criminal law review transcription 1st installment.doc

University of San Carlos CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW TRANSCRIPTION

Judge M. Paredes

MAY 31, 2010

CRIMES AND PENALTIES

Assignment: Related Special Penal Laws; Human Security Act/Anti-terrorism Law; R.A. 9851: IHL; P.D. 532: Piracy

Title One: CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE LAW OF NATIONS

Why punish crimes against national security. Constitution, the defense of the state is the prime duty of government. That's why Commonwealth Act No. 1 and RPC were passed by the law-making body then. You know of course what is Commonwealth Act No. 1: National Defense Act, what is the leading case? Lagman vs People. Is there any obligation of a citizen to render military service? The answer is yes, Commonwealth Act No. 1.

Chapter One: CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY

Section One. — Treason and espionage

Going back to crimes against national security, there are four crimes. Crimes against national security triable here in the Philippines even if the act/s were committed outside Philippine territorial jurisdiction. Rebellion does not fall under crimes against national security, it falls under crimes against public order, although the essence is it's a crime against national security. Crimes against the law of nations, why punish? Because we adopt the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land. There are five crimes against law of nations, triable anywhere.

1) Art. 114. Treason. — Any person who, owing allegiance to (the United States or) the Government of the Philippine Islands, not being a foreigner, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort within the Philippine Islands or elsewhere, shall be punished by reclusion temporal to death and shall pay a fine not to exceed P20,000 pesos.

No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses at least to the same overt act or on confession of the accused in open court.

Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippine Islands, who commits acts of treason as defined in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be punished by prision mayor to death and shall pay a fine not to exceed P20,000 pesos. (As amended by E.O. No. 44, May 31, 1945).

Offenders here may be Filipino citizen or resident alien. Non-resident aliens are not liable under Section 114, paragraph 1. This can only be committed during war time, if there is no war, there is no treason. It is violation by a subject of his allegiance to his sovereign or to the supreme authority of the state.

'Allegiance' means obligation of fidelity or loyalty and obedience. Allegiance may either be permanent or temporary allegiance. Permanent = Filipino citizens, temporary = resident aliens. The war here must be directed against the government.

What is the meaning of 'adherence to the government? It means intent to betray.

'Aid or comfort', what is the meaning? It means an act which strengthens or tends to strengthen the enemy in the conduct of war against the traitor country. Adherence alone without aid or comfort does not constitute treason. So emotional or intellectual attachment or sympathy to the enemy, without giving the enemy aid or comfort, is not treason. The aid and comfort must be given to the enemy by some kind of action. So there must be some physical deed or activity.

The aid or comfort given to the enemies must be after the declaration of war. The enemies must be the subject of a foreign power. I repeat, there is no treason if there is no war. The war must be declared. There are two kinds of war: war in the formal sense, meaning, there is a declaration of war, and war in the material sense, there is armed conflict without formal declaration of war.

No complex crime of treason with murder, physical injuries because murder, physical injuries, etc are inherent in treason. When killings and other common crimes are charged as overt acts of treason, they cannot be regarded as separate crimes or as complexed with treason.

Treason by Filipino citizen can be committed outside of the Philippines. Treason by an alien must be committed in the Philippines.

Paragraph 2 is actually rule of evidence. How do you prove treason? 1) Testimony of two witnesses, at least to the same overt act; 2) confession in open court, not extra-judicial confession.

Defense of suspended allegiance and change of sovereignty is not accepted. But defense of obedience to de facto government is a good defense.

2) Art. 115. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason; Penalty. — The conspiracy or proposal to commit the crime of treason shall be punished respectively, by prision mayor and a fine not exceeding P10,000 pesos, and prision correccional and a fine not exceeding P5,000 pesos.

You know the meaning of conspiracy under Volume 1, you know what is the meaning of proposal. X, Y and Z conspired to commit treason on January 21. On January 22, they committed treason. What crime did they commit? Answer is TREASON. Why? Because conspiracy to commit treason is committed only if there is no overt act of treason. So mere conspiracy is already punished by the Revised Penal Code.

Proposal to commit treason. X proposed to A, B, C and D to commit treason. A, B, C and D was swayed to commit treason. What crime is committed? Answer is TREASON. Why? Because when X proposed to A, B, C and D to commit treason, they committed treason, X is principal by induction. So proposal to commit treason may only be committed if there is no treason.

Two-witness rule does not apply to conspiracy or proposal to commit treason.

3) Art. 116. Misprision of treason. — Every person owing allegiance to (the United States) the Government of the Philippine Islands, without being a foreigner, and having knowledge of any conspiracy against them, conceals or does not disclose and make known the same, as soon as possible to the governor or fiscal of the province, or the mayor or fiscal of the city in which he resides, as the case may be, shall be punished as an accessory to the crime of treason.

In the Philippines, general rule, there is no crime for failure to report any commission of a crime. But there are exceptions, one of which is misprision of treason. It is failure to report a conspiracy to commit treason. X knew that A, B, C and D will commit treason, he knew about the conspiracy. A, B, C and D committed treason. Is X liable for misprision of treason? Answer is NO. Why? Because treason has already been committed. What is punished by the revised Penal Code is the failure to report the conspiracy immediately to the mayor or city prosecutor or governor or provincial prosecutor. If there is already an overt act of treason, failure to report is not misprision of treason.

The law says 'every person owing allegiance to the Government of the Philippine Islands, without being a foreigner', meaning, only a Filipino citizen may be punished for misprision of treason.

Then next phrase 'having knowledge of any conspiracy against them', knowledge of any conspiracy, not knowledge of the commission of treason; who 'conceals or does not disclose and make known the same', so this is a crime by omission, failure to report the conspiracy.

Criminal Law Review 1st Installment 1

The law says 'as soon as possible' Why? So that the authorities will be alerted or informed of the conspiracy to commit treason, so that the conspirators will not make good their plan to commit treason. To whom? The law says 'to the governor or fiscal of the province, or the mayor or fiscal of the city in which he resides'.

What is the liability here of the accused? Accessory to the crime of treason.

Article 116 does not apply when the crime of treason is already committed by someone and the accused does not report its commission to the proper authorities. The offender is the principal in the crime of misprision of treason but he is punished as an accessory to the crime of treason.

Article 116 is an exception to the rule that mere silence does not make a person criminally liable.

4) Art. 117. Espionage. — The penalty of prision correccional shall be inflicted upon any person who:

1. Without authority therefor, enters a warship, fort, or naval or military establishment or reservation to obtain any information, plans, photographs, or other data of a confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippine Archipelago; or

2. Being in possession, by reason of the public office he holds, of the articles, data, or information referred to in the preceding paragraph, discloses their contents to a representative of a foreign nation.

The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed if the offender be a public officer or employee.

It is not necessary that the information has been actually obtained, it is enough that the purpose is to obtain such information. If he entered the places the places mentioned under Article 117 but the purpose is not to obtain information, the crime is not espionage, but some other crime.

Next is 'disclosing their contents to a representative of a foreign nation', the law does not distinguish, friendly or hostile nation.

'Plans, photographs, or other data of a confidential nature', if it is ot of a confidential nature, then there is no violation of Article 117 but there may violation of some other provisions of the Revised Penal Code or special penal laws.

Please take note also 'being in possession, by reason of the public office he holds', so under number, the offender must be a public officer. Now if the public officer discloses data or information of confidential information he may also be held R.A. 3019: Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and R.A. 6713: Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards of Public Officers or Employees.

To be liable under paragraph 1, the offender must have the intention to obtain information relative to the defense of the Philippines. It is not necessary that information is obtained. Persons liable in 2 ways of committing espionage, citizenship here is immaterial.

Now there is a special penal law, C.A. 616. There are several acts punished:

a. unlawfully obtaining or permitting to be obtained information affecting national defense; If it does not affect national defense and the offender is a public officer, he is liable under R.A. 3019: Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and R.A. 6713: Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards of Public Officers or Employees.

b. unlawfully disclosing information affecting national defense;

c. dicloyal acts or words in time of peace;d. disloyal acts or words in time of war; so

espionage here under C.A. 616 may be committed in time of peace and in time of war.

e. conspiracy to violate preceding sections;f. harboring or concealing violators of law; special

penal law which may be involved is P.D. 1829, it is included in the bar exam. There are several provisions int he RPC where we have to refer to P.D. 1829. What is P.D. 1829? Obstruction of justice.

As to harboring or concealing violators of law. If the purpose of the offender is to prevent prosecution or apprehension of criminal offenders, in addition to C.A. 616, the accused may also be held liable under P.D. 1829. in P.D. 1829, there is also harboring and concealing violators of the law but the main purpose of P.D 1829 is to prevent prosecution or apprehension of criminal offenders.

You should distinguish espionage from treason. Treason can only be committed in time of war, espionage (either under RPC or under C.A. 616) may be committed in time of peace or in time of war. Citizenship is not important in espionage; it may be committed by a Filipino citizenor an alien (either resident or non-resident alien). There are 2 ways of committing treason, there are several ways in committing espionage.

