indirectly through
dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or business associates.
5. F It mean any person holding any public office in the Government of the
Republic of the Philippines by virtue of an appointment, election or
contract (Sec. 1(2). RA 7080)

a. Pattern b. Ill-gotten wealth c. Series

d. Plunder e. Combination f. Public offers

II. Underline the incorrect word and write the correct answer.
1. __TREASURY_through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or
malversation of public funds or raids on the public Government;
2. RA, 7080 it is sufficient to establish beyond reasonable doubt a pattern
of overt or criminal acts indicative of the overall unlawful scheme or
conspiracy (Sec. 3, RA 7090)
3. NOT it bears stressing that the predicate acts merely constitute acts of
plunder and are real crimes separate and independent of the crime of
plunder (Serapio v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148468, January 28, 2003).
4. August 11, 2015 That the aggregate amount or total value of the ill-gotten
wealth amassed, accumulated or acquired is at least P50,000,000.00 (Enrile
v. People, G.R. 213455, August 13, 2016).
5. ADVANTAGE By taking undue disadvantage of official position,
authority, relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich himself

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 15

 or themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the
Filipino people and the Republic or the Philippines (Sec. 1-(d), RA 7080).

ANTI-TORTURE ACT RA 9745

Punishes torture inflicted by a person in authority or agent of a person in
authority upon another person who is in his/her custody.

Torture
Under Sec. 3, "torture" refers to an act by which severe pain or suffering,
whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such
purposes as obtaining from him/her or a third person information or a
confession; punishing him/her for an act he/she or a third person has
committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing
him/her or a third person; or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind,
when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the
consent or acquiescence of a person in authority or agent of a person in authority.
It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental
to lawful sanctions

Other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment refer to a

deliberate and aggravated treatment or punishment not enumerated under
Section 4 of this Act, inflicted by a person in authority or agent of a person in
authority against a person under his/her Custody, which attains a level of
severity causing suffering, gross humiliation or debasement to the latter.

Torture as punished under the law, may either be physical or

mental/psychological.

A. Physical torture is a form of treatment or punishment that causes severe

pain exhaustion, disability or dysfunction of one or more parts of the body,
such as:
1. Systematic beating, head-banging, punching, kicking, striking with
truncheon or rifle butt or other similar objects, and jumping on the stomach,
2. Food deprivation or forcible feeding with spoiled food, animal or human
excreta and other stuff or substances not normally eaten;

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 16

 3.Electric shock;
4. Cigarette burning; burning by electrically heated rods, hot oil or acid, or
by the rubbing of pepper or other chemical substances on mucous
membranes, or acids or pices directly on the wound;
5. The submersion of the head in water or water polluted with excrement,
urine, vomit and/or blood until the brink of suffocation;
6. Being tied or forced to assume fixed and stressful bodily
position;
7. Rape and sexual abuse, including the insertion of foreign
objects into the sex organ or rectum, or electrical torture
of the genitals; Refer to Anti-Rape Law RA 8353

8. Mutilation or amputation of the essential parts of the body such as the

genitalia ear, tongue, etc.
9. Dental torture or the forced extraction of the teeth;
10. Pulling out of fingernails;
11. Harmful exposure to the elements such assunlight and extreme cold;
12. The use of plastic bag and other materials placed over the head to the
point of asphyxiation;
13. The use of psychoactive drugs to change the perception, memory,
alertness or will of person, such as;
i. The administration or drugs to induce confession and/or reduce
mental competency; or
ii. The use of drugs to induce extreme pain or certain symptoms of a
disease; and

14. Other analogous acts of physical torture.

B. Mental/psychological torture refers to acts calculated to affect or confuse the

mind and/or undermine a person's dignity and morale, such as:
1. Blindfolding:
2. Threatening a person(s) or his/her relative(s) with bodily harm execution or
other wrongful acts;
3. Confinement in solitary cells or secret detention places;
4. Prolonged interrogation;
5. Preparing a prisoner for a “show trial”, public display or public humiliation
of a detainee or prisoner;

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 17

 6. Causing unscheduled transfer of a person deprived of liberty from one place
to another, creating the belief that he/she will be summarily executed,
7. Maltreating a member/s of a person's family;
8. Causing the torture sessions to be witnessed by the person's family, relatives
or any third party;
9. Denial of sleep/rest;
10. Shame infliction such as stripping the person naked, parading him/her in
public places, shaving the victim's head or putting marks on his/her body
against his/her will;
11. Deliberately prohibiting the victim to communicate with any member of
his/her family; and
12. Other analogous acts of mental/psychological torture.
(Sec. 4, RA 9745)

Persons liable for torture

1. As principals for the crime of torture or other cruel or inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment:
a. Any person who actually participated or induced another in the
commission of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment, or who cooperated in the execution of the act of torture or other
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment by previous or
Simultaneous acts;
b. Any Superior military, police or law enforcement officer or senior
government official who issued an order to any lower ranking personnel to
commit torture for whatever purpose; and
c. The immediate commanding officer of the unit concerned of the AFP or the
immediate senior public official of the PNP and other law enforcement
agencies, if:

i. By his act or omission, or negligence, he has led, assisted, abetted or allowed,

whether directly or indirectly, the commission of torture by his/her
subordinates;
ii. He/she has knowledge of or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should
have known that acts of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment will be committed, is being committed, or has been
committed by his/her subordinates or by others within his/her area of
responsibility and, despite such knowledge, did not take preventive or corrective
Action either before, during or immediately after its commission, when he/she

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 18

 has the authority to prevent or investigate allegations of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment but failed to prevent or
investigate allegations of such act, whether deliberately or due to negligence.