Section Two. — Provoking war and disloyalty in case of war

There are four classes of crimes under Section 2.

1) Art. 118. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals. — The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be imposed upon any public officer or employee, and that of prision mayor upon any private individual, who, by unlawful or unauthorized acts provokes or gives occasion for a war involving or liable to involve the Philippine Islands or exposes Filipino citizens to reprisals on their persons or property.

You have studied international law, you came across Charter of the UN, the government should see to it that its citizens should not provoke neighbouring countries, you should not form armed groups to invade or conduct armed activities in neighbouring countries.

There are 2 persons who may be held liable. Public officer/employee or private person. What is the act committed here? Unlawful or unauthorized acts provoking or giving occasion for a war involving or liable to involve the Philippines or exposes Filipino citizens to reprisals on their person or property. If you form an armed group to invade Sabah, Malaysia or any neighbouring country, the person who organizes the armed group may be held liable for violation of Article 118.

This crime is not committed in time of war but time of peace. Because if there is war already, there is no point of provoking war. The intention of the offender is immaterial. Penalty is higher if committed by a public officer/employee. Please take note unlawful or unauthorized acts.

2) Art. 119. Violation of neutrality. — The penalty of prision correccional shall be inflicted upon anyone who, on the occasion of a war in which the Government is not involved, violates any regulation issued by competent authority for the purpose of enforcing neutrality.

This can only be committed if there are two countries involved in war in which the Philippines is NOT involved. The offender here violates any regulation issued by competent authority for the purpose of enforcing neutrality. Suppose there is war between Malaysia and Indonesia, so who is the competent authority? The President. There is a regulation to respect our position that is to be neutral and the accused committed acts in violation of the regulation. Example, do not sell war materials to any of the two warring countries; however, you sent ammunition to Malaysia, that is in violation of the regulation. If the Governor of Cebu says do not sell ammunitions to Malaysia or Indonesia because they are at war. You violate the provincial ordinance, is there violation of neutrality under Article 119? The answer is NO. Because the governor is not the competent authority mentioned in Article 119. The competent authority to declare neutrality is either the President or persons in charge of foreign affairs in the Philippines.

3) Art. 120. Correspondence with hostile country. — Any person who in time of war, shall have correspondence with an enemy country or territory occupied by enemy troops shall be punished:

1. By prision correccional, if the correspondence has been prohibited by the Government;


2. By prision mayor, if such correspondence be carried on in ciphers or conventional signs; and 3. By reclusion temporal, if notice or information be given thereby which might be useful to the enemy. If the offender intended to aid the enemy by giving such notice or information, he shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal to death.

Obsolete. Correspondence here means sending of letters. Why send letters when there is already text message.

So who is liable? Any person, resident alien, non-resident alien, Filipino citizen, private individual, public officer or employee, who in time of war, shall have correspondence with an enemy country or territory.

And the correspondence here may be innocent correspondence provided there is prohibition by the government. It says here if notice or information given thereby which might be useful to the enemy. If the offender intended to aid the enemy then the penalty is higher. Correspondece is communication by means of letters even if correspondence contains innocent matters.

3) Art. 121. Flight to enemy country. — The penalty of arresto mayor shall be inflicted upon any person who, owing allegiance to the Government, attempts to flee or go to an enemy country when prohibited by competent authority.

Consummated by mere attempt to flee to an enemy country. There must be war wherein the Philippines is involved. 'Any person who, owing allegiance to the Government'; a resident alien owes temporary allegiance, so I believe a resident alien may be liable. Acts committed: attempting to flee or going to an enemy country when prohibited by competent authority. So there must be a prohibition by competent authority, if there is none, there is no crime.

Section Three. — Piracy and mutiny on the high seas

We have 3 Piracy laws in the Philippines: 1) piracy under the RPC, 2) piracy under P.D. 532 and 3) R.A. 6235: Anti-hijacking law.

Art. 122. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas. — The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be inflicted upon any person who, on the high seas, shall attack or seize a vessel or, not being a member of its complement nor a passenger, shall seize the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel, its equipment, or personal belongings of its complement or passengers.

The same penalty shall be inflicted in case of mutiny on the high seas.

The offender must be an outsider, not a member of the crew, not an officer or not a passenger of the vessel. Because if he were an insider, even an officer of the vessel, even a passenger and he robs a co-passenger in Philippine waters, it is piracy under P.D. 532. So piracy committed in Philippine waters-under P.D. 532, the culprit may be an insider whereas under the RPC-an outsider. Same penalty shall be inflicted in case of mutiny on the high seas or Philippine waters. Most important element of piracy under Article 122, offenders are not members of its complement nor a passenger of the vessel. Essence of piracy is robbery or forcible depredation. If an outsider enters a vessel, stole jewelleries silently and fled, is that piracy? NO. Why? Because there is no element of robbery; violence against, intimidation of persons or force upon things.

Mutiny means unlawful resistance to superior officer, or the raising of commotions and disturbances on board a ship.

You should distinguish piracy from mutiny. Most important distinction, in piracy-there is intent to gain while in mutiny-there may be intent to gain or not. Piracy are usually committed by outsiders while mutiny by fellow officers or even passengers.

Art. 123. Qualified piracy. — The penalty of reclusion temporal to death shall be imposed upon those who

commit any of the crimes referred to in the preceding article, under any of the following circumstances:

1. Whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding or firing upon the same; 2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims without means of saving themselves; or 3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries or rape.

I repeat. The essence is robbery. If there is no violence, intimidation etc, the crime is theft only. Article 123 enumerates the instances when the piracy is qualified.

The question to be asked is what is the main purpose of entering or boarding the vessel. If the main purpose is to kill, it's not qualified piracy, but murder. So if persons boarded a vessel because they wanted to kill one of the passengers and after killing the passenger they stole personal belongings, the crime is not qualified piracy, it's murder AND theft or robbery as the case may be.

'Accompanied by homicide', if the main purpose is to kill without the qualifying circumstance of treachery, etc, the crime os homicide only. 'Physical injuries', what kind of physical injuries? This should be serious and less serious because if it is slight, it is absorbed in qualified piracy. 'Accompanied by rape', if the main purpose of the culprits in boarding the vessel is to rape a passenger, it's rape. So the main purpose here should be piracy. Murder, homicide, physical injuries or rape are just afterthoughts or consequence of piracy.

Qualified piracy is a special complex crime punishable by death regardless of the number of victims. Since there is no death penalty, the penalty will be downgraded to reclusion perpetua without possibility of parole under the new law.

Then the third kind of piracy is P.D. 532. Piracy in Philippine waters. Philippines waters is not defined by Article 122 of the RPC but defined by P.D. 532. Meaning 'all bodies of water, such as but not limited to, seas, gulfs, bays around, between and connecting each of the Islands of the Philippine Archipelago, irrespective of its depth, breadth, length or dimension, and all other waters belonging to the Philippines including territorial sea, the sea-bed, the insular shelves and submarine areas over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction.

Next important definition under P.D. 532 is 'vessel'. Vessel refers to any vessel or watercraft used for transport of passengers and cargo from one place to another through Philippine waters. It shall include all types of vessels or boats used in fishing. What is the precedent case People vs Catantan. The Pilapil brothers riding a pump boat has been followed Catantan and company. Pilapil brothers were forced to jump out of the vessel. What was the charge? Piracy under P.D. 532. Catantan's argument is that it is only grave coercion, Pilapil brother were only compelled to do something against their will. Supreme court said, you read the law Mr. Catantan, it says 'all types of vessels or boats'. In one of the whereases, one of the reasons why P.D. 532 was decreed by President Marcos was to protect the fishing industry, the Philippines being an archipelago.

In People vs Roger Tulin, the vessel has been sea-jacked in Bataan, what they did was repaint the vessel, load the cargoes and went to Singapore to unload the cargoes. They argued that P.D. 532 will not apply because they only loaded the cargoes in Batangas but unloaded the cargoes in Singapore, outside Philippine waters. Supreme Court said, you loaded the cargoes in Philippines waters and unloaded it in international waters, it does not matter, as long as the loading took place in Philippine waters.

Then abetting piracy. Please take note, one of the distinctions of piracy under Article 122 from P.D. 532 is that if a person acquires or receives property taken by pirates, under Article 122 of the RPC, he is only an accessory while in P.D. 532, the accused it an accomplice, not an accessory, take note of that. The law says 'any person who knowingly and in any manner aids or protects pirates, such as giving them information about the movement of police or other peace officers of the government, or acquires or receives property taken by


such pirates or in any manner derives any benefit therefrom; or any person who directly or indirectly abets the commission of piracy, shall be considered as an accomplice of the principal offenders and be punished with the Rules prescribed by the Revised Penal Code.’

Last law on Philippine piracy, R.A. 6235: An Act Prohibiting Certain Acts Inimical to Civil Aviation. Warning: there is no attempted stage. There are two aircrafts under this law: aircraft of Philippine registry and aircraft foreign registry. The distinction is important.

What are the acts punished?

1. It shall be unlawful for any person to compel a change in the course or destination of an aircraft of Philippine registry. (Section 1, paragraph 1)

This law originated from People vs Ang Chio Kio, R.A. 6235 was not yet in effect. The accused (a Chinese national) here compelled the pilot to change the course of the airplane from Laoag to Amoy (China) instead of directing it to Apari and, in not complying with such illegal requirement killed him. After that incident, Congress passed R.A. 6235.

2. It shall be unlawful to seize or usurp the control thereof, while it is in flight. (Section 1, paragraph 1)

The phrase ‘while it is in flight’ is important. This phrase applies only to aircraft of Philippine registry. What is the meaning of aircraft is in flight? An aircraft is in flight from the moment all its external doors are closed following embarkation until any of such doors is opened for disembarkation. It the accused committed such acts while all the external doors are not yet closed, what is the crime committed? It’s either grave threat or grave coercion; if it is to compel, it is grave coercion; if threat only then grave threat especially if there is threat to kill. You should know when an aircraft is in flight according to how it is defined by law, not according to our understanding.

Next paragraph is aircraft of foreign registry.

3. It shall be unlawful for any person to compel an aircraft of foreign registry to land in Philippine territory or to seize or usurp the control thereof while it is within the said territory. Even if it is not in flight. (Section 1, paragraph 2)

4. It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, to ship, load or carry in any passenger aircraft operating as a public utility within the Philippines, any explosive, flammable, corrosive or poisonous substance or material. Does not apply to private aircraft. (Section 3)

5. The shipping, loading or carrying of any substance or material mentioned in the preceding section in any cargo aircraft operating as a public utility within the Philippines shall be in accordance with regulations issued by the Civil Aeronautics Administration. Does not apply to private aircraft. (Section 4)

6. For any death or injury to persons or damage to property resulting from a violation of Sections three and four hereof, the persons responsible therefor may be held liable in accordance with the applicable provisions of the RPC. (Section7)

JUNE 3, 2010

CRIM 2-A

Additional items in Crimes against National Security and Law of Nations

Treason absorbs crimes in furtherance thereof. There is NO treason thru negligence, it is always deliberate. The overt act of giving aid and comfort must

be intentional. Mere acceptance of office and discharge of official duties under the enemy does not per se constitute treason, EXCEPTION when the position is Policy-Determining (Laurel vs. Misa). Mere expression of opinion does not constitute an act of treason. NO complex crime of treason with murder and other common crimes.

Does the crime of treason admit three stages (attempted, frustrated, consummated)? The answer is NO. Mere attempt constitutes the crime of treason.

How do you distinguish treason from sedition?

Treason, violation of the subject of his fidelity or loyalty or allegiance to his sovereign. Sedition is raising of commotions or disturbances in a state. Treason may only be committed in time of war, meaning after the declaration of war. In treason, the Philippines is involved in a war – international. In Sedition, the conflict is merely internal.

How about treason vs. rebellion?

If the purpose is to deliver the government to a foreign power or to pave the way for the coming of an enemy, the crime is treason. In rebellion, the purpose is political; to change the government with the rebels’ own form of government.In misprision of treason, the offender is punished as an accessory to treason, but he is a principal in the crime of misprision of treason.

Under the first mode of committing espionage, is it necessary that the offender succeeds in obtaining information? Answer is NO. Is wiretapping under 4200 a form of espionage? Qualify your answer. If the purpose is to obtain information especially if its national defense, its espionage. But if the purpose has nothing to do with the country’s defense or national security, it is simply wiretapping under RA 4200.

Is it necessary that the country is at war for the crime of espionage to be committed? The answer is NO. The crime of espionage may be committed in times of peace or war.

How do you distinguish espionage from treason?

Espionage may be committed both in time of peace and in time of war. Treason is essentially committed only in time of war. Espionage may be committed in many ways. Treason may be committed in two ways only.

Reprisal in inciting to war or giving motives of reprisal - is any kind of forcible or coercive measure whereby one state seeks to exercise a deterrent effect or obtain redress or satisfaction for the consequences of the illegal acts of another state. Inciting to war is committed in time of peace.

Who has the authority to issue regulation for the enforcement of neutrality? It is the chief executive, the President of the Philippines, or the chief of staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, being the alter ego of the President.There is authority to the effect that correspondence to hostile country contemplates correspondence to officials of the enemy country, not correspondence to private individuals in the enemy country (although some authors do not distinguish).

Flight to enemy’s country, mere attempt to flee consummates the felony.

What is the essence of piracy under the RPC?

It is robbery or deprivation in the high seas. So if there is no force, intimidation or force upon anything, personal property is taken while the ship is in the high seas, the crime is not piracy or robbery but THEFT only. It is done without lawful authority and done with animo furandi. But in time of war, under international law, if citizens deprive enemy ships of personal property, the crime is not robbery, it is considered as an act of war. Piracy is a crime against all mankind.

Art. 122 vs. PD 532


Art. 122 limits the offenders to non-passengers or non-members of the crew. PD 532, no qualification as to the criminal, hence, offender may be a passenger, a crew or a stranger.

Piracy vs. Robbery on the High Seas

Piracy, offender is an outsider. Robbery on the high seas, offender is a member of the compliment or a passenger of the vessel.

When piracy is committed and accompanied with murder, homicide, rape or physical injuries, it cannot be complex with piracy, it is Qualified Piracy.

The Anti-Hijacking law will not apply and the crime is punished under RPC or the applicable special penal laws, if the aircraft is a Philippine registry but is NOT in flight. Crime committed is either grave coercion or grave threat; if somebody is killed the crime is homicide or murder, as the case may be. If the aircrafts is of foreign registry, is it required to be in flight before RA 6235 to apply? The answer is NO, because aircrafts of foreign registry are considered as “in transit” while they are in foreign countries. Is there hijacking in the attempted stage? NO.

Crimes against the Law of Nations vs. Crimes against National Security

Crimes against the law of nations can be prosecuted anywhere in the world, because these crimes are considered as crimes against humanity. Crimes against national security may only be tried in the Philippines. The acts against national security may be committed abroad and still be punishable under our law, but it cannot be tried under foreign law.

An Act to Secure the State and Protect our People from Terrorism

R.A. 9372: The Human Security Act of 2007

It is the policy of the State:

1. To protect life, liberty, property2. To condemn terrorism

How do you classify terrorism? The law says: Crime against National

Security, Crime against the Filipino People, Crime against Humanity, Crime against the Law of Nations (Sec. 2)

The State recognizes that the fight against terrorism requires comprehensive approach; political, economic, diplomatic, military and legal, taking into account the root causes of terrorism. Measures shall include conflict management, post-conflict peace building and addressing the root causes of the conflict. The main root is poverty and neglect.

Section 3. Definition of Terrorism

Terrorism may be committed by any person: public officers or private persons. This may be committed by one single act or series of acts. This may be committed by a single individual who commits an act punishable under any of the following provisions of the RPC and other laws. So before a person may be charged under this law, he must commit another crime. There must be a PREDICATE CRIME before one may be charged of terrorism. The crimes are enumerated, like:

Art. 122 Piracy and Mutiny;

Art. 134 Rebellion or Insurrection, is a predicate crime when committed in furtherance of Terrorism; thus rebellion is absorbed in Terrorism;

Art.134-a Coup d’Etat, including acts committed by private persons, why is “including acts…” included? Because Coup d’Etat is committed by military officers or police officers with or without civilian support, unlike Rebellion which is mainly committed by private persons;

Article 248 (Murder);

Article 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention);

Article 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction);

Special Penal Laws

1. Presidential Decree No. 1613 (The Law on Arson);

2. Republic Act No. 6969 (Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control Act of 1990) Importation, manufacturing, processing, distributing, selling and disposing of unregulated chemicals as well as keeping or storage and disposal of nuclear waste and hazardous substances, even in transit;

3. Republic Act No. 5207, (Atomic Energy Regulatory and Liability Act of 1968) Production and use of atomic energy facilities and atomic energy materials which is subject by the control of the state. Here nuclear damage, licensing dangerous substances is not allowed;

4. Republic Act No. 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law);

5. Presidential Decree No. 532 (Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law of 1974); and,

6. Presidential Decree No. 1866, as amended (Decree Codifying the Laws on Illegal and Unlawful Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in, Acquisition or Disposition of Firearms, Ammunitions or Explosives)

These are the predicate crimes. Any one, two or three of these crimes must be committed in furtherance of Terrorism. If other crime/s is committed in furtherance of terrorism, it does not fall under this law.