2. Any public officer or employee will be liable as an accessory if he/she has

knowledge that torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment is being committed and without having participated in its
commission, either as principal or accomplice, takes part subsequent to its
Commission

a. By profiting from or assisting the offender to profit from the effects of the
act of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment,
or
b. By concealing the act of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment and/or destroying the effects or instruments of torture
in order to prevent its discovery; or
c. By harboring, concealing or assisting in the escape of the principal/s in
the act of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment
or punishment, provided the accessory acts are done with the abuse of the
official's public functions. (Sec.13, RA 9745)

Rights of a victim of torture

a. To have an impartial investigation by the CHR and other concerned

government agencies such as the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Public
Attorney's Office (PAO), the PNP, the National Bureau of Investigation
(NBI) and the AFP;
b. To have the investigation of the torture completed within a maximum
period 60 working days from the time a complaint for torture is filed, and to
have any appeal resolved within the same period;
c. To have sufficient government protection for himself/herself and other
persons involved in the investigation/prosecution such as his/her lawyer,
witnesses and relatives, against all forms of harassment, threat and/or
intimidation as a consequence of the filing of the complaint for torture or
the presentation of evidence for such complaint
d. To be given sufficient protection in the manner by which he/she testifies
and presents evidence in any forum to avoid further trauma;
e. To claim for compensation under Republic Act No. 7309, which in no

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 19

 case should be lower than P10,000.00, and under other existing laws and
regulations.

I. Read carefully check the correct answer on the blank (5pts)

A. Rights of a victim by torture are under the investigation by the ff.
Right the role of each agencies.

1.(Commission of Human Rights)

2.(Department of Justice)
3.Department of Energy)
4.(Philippine National Police)
5.(National Bureau of Investigation)
6.(Public Attorney’s Office)

B. Enumeration . What are the Five(5) Rights of a victim of a torture (5Points)

OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE (PD 1829)

Purpose
The purpose of the law is to discourage public indifference or apathy
towards the apprehension and prosecution of criminal offenders. It is necessary
to penalize acts which obstructs or frustrates or tend to obstruct or frustrate the
successful apprehension and prosecution of criminal offenders.

PUNISHABLE ACTS

1. 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:
2. 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,
3. Altering, destroying, suppressing or concealing any paper, record,
document, or object, with intent to impair its veracity, authenticity, legibility,
availability, or admissibility as evidence in any investigation of or official
proceedings in, criminal cases, or to be used in the investigation of, or official
proceedings in, criminal cases; (BAR 2005)

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 20

 4. Harboring or concealing, or facilitating the escape of any person he
knows, or has reasonable ground to believe or suspect, has committed any
offense under existing penal laws in order to prevent his arrest,
prosecution and conviction;
5. 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;
6. Delaying the prosecution of criminal cases by obstructing the service of
process or court orders or disturbing proceedings in the fiscal's offices,
in Tanodbayan, or in the courts;
7. Making, presenting or using any record, document, paper or object with
knowledge of its falsity and with intent to affect the course or outcome of the
investigation of, or official proceedings in, criminal cases;
8. Soliciting, accepting, or agreeing to accept any benefit in consideration
of abstaining from, discounting, or impeding the prosecution of a criminal
offender;
9. Threatening directly or indirectly his person, honor or property or that of
any immediate member or members of his family in order to prevent such
person from appearing in the investigation of, or official proceedings in, criminal
cases, or imposing a condition, whether lawful or unlawful, in order to prevent a
person from appearing in the investigation of or in official proceedings in,
criminal cases, and
10. Giving of false or fabricated information to mislead or prevent the law
enforcement agencies from apprehending the offender or from protecting the life
or property of the victim, or fabricating information from the data gathered in
confidence by investigating authorities for purposes of background information
and not for publication and publishing or disseminating the same to mislead the
investigator or the court (PD 1829, Sec. 1).

NOTE: If any of the foregoing acts are committed by a public official or

employee, he shall, in addition to the penalties provided there under, suffer
perpetual disqualification from holding public office.

Q: Senator Juan Ponce Enrile was charged for rebellion. Subsequently, he was
charged under PD 1829, for allegedly accommodating Col. Gregorio Honasan
by giving him food and comfort in 1989. The complaint states that "knowing
that Col. Honasan is a fugitive from justice, Sen. Enrile did not do anything to
have Honasan arrested and apprehended." While the complaint was filed, a

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 21

charge of rebellion against Sen. Enrile was already instituted. Is Sen. Juan
Ponce Enrile liable under PD 1829?

A: NO. Sen. Enrile could not be separately charged under PD 1829, as this is
absorbed in the charge of rebellion already filed against Sen. Enrile (Enrile v.
Hon. Admin., G.R. No. 93335, September 13, 1990).

Lesson Examination
A. list down Five(5) punishable acts of PD 1829, Explain it in your own words
(5pts)
B. Relate your journey as cadet to the topic (500 words) (5pts)

Compiled by: Florentino, John Kenneth [Date] 22