Next element: thereby sowing and creating a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace. Widespread and extraordinary fear must be proven. Widespread and extraordinary – no definition (grey area). Also to be proven, panic among the populace. What is the purpose? The purpose is to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand; otherwise, there is no terrorism. So if you commit widespread and extraordinary fear and panic but no demand, there is NO terrorism. Purpose must be proven. Unlawful demand – no definition. Penalty is 40 years of imprisonment without the benefit of parole.

There is also a crime known as conspiracy to commit terrorism.

X, Y and Z conspired to commit terrorism, but did not commit terrorism. They are liable for Conspiracy only. There is conspiracy when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of the crime of terrorism and decide to commit the same. But they have not commit terrorism; they only decided to commit terrorism.

Accomplice – any person not being principal, cooperates in the execution of either the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism. Penalty is 17 years 4 months to 20 years.

Accessory, just follow the definition of Art. 17 and 18 of RPC.

Letter C here says “(c) by harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principal or conspirator of the crime”. So if a person harbors or conceals or assists in the escape of the principal or conspirator, he is liable under Sec. 6 (RA9372) as well as violation of PD 1829. Because the law (PD 1829) says, any person who


knowingly or willfully obstructs, impedes, frustrates, etc., the apprehension of suspects and the prosecution and investigation of criminal cases x x x”, there is a long enumeration, one of which states: “(c) harboring, concealing, facilitating the escape of any person, he knows or has reasonable ground to believe or suspect has committed any offense under existing penal laws.” So the accused is charged under Sec. 6 RA 9372 as well as PD 1829 Sec. 1 (c)

Section 7. Surveillance of Suspects and Interception and Recording of Communications.

Related law is Republic Act 4200. It is not true that you cannot wiretap, you can wiretap under 4200 if there is a court order; and the crimes are specified. You can file petition to wiretap with the Regional Trial Court.In RA 9372, to conduct surveillance, interception and recording of communication of terrorists or suspected terrorists or members of terrorist organizations, you have to apply with the Court of Appeals. BUT there must be a recommendation from the ATC, Anti – Terrorist Council.

Section 7 states: “The provisions of Republic Act No. 4200 to the contrary notwithstanding, a police or law enforcement official and the members of his team may, upon a written order of the Court of Appeals, listen to, intercept and record, with the use of any mode, etc., of electronic or other surveillance equipment or intercepting and tracking devices, or with the use of any other suitable ways and means for that purpose, any communication, message, conversation, discussion, etc. x x x”.

Who are the targets? Members of judicially declared an outlawed terrorist organizations, any person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism.EXCEPTION: No surveillance, no interception - between lawyers and clients (privileged communication), doctors and patients (privileged communication), journalists and their sources (under the gag law) and confidential business correspondence.

There must be a formal application for judicial authorization to intercept, record, etc. Application is EX PARTE. Duly authorized in writing by the ATC is required.

Section 9. Classification and Contents of the Order of the Court - Classified information

Section 10 Effective period.

This is the order of the Court of Appeals. Effective for the length of time specified in the order which shall not exceed a period of 30 days from receipt of written order, after which it becomes fuctos officio (not sure). What is the lifetime of a search warrant? 10 days. How about writ of execution? Actually, no lifetime but you can serve it within 5 years, after which you have to file revival of judgment.

Extendible or renewable for 30 days from expiration of original period, it is granted only if public interest is involved. If the original applicant is physically disabled or is deceased, then one next in rank shall file the application. If no case is filed within 30 days, the applicant police or law enforcement official shall immediately notify the person subject of the surveillance, interception and recording of the termination of such surveillance, interception and recording.

Section 11. Custody of Intercepted and Recorded Communications.

Who shall be the custodian?

Deposit it with the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals in a sealed envelop or sealed package accompanied by joint affidavit.

Section 12. Contents of Joint Affidavit

Section 13. Disposition of Deposited Material.

Materials shall be deemed and are hereby declared classified information, sealed envelope or sealed package shall not shall not be divulged, revealed, etc., as evidence unless authorized by written order of the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals. If you want to

open the sealed envelop, you should file an application with the Court of Appeals stating the purpose or reason.

Section 15. Evidentiary Value of Deposited Materials.

What is the evidentiary value of the listened to, intercepted or recorded communications, messages, conversations, etc.? It shall absolutely not be admissible and usable as evidence against anybody in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative, or administrative investigation, inquiry, proceeding, or hearing.

There is a penalty for an unauthorized or malicious interception, 10 years and 1 day to 12 years. (Sec. 16)(important) Section 17. Proscription of Terrorist Organizations, Association, or Group of Persons. Any organization, etc., organized for the purpose of engaging in terrorism, or which, although not organized for that purpose, actually uses the acts of terrorism to sow and create a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace x x x.It has to sow AND create a condition of widespread AND extraordinary fear.

So if you want to declare an organization, association, etc. illegal, file an application with the Regional Trial Court initiated by the Department of Justice, with due notice and opportunity to be heard; be declared as a terrorist and outlawed organization, association, or group of persons by the said RTC. So the leaders and members may be punished under Art 147 of the RPC, Illegal Association. There is no mention of filing fee under Sec. 17.Section 18 is important because the RPC and portions of the Rules of Court are modified. In Art. 125 Delay in the delivery of detained person to the proper judicial authorities; in a warrantless arrest, you have to file for a criminal charge within 36 hours (max). It is different under RA 9372, “x x x duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council has taken custody of a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism shall, without incurring any criminal liability for delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities, deliver said charged or suspected person to the proper judicial authority within a period of three days (72 hours) counted from the moment the said charged or suspected person has been apprehended or arrested, detained, and taken into custody. Those suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism must result from the surveillance under Section 7 and examination of bank deposits under Section 27.

Procedure is different. If an ordinary criminal is arrested, it is taken directly to the police station or nearest jail, while under this law he is taken directly to the judge, for the judge to see personally. The law says, “the police or law enforcement personnel concerned shall, before detaining the person suspected of the crime of terrorism, present him or her before any judge at the latter's residence or office nearest the place where the arrest took place at any time of the day or night.”

What is the duty of the judge?

- To ascertain the identity of the police or law enforcement personnel (CCPO, NBI, etc.) and the person or persons they have arrested and presented before him or her

- To inquire of them the reasons why they have arrested the person and determine by questioning and personal observation whether or not the suspect has been subjected to any physical, moral or psychological torture by whom and why.

- Submit a written report of what he/she had observed when the subject was brought before him to the proper court that has jurisdiction over the case of the person thus arrested. The judge shall forthwith submit his/her report within three calendar days from the time the suspect was brought to his/her residence or office.

Immediately after taking custody of a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, the police or law enforcement personnel shall notify in writing the judge of the court nearest the place of apprehension or arrest:


Provided, That where the arrest is made during Saturdays, Sundays, holidays or after office hours, the written notice shall be served at the residence of the judge x x x.

Section 19 Period of detention in the event of an actual or imminent terrorist attack.In the event of an imminent terrorist attack, suspect may not be detained for more than 3 days without written authority or approval of either of the following: municipal, city or regional official of a human rights commission, MTC, RTC, Sandiganbayan or CA.

If the arrest is made during a Saturday, Sunday, holiday or after office hours, residence of any of the officials mentioned above. The approval in writing of any of the said officials shall be secured by the police or law enforcement personnel concerned within 5 days after the date of the detention of the person concerned. Penalty for failure to deliver the suspect is 10 years and 1 day to 12 years.

Section 21 Rights of the person under custodial investigation (reiteration of previous laws). Penalty of violation of the rights of detainees is 10 years and 1 day to 12 years (Sec. 22).

Section 23, there is a requirement to keep a securely and orderly maintained official custodial log book.

Section 24 No torture, coercion, investigation and interrogation. Penalty is 10 years and 1 day to 12 years (Sec. 25).

(important) Section 26 Restriction on travel. In cases where evidence of guilt is not strong and the person charged with the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism is entitled to bail and is granted the same, the court upon application by the prosecution shall limit the right to travel of the accused to within the municipality or city where he resides or where the case is pending.

So, granted bail because the evidence is not strong; the suspect is freed but there are restrictions, one of which is to limit the right to travel. Travel outside the municipality or city without authorization means violation of the terms and conditions of bail, which means bail will be cancelled and the suspect will be re-incarcerated.

Under Philippine laws, before this law, there is no house arrest. In the RPC, there is somewhat house arrest but only when the crime is punishable by arresto menor, if accused cannot be placed in jail. This law (RA9372), for the first time provide for house arrest, states, “x x x he or she may also be placed under house arrest by order of the court at his or her usual place of residence,” BUT cannot use telephone, cell phone, email, internet or any other means of communication. When the accused is acquitted, the restriction shall be terminated.

Section 27 Judicial authorization to examine bank deposits.

Related law is Anti-Money Laundering Law. Under the Anti-Money Laundering Law, if you want to inquire to bank deposits, there must be a recommendation from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC). Under the Anti-Terrorism law, there must be a recommendation also but from Anti-terrorism council (ATC), who shall also file the application. Under Sec. 27, the application shall be filed with the Court of Appeals (designated as special court to handle anti-terrorism cases). You must prove the existence of probable cause. What is the prayer? To examine or cause the examination of the deposit and gather or cause the gathering of any relevant information about such deposits, placements or trust accounts.

Section 28 Application

There must be a written order of the CA authorizing the examination of bank deposits, etc.Section 29 Classification and contents of court order authorizing the examination of bank deposits.

There must be an order issued by the Court of Appeals. What is the nature of bank deposits, etc.? CLASSIFIED information (for your eyes only).

Section 30 Effective period of court authorization

Effective for the length of time specified in the written order of the authorizing division of the CA which shall not exceed 30 days from date of receipt of the written order. It may be extended or renewed but not for more than 30 days. If no case is filed within 30 day period, then applicant police or law enforcement official shall immediately notify in writing the person subject of the bank examination.

Section 31 Custody of bank data and information obtained

Where deposited? In the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals which is accompanied by a joint affidavit, contents of which are mentioned in Sec. 32.

Section 33 Disposition of bank materials

The sealed envelop or sealed package and contents thereof which is deposited shall be deemed and hereby declared classified information.

Section 34 Procedure in application to open bank materials

Section 35 Evidentiary value of information, data, excerpts, summary, etc., shall absolutely NOT be admissible and usable as evidence against anybody in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative or administrative investigation, inquiry, proceeding or hearing. Penalty for unauthorized or malicious examination is 10 years and 1 day to 12 years (Sec. 36).

Penalty of bank officials or employees defying court order, meaning refusal to allow examination of deposits, 10 years and 1 day to 12 years (Sec. 37).

There is also a penalty for false or untruthful statement or misrepresentation of material fact in joint affidavit, 10 years and 1 day to 12 years (Sec. 38).

Section 39 Seizure and sequestration

The deposits and their outstanding balances, placements, trusts, etc., shall be seized, sequestered, and frozen in order to prevent their use, transfer, or conveyance for purposes that are inimical to the safety and security of the people or injurious to the interest of the State.

So a suspected terrorist who has funds in the bank, there is a freeze order. You cannot use the funds of bank deposit.

EXCEPTION (second par.), accused or a person suspected of may withdraw such sums as may be reasonably needed by the monthly needs of his family, etc. family's medical needs upon approval of the court.

What is the nature of the seized, sequestered and frozen bank deposits?

Section 40 Deemed as property held in trust by the bank or financial institution.

Section 41 Disposition of the Seized, Sequestered and Frozen Bank Deposits

Suppose the suspect is found innocent or is acquitted after his arraignment or his case is dismissed, the seizure, sequestration and freezing of his bank deposits, placements, etc., shall forthwith be deemed lifted shall be deemed released from such seizure, sequestration and freezing, and shall be restored to him without any delay.If convicted then trial court may issue an order for the automatic forfeiture of the sequestered and frozen bank deposits in favor of the government.

Suppose you are a suspected terrorist, you deposited P20, 000, which was seized - (last par.) upon his or her acquittal or the dismissal of the charges against him or her, the amount of P500.000.00 a day for the period in which his properties, assets or funds were seized shall be paid to him on the concept of liquidated damages. (No assessment)


One of the dangers sought is collusion between the suspected terrorist and law enforcement personnel.Aside from the P500,000.00 a day as liquidated damages, you also have P500,000.00 a day of detention; it would be P1,000,000.00 a day, taken from the police funds.

Penalty for unjustified refusal to restore, etc. penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment. (sec. 42)

Penalty for the loss, misuse, diversion or dissipation of seized, sequestered and frozen bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and records. penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment. (Sec. 43)

There is a different law on infidelity in the custody of detained persons.

Any public officer who has direct custody of a detained person etc. and who by his deliberate act, misconduct, or inexcusable negligence; the penalty is twelve (12) years and one day to twenty (20) years of imprisonment (Sec. 44). In RPC its only prision correccional.

Section 45 Immunity and protection of government witnesses

Section 46 Penalty for unauthorized revelation of classified materials, 10 years and 1 day to 12 years of imprisonment.

Section 47 Penalty for furnishing false evidence, forged document, or spurious evidence, penalty of 12 years and 1 day to 20 years

Section 48 Continuous trial, Monday to Friday Section 49 Prosecution under this act shall be a bar to another prosecution under the RPC or any special penal laws (that is the consequence). The acquittal of the accused or the dismissal of the case shall be a bar to another prosecution for any offense or felony which is necessarily included in the offense charged under this Act.

Remember the predicate crimes. If you commit kidnapping, when acquitted in terrorism, you are also acquitted in kidnapping.

Section 50 Damages for unproven charge of terrorism

Upon acquittal, any person who is accused of terrorism shall be entitled to the payment of damages in the amount of P500,000.00 for every day that he or she has been detained or deprived of liberty or arrested without a warrant as a result of such an accusation.

So P500, 000 per day if acquitted plus sequestered funds P500, 000. You have P1 million a day.

Where is it taken? The law says, the amount of damages shall be automatically charged against the appropriations of the police agency and shall also be released within 15 days from the date of the acquittal of the accused.

The award of damages mentioned above shall be without prejudice to the right of the acquitted person to file criminal or administrative charges against those responsible for charging him with terrorism.

Any officer, employee, personnel, or person who delays the release or refuses to release the amounts shall suffer the penalty of six months imprisonment.

Section 51 Duty to record and report the name and address of the informant. Real name and the specific address of the informant

There is an Anti-Terrorism Council task to implement the anti-terrorism policy of the country (Sec. 53).Before this law, under our jurisprudence, CHR may only investigate but cannot prosecute. Its no longer under this law.

Section 55 The Commission on Human Rights shall have the concurrent jurisdiction to prosecute

public officials, law enforcers, and other persons who may have violated the civil and political rights of persons suspected of, or detained for the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism.

Section 56 Grievance Committee

Section 57 Ban on Extraordinary Rendition

(primer discussion) Section 58 is important because this is an exception to Art. 2 of the RPC on territorial jurisdiction.One of the provisions, when you are already a naturalized foreign citizen and you are a victim of terrorism, the Philippine government can prosecute the terrorist even if you are no longer a Filipino as long as you are a foreigner of Filipino descent.

R.A. 9372: Human Security Act of 2007

Sec. 58 is not an amendment but an addition to Art. 2 of the RPC on territorial jurisdiction. Subject to the provisions of an existing treaty of which the Philippines is a signatory and to any contrary provision of any law of preferential application like RA 75. The provisions of this Act shall apply: (1) to individual persons who commit any of the crimes defined and punished in this Act within the terrestrial domain (meaning land), interior waters (like lakes or bays), maritime zones and air space of the Philippines; [number 2 is an exception to principle of territoriality] (2) to individual persons, who although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit any of said crimes on board Philippine ship or Philippine air ship. How do you determine citizenship of a ship or air ship? It’s registration, not actual ownership. The next is also an exception to the principle of territoriality (3) to individual persons who commit any of said crimes within any embassy, consulate, or diplomatic premises belonging to the Republic of the Philippines or occupied by Philippine government in an official capacity [ownership here is not material; what is important is occupancy by government officials]; [Judge skipped this: (4) to individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit, conspire or plot to commit any of the crimes defined and punished in this Act inside the territorial limits of the Philippines] (5) to individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit said crimes against Philippine citizens or persons of Philippine descent, where their citizenship or ethnicity was a factor in the commission of the crime [so Filipino citizen who’s already an American citizen, after naturalization, and is the object of a terrorist attack, Philippine courts can take cognizance of the case and exercise jurisdiction over the offense charged]; and (6) to individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit said crimes directly against the Philippine government. I repeat this law is an exception to the principle of territoriality.

Sec. 59 – Joint Oversight Committee. The Committee shall render semi-annual report to both Houses of Congress on the effectivity and enforcement of this law. The report may include where necessary a recommendation to reassess the effects of globalization on terrorist activities on the people. The courts dealing with anti-terrorism cases shall submit to Congress and the President a report every six (6) months. So those are the salient features of the Anti-Terrorism Law.

Title Two: CRIMES AGAINST THEFUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE STATE

You know what is the fundamental law – the Constitution. Constitutional provisions relative to rights of people found in Art. III – Bill of Rights. What are the rights of persons under Art. III? To be secure in their houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizure, freedom of expression, freedom of speech, freedom to peaceably assemble, etc. These fundamental freedoms must be protected and any violation of Art. III must be criminalized. That is the reason why it’s included in Title II – crimes against the fundamental laws of the state. You know what is the purpose of the Bill of Rights? To protect citizens, including aliens, from excesses, from abuses, committed by public officers and employees. So, usually, crimes against the fundamental laws of the state are committed by public officers and employees. But


private persons may also be held liable for violation of crimes against the fundamental laws of the state if private persons conspire with public officers and employees in committing the offenses.

Chapter One: ARBITRARY DETENTION OR EXPULSION, VIOLATION OF DWELLING, PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION, AND DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS AND CRIMES AGAINST RELIGIOUS WORSHIP

There are ten (10) crimes against the fundamental laws of the state.

Section One. — Arbitrary detention and expulsion

There three (3) classes of arbitrary detention, the first of which is Art. 124, the epigraph is arbitrary detention. Who is the offender? Opening statement of Art. 124, any public officer or employee. But make no mistake about this – not all public officers or employees may be held liable for arbitrary detention. Only public officers vested with authority to detain or order the detention of persons accused of crime like police officers, agents of the law, judges and mayors. If the detention is perpetrated by other public officers, the crime committed is not arbitrary detention, but illegal detention under Art. 267 or Art. 268 of the RPC. Here, the public officer or employee detains a person without legal grounds. Meaning, the act of the public officer or employee is illegal from the beginning. Please take note of the words “without legal grounds”, meaning no probably cause. In warrantless arrest or lawful warrantless arrest, there must be probable cause. If there is none, then the arrest and detention are illegal. When is there a detention? When a person is placed in confinement or there is restraint on his person. I’d like to emphasize the second – restraint because restraint here is the essence of arbitrary detention. “Without legal grounds” – there are legal grounds for detaining a person.

Arbitrary detention may be committed through imprudence.

The law does not fix any minimum period of detention. It may be three minutes, three hours, three days. The penalty varies. If the detention has not exceeded three days, if the detention has continued more than three days but not more than fifteen days, if the detention has continued for more than 15 days but not more than six months or if the detention shall have exceeded six months.

There are legal grounds for detaining a person under Art. 124 – commission of a crime, violent insanity or any other ailment requiring compulsory confinement.

Art. 125 – Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities. Delivery here does not mean physical delivery of the person detained. Deliver here means filing of a criminal action in court. Detention here is legal from the beginning. It became illegal after the lapse of a certain period. The law says “public officer or employee who shall detain any person for some legal ground” meaning there is lawful warrantless arrest, there is probable cause to effect a warrantless arrest, but the public officer or employee failed to deliver the person arrested to the proper judicial authorities, meaning no case was filed within the following periods: twelve (12) hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by light penalties, or their equivalent; eighteen (18) hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by correctional penalties, or their equivalent and thirty-six (36) hours, for crimes, or offenses punishable by afflictive or capital penalties, or their equivalent. And do not forget under the Anti-Terrorism Law, how many days? 3 days (72 hours).

There are rights of persons arrested under custodial interrogation or detained. There is a special law. In addition to right to remain silent, right to counsel, a person detained and arrested has a right to be visited by a member of the family, right to be visited by a doctor or physician, right to be visited by a priest or minister of the gospel or imam, in the case of Muslims, and other rights under said special law.

Now if the offender here is a private person, the crime is illegal detention. Suppose, a police officer saw a person walking briskly and then looking side by side and he was arrested. He was asked in court, of course, he was

cross examined, “why did you arrest the accused?” Answer: “Because he looked suspicious. What do you mean by “he looked suspicious?” When arrested, there was shabu. That is a classic case of arbitrary detention – no probable cause. But suppose there are facts and circumstances in support of the claim of the police officer that that guy really committed a crime. He arrested the accused. He turned out to be innocent. Is the police officer liable for arbitrary detention? The answer is no because there was probable cause but it turned out to be false. In other words, if the police officer is in good faith, he is not liable criminally or administratively. So what is the meaning of this phrase “shall fail to deliver such person to the proper judicial authorities?” In many cases, the Supreme Court said, “it does not consist in the physical delivery but in making an accusation or charge or filing of information against the person arrested with the corresponding court or judge.” If there is warrantless arrest, the procedure is to conduct an inquest investigation. What is the purpose of inquest to be conducted by the prosecutor? The purpose is to ascertain whether there was probable cause for effecting warrantless arrest.

“Proper judicial authorities” mean courts of justice or judges of said courts. Remember under the Anti-Terrorism Law, the suspect must be brought to the residence of the judge if the courts are not open. There are periods to be remembered here – 12, 18, 36. Suppose the police officer arrests and detains a person on top of a mountain and when they came down, there was flood. They could not cross. Three (3) days have passed and there was still flood. Is he justified in releasing the suspect because it’s already more than 36 hours? The answer is no. You have to consider several factors in computing the number of hours. So for the purpose of determining criminal liability, a person or an officer detaining a person for more than the time prescribed by Art. 125, the following shall be considered: means of communication; hour of arrest and other circumstances; if the courts are closed; if the office of the city prosecutor is closed, meaning, you cannot file case against the suspect, you cannot institute any criminal action, then the time when the courts and offices of the prosecutors are closed should not be considered.

Violation of Art. 125 does not affect the legality of confinement and their process issued by a court.

The illegality of detention is not cured by the filing of information in court. In criminal procedure, if your client was illegally arrested, before arraignment, you must file a motion to quash. On what ground? Lack of jurisdiction over the person of the accused. Why lack of jurisdiction? Because he was illegally arrested. If before arraignment, you did not file a motion to quash, the consequence is that you are deemed to have waived your right to question the legality of the arrest.

The prosecutor is not liable. He recommended the filing of information so the judge issued a warrant of arrest. Is he liable if it turned out that the arrest is illegal? The answer is no. The only exception is if he conspired with the public officer in illegally arresting and detaining a suspect.

What is the remedy if a warrant of arrest is illegally or improvidently issued? The remedy is to file a motion to quash the warrant of arrest. Habeas corpus is not the remedy. Certiorari is not the remedy. In fact before you file a petition for certiorari, you must file a motion for reconsideration per Rule 65. So you have to distinguish Art. 124 (Arbitrary Detention) and

Art. 125 (Delay). Arbitrary detention – detention is illegal from the beginning; delay – detention was legal from the beginning but it later became illegal for failure to commence or institute criminal action.

Art. 126 is Delaying release. There are three (3) acts punished: (1) delaying the performance of any judicial or executive order for the release of a prisoner [by the way, only the court can order the release of a prisoner. There is already a decision acquitting the accused for failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt, but the judge did not issue an order of release so the jail warden will not release the accused in the absence of a court order. That’s an example of number one]; (2) unduly delaying the service of notice of such


order to said prisoner [Wherefore judgment is hereby rendered acquitting the accused of the crime charged for failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Second paragraph, the BBRC jail warden is directed to release the accused unless there is any other legal ground for his continued detention. There is an order of release. It was served on the warden but the latter did not release the accused right away. That’s violation of number two, Art. 126]; (3) unduly delaying the proceedings upon any petition for the liberation of such person [there is a petition for the issuance of a writ of amparo, there is a petition for the issuance of writ of habeas corpus. The Rule says the two (2) petitions must be given preference. Number one in the calendar because it involves the life and liberty of a person. The judge may be held liable. There may be compelling reasons not to give preference to those cases. Wardens and jailers are the public officers most likely to violate Art. 126.

Art. 127 – Expulsion. This is a violation of the constitutional right of a citizen – liberty of abode or of changing the same. Only the President of the Philippines can expel or deport an alien under the “act of state” doctrine. Art. 127 says “public officer or employee who, not being authorized by law: (1) shall expel a person from the Philippines; or (2) shall compel such person to change his residence. If these were committed by a private individual, these may be a crime known as grave coercion or maybe grave threats. Are there exceptions to Art. 127? Yes, there are exceptions. You can compel a person to change his residence. What are the cases? (1) expropriation [of course, if the court will issue a writ of possession, it means that the occupant shall be ousted from the premises to place the plaintiff in peaceful position; (2) ejectment; (3) in cases of emergency when public safety requires [When the volcano is about to erupt. You are living at the peak of that volcano and you are not willing to evacuate. You may be forced to evacuate the place

Section Two. — Violation of domicile

There are three (3) crimes known as violation as violation of domicile.

Art. 128 – Violation of domicile proper. There are three [3] acts under Art. 128: (1) entering any dwelling against the will of the owner thereof [this may be express or implied prohibition. If the police officer passed through the window, even if there was not prohibition, that’s violation of domicile. You are not supposed to pass through the window if there is a door. Worse, if the police officer would insist on entering the dwelling, that s violation of domicile; (2) searching papers or other effects found therein without the previous consent of such owner [a police officer who was looking for the suspect knocked on the door and was allowed to enter the house. While inside, he opened the cabinets and got papers. That is violation of domicile. Remember, in the example, he was allowed to enter the house. But then there was violation of domicile because he searched papers and other effects without the previous consent of the owner. It does not matter what kind of paper, harmful or harmless or whatever as long as the search is unauthorized, it is violation of domicile under Art. 128; (3) refusing to leave the premises, after having surreptitiously entered said dwelling, and after having been required to leave the same [a police officer surreptitiously entered the house through the backdoor because it was opened. When the owner saw him, he was asked to leave and he left. Is there violation of domicile? None. There is only unjust vexation. Why? Because the law says “after having been required to leave the same, refused”. He did not refuse. He left when asked to leave. It’s only violation of domicile if he refused to leave.

The offender must be a public officer or employee. If committed by a private person, what is the crime? Trespass to dwelling. But if a private person conspires with a public officer or employee to commit violation of domicile, then the private person is liable.

“Against the will of the owner.” It presupposes opposition or prohibition by the owner whether express or implied. Lack of consent would not suffice. Offender’s entry must be over the objection of the occupant under the first mode.

Art. 129 – Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in the service of those legally obtained. When is a search warrant said to be maliciously obtained? Answer is when there is no probable cause; when the police officer lied to the court [He said there is shabu there, firearms there, but all false. He said so just so he could enter the house. That is search warrant maliciously obtained.

Abuse in the service of those legally obtained. Here, the search warrant was legally obtained. There was probable cause but there was abuse in the service thereof. Procuring search warrant without just cause. The witnesses lied to the judge. What are the crimes committed? Two crimes – search warrants maliciously obtained and perjury. There is no double jeopardy because the law says “in addition to the liability attaching to the offender for the commission of any other offense.” The phrase “in addition to the liability” means that if the public officer lied to the court, he may be held liable for perjury. So, in addition to Art. 129, perjury is committed.

Then next, exceeding his authority. Search warrant says violation of Sec. 11, Art. 2, RA 9165 (possession of dangerous drugs). When they entered the house, they were looking for firearms. That is exceeding authority. Search warrant says “search house no. 5.” they searched nos. 5 and 6. That is exceeding authority.

Using unnecessary severity in executing a search warrant. The search warrant was perfectly valid. There is probable cause. I invite your attention to knock-and-announce rule in political law. If you have a search warrant, you must knock first at the door then introduce yourself as a police officer and show the search warrant. In People vs. Wang, they were Chinese nationals, they were in a hotel room and there were reports that they were in possession of large quantities of drugs. So search warrant was issued. Perfectly valid. You know what they did? When they arrived in the hotel room, they kicked the door so the door was destroyed and seized the dangerous drugs. Convicted by the RTC, acquitted by the Supreme Court. Supreme Court said even if they are not Filipino citizens, they are covered by Art. III of the Constitution. You violated the knock-and-announce rule. Although the search warrant was valid, there is a crime known as abuse in the service of a legally procured search warrant. Although there is an exception to that rule – knock-and-announce - what is that exception? Exception is armed and dangerous.

Another example is severity in executing the search warrant. They are looking for shabu. According to them, the drugs are inside the jars, which are expensive. The said jars are found inside the locked cabinet. Instead of waiting for the owner to get the keys of the lock, the police officers hit the cabinet. That is unnecessary severity. It’s a violation of Art. 129.

There is a test of lack of just cause: whether the affidavit filed in support of the application for search warrant has been drawn in such a manner that perjury could be charged thereon and the affiant be held liable for damages caused.

Art. 130 –Searching domicile without witnesses. Under the Revised Penal Code, Rules of Court, if you search a house and you have a search warrant, there must be witnesses, preferably the owner of the house, the occupant of the house, if none, relatives, if none, two [2] residents of the place. The procedure of the police in the raid in Pasil, the barangay tanod was from Pardo. Wrong! Residents of the place. So searching domicile without witnesses.

In cases where search is proper, but the search was done in the absence of the owner of the place or any member of his family, or in their default, without the presence of two witnesses residing in the same locality.

Section Three. — Prohibition, interruption and dissolution of peaceful meetings

Art. 131 – Prohibition, interruption and dissolution of peaceful meetings.

Public Assembly Law.

Salient features of the law. If you want to conduct mass action and you want to use government property,


ask permit from the municipal mayor. The municipal mayor is given a certain number of days to act, either to deny or to grant. If the mayor fails to act on the application, then you can conduct peaceful mass action sans any permit. If you are going to conduct mass action in a private place, you only need to ask permission from the owner. The law says “every city or municipality must have a freedom park where you can conduct mass action even without a permit. There’s none in Cebu City. We have a freedom park but the freedom park there is a place where people sell flowers, dried fish. There’s none. Three [3] acts are punished under Art. 131: (1) by prohibiting or interrupting, without legal ground, the holding of a peaceful meeting, or dissolving the same [you know the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and to seek redress of grievances. The meeting must, however, be peaceful. If the meeting is peaceful, it must not be dissolved. Who is the offender? Public officer or employee, who without legal ground.]; (2) hindering any person from joining any lawful association or from attending any of its meetings [self-explanatory]; (3) prohibiting or hindering any person from addressing any petition to the authorities for the correction of abuses or redress of grievances.

The right to peaceful meeting is not absolute. There are many cases – Navarro v. Villegas, Reyes v. CA and other cases.

The offender here must be a stranger, not a participant of a peaceful meeting. Because if he were a participant, he may be liable for violation of Art. 287 – unjust vexation.

Interrupting and dissolving the meeting of municipal council by a public officer is a crime against legislative body, not punished under Art. 131. If there’s a meeting of the Sanggunian and you are making noise, it does not fall under crimes against the fundamental laws of the state.

Section Four. — Crimes against religious worship

Art. 132 – Interruption of religious worship. Any public officer or employee who shall prevent or disturb the ceremonies or manifestations of any religion.

Take note of the meaning of ceremonies or manifestations of any religion.

Qualified interruption if committed with violence or threats. Violence and threats are absorbed in interruption of religious worship.

Art. 133 – Offending the religious feelings. Take note that this is the only crime under Art. 133 where a private person may be held liable. It says any person, not public officer or employee. The law says “shall be imposed upon anyone”, not necessarily public officer or employee, “in a place devoted to religious worship or during the celebration of any religious ceremony shall perform acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful.” Place devoted to religious worship. It is not necessary that there is a religious ceremony going on. Religious ceremonies are those acts performed outside of a church like processions. Acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful, meaning, the acts must be directed against religious practice or dogma or ritual for the purpose of ridicule, smocking or scoffing at or attempting to damage an object of religious veneration.

There must be deliberate intent to hurt the feelings of the faithful. If there is none, then the crime may be committed under other provisions of the Revised Penal Code.

Short Quiz

1-3. Give at least three (3) predicate crimes of terrorism. Piracy, mutiny, rebellion, insurrection, coup d’etat, murder, kidnapping, serious illegal detention, crimes involving destruction, law on arson, toxic substances, anti-hijacking, anti-piracy

4. What is the lifetime or effective period of a Court of Appeals order authorizing surveillance of terrorist suspects and interception and recording of their communications? 30 days maximum

5. Who shall have custody of intercepted and recorded communications of terrorist suspects? Authorizing division of the CA

6. If a suspected terrorist is legally arrested without warrant, within what period should he be charged in court? 3 days (72 hours)

7. What is the duty of the police or law enforcement personnel before detaining a person suspected of committing the crime of terrorism? Present him to the judge

8. What is the effective period of court authorization to examine and obtain information on bank deposits, assets, etc. and records of suspected terrorist? 30 days

9. How much shall be paid to a suspected terrorist if his bank deposits, assets or funds were seized but the charges against him were dismissed? Php500,000.00

10. The accused was charged with terrorism with insurrection as the predicate crime. If he is acquitted of the crime of terrorism, may he be charged of insurrection? No

Useful notes (Starting from Art. 124):

Is it necessary that the public officer be a police officer for him to be held liable for arbitrary detention? No. It is important, however, that the public officer must be vested with the authority to detain or order the detention of persons accused of crime. A treasurer is a public officer. If he arrests and detains a person without legal ground or grounds, he is not liable for arbitrary detention but for serious illegal detention.

Arbitrary detention vs. Illegal detention

Arbitrary detention vs. Unlawful arrest

In arbitrary detention, the offender is a public officer or employee possessed with authority to make arrests; in unlawful arrest, the offender may be any person, public officer or employee, or private person.

Most important is, what is the purpose? In arbitrary detention, the purpose for detaining the offended party is to deny him of his liberty, restraint of liberty; in unlawful arrest, the purpose is to accuse the offended party of a crime he did not commit, to deliver the person to the proper authority and to file necessary charges in a way trying to incriminate him. Almost always, there is incriminating innocent person plus unlawful arrest. Usual cause for arbitrary detention is arrest without warrant.

Astorga v. People decided on Oct. 1, 2003. The mayor of a municipality in his capacity as mayor connived with other persons and detained DENR employees without legal and valid grounds by not allowing them to leave the municipality. In fact, the victims were allowed to go down from the house they were brought, but they were not allowed to leave the barangay. So the mayor was charged with the crime of arbitrary detention. He argued that he cannot be made liable because the victims were not kept in an enclosure. In fact, the victims or offended parties were free to go out from the house where they were confined. Supreme Court said arbitrary detention because the essence of the crime is restraint of liberty. Supreme Court said arbitrary detention exists even if the victims were not kept in an enclosure. In establishing the intent to deprive the victim of his liberty, it is not necessary that he be kept within an enclosure to restrict her freedom of locomotion. 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. If the acts and actuations of the accused can produce such fear in the mind of the victim sufficient to paralyze the latter to the extent that the victim is compelled to limit his own actions and movements in accordance with the wishes of the accused then the victim is, for all intents and purposes, detained against his will.

If a person is arrested pursuant to a warrant of arrest, within what period should the police officer turnover the arrested person to the judicial authority? Actually, there is no time limit. The Rules of Court only say


“after the arrest, the arrestee should be turned over to the nearest police station or jail. No period is fixed by the court.

What is the essence of the crime of expulsion? Essence is coercion. If committed by a private person, it is coercion. If committed by a public officer, it’s expulsion.

If any of the punishable acts under Art. 127 is committed by private person, what crime can he be made responsible for? According to majority of the authorities, grave coercion. See also Villavicencio v. Lucban.

What is the crime committed if aliens are deported without an order of the President or the Commissioner of the BI? The crime committed is expulsion.

Who has the authority to order a person to change his residence? Only the courts by final judgment.

Are the provisions of Art. 128 – violation of domicile – applicable if the occupant of the premises is not the owner? The answer is yes. It would be sufficient if the inhabitant is the lawful occupant, using the premises as his dwelling although he is not the owner of the place.

Art. 131 – Prohibition, interruption, dissolution (PID) – to be held liable it is necessary that the offender be a stranger, not a participant of the meeting that has been interrupted and dissolved. If the offender is a participant of the meeting he is liable for unjust vexation.

If the application for the permit to peaceably assemble is arbitrarily denied, what crime is committed (under the Public Assembly Law)?

What is the distinction between PID (prohibition, interruption or dissolution) from tumults and other disturbances of public order (Art. 153)?

In Art. 131, PID ((prohibition, interruption or dissolution), the public officer is not a participant of the meeting; he is a third party. Under tumults, the public officer is a participant of the assembly. PID, committed by public officer; tumults, offender need not be a public officer.

Offending religious feelings. Art. 133 is the only crime against fundamental laws of the state that may be committed not only by a public officer but also by a private person.

What are religious ceremonies covered by Art. 132 and 133? They are those religious acts performed outside of a church.

What is the meaning of “notoriously offensive’? Offense or feeling is judged from complainant’s point of view. There must be intent to hurt the feelings of the faithful.

Title Three: CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER

There are twenty-four (24) crimes against public order.

Chapter one is rebellion, coup d’etat, sedition, disloyalty. Subject of several debates, is there complex crime of coup d’etat with rebellion. It’s discussed by some authors.

Art. 134 is rebellion or insurrection. Actually, insurrection here is misplaced. There’s no word insurrection in the 1987 Constitution. Committed by rising publicly and taking arms against the government. What is the purpose? There are two [2] purposes. (1) Remove from the allegiance of said government or its laws the territory, etc. or any body of land, etc.; (2) Deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, wholly or partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives.

Rebellion is a political crime. Why political? Because the object is to change the political order of society. Take note public uprising, taking arms against the government. But make not mistake about rebellion. Not all those who take arms against the government will be spared from prosecution because in rebellion, there are armed and unarmed components (spies, couriers, nurses, doctors, etc.) who may not have been engaged in actual

combat against the forces of the government. If the unarmed components conspired with those who directly take up arms or engage in combat against the forces of the government, they are equally liable.

Rebellion is a continuing crime. One of the cases, Pumil v. Ramos. An NPA was recuperating in the hospital because he suffered gunshot wounds. He unarmed. He was arrested by police officers. He said “what crime did I commit?” Supreme Court said “rebellion is a continuing crime.” You cannot split several acts of the accused and file several cases of rebellion. If you fire one thousand bullets, there is only one crime – rebellion. If you ambush in Leyte then you go to Samar, then to Bohol, continuing crime. Only one crime – rebellion.

Take note of the purposes because we have to distinguish rebellion from coup d’etat. We should know what the purpose of the offenders in coup d’etat is.

Rebellion and insurrection are not synonymous. The purpose of rebellion is overthrow of the government. Insurrection, to effect some change of minor importance or to prevent the exercise of governmental authority with respect to particular matters or subjects. If the EDSA, so-called revolution, failed, the crime is not rebellion, but insurrection only, but it succeeded.

Nature of the crime of rebellion, crime of masses or multitude. Coup d’etat can be committed by a single person. Only one may commit coup d’etat. Actual clash of arms and the forces of government, not necessary to convict the accused who is in conspiracy with others actually takings arms against the government. There are armed and unarmed components.

You should know the purpose or motive of uprising. If the motive is personal, not political, it is not rebellion. It may be kidnapping, murder, homicide or arson.

Rebellion vs. Treason

If the act of levying war against the government is to give aid or comfort to the enemy, the crime is treason. If otherwise, then it’s rebellion.

Never mind the distinction between rebellion and subversion because Republic Act 1700, the Anti-Subversion Law, as amended by Batas Pambansa 885, was already repealed.

Is there complex crime of rebellion and common crimes? The jurisprudence still remains. People v. Hernandez, Enrile v. Salazar. Others contend that rebellion can be complexed with common crimes like Boado, Ortega and others. But we should follow the Supreme Court decision – Enrile v. Salazar.

Art. 134-A – Coup d’etat. “Coup” means swift. How committed? Swift attack accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth. That’s the mode of attack. Rebellion, rising publicly and taking up arms. More or less protracted war, prolonged. Why swift? Because offenders are insiders. They may even be inside Malacanang. They have positions in the government. Only military officers and policemen can commit coup d’etat with or without civilian support. Coup d’ etat – swift. Rebellion – protracted. Mode? Rebellion – rising publicly and taking up arms. Coup d’ etat – swift attack. Directed against whom? Against duly constituted authorities of the Republic of the Philippines or any military camp or installation, communication network, public utilities or other facilities needed for the exercise and continued possession of power. Rebellion – crime of the multitude or the masses. It’s a mass movement. There is a mass action. Coup d’ etat – the law says, “singly or simultaneously carried out anywhere in the Philippines by any person or persons.” Can be committed by one person. If I were the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces or the Sec. of National Defense, I’ll arm myself with a 45 caliber pistol. I will enter the room of the President, “Mr. President, I’m taking over. The armed forces is with me.” That’s coup d’ etat. Swift. Why? He is an insider. That is the essence of coup d’ etat. In the case of Honasan v. Panel of Investigators, the Supreme Court, through Jusitce Ynarez-Santiago, ”coup d’ etat can only be committed by members of the military or police or holding public office or employment, with or without civilian support. Coup d’


etat consists mainly of the military personnel and public officers and employees, seizing the controlling levers of the government. What are the controlling levers? Communications network, public utilities, television, radio, etc. Belonging to the military or police or holding any public office or employment, with or without civilian support or participation. And what is the purpose? Purpose is to seize and diminish state power. It does not necessarily mean replacement of the system of government. Coup d’ etat is a crime committed in relation to office. Which court has jurisdiction? According to Ynarez-Santiago, only Sandiganbayan. But who will conduct the preliminary investigation? In the case of Honasan v. Panel of Investigators, DOJ or Ombudsman may conduct preliminary investigation. The responsibility to conduct preliminary investigation is a shared responsibility, meaning, concurrent.

Art. 135 – Penalties. When the rebellion, insurrection, or coup d'etat shall be under the command of unknown leaders, any person who in fact directed the others, spoke for them, signed receipts, etc. or performed similar acts, on behalf of the rebels shall be deemed a leader. So penalty depends upon leadership and participation.

Political crimes v. Common crimes.

Political – directly aimed against political order.

Art. 136 – Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d'etat, rebellion or insurrection. If X, Y, Z, W and 100 others conspired to commit rebellion, etc., they’re already liable under Art. 136 even if they did not commit overt acts of rebellion. If they conspired and took up arms publicly or rise publicly and take arms against the government, the crime is not only conspiracy, it’s rebellion. In conspiracy, there must be no rebellion committed. In proposal, the persons to whom rebellion is proposed must not commit rebellion. Because if the person who proposes rebellion is so effective and then after proposing rebellion, the people committed rebellion, he is principal by induction in the crime of rebellion, insurrection or coup d’etat. He is not only liable for proposal under Art. 136. In proposal, there must be no overt act of rebellion. Merely agreeing and deciding to rise publicly and take up arms, etc. for purposes of rebellion is already subject to punishment.

Disloyalty of public officers or employees. From the President down to the barangay captain. They take their oath of office to defend the Constitution, obey the laws and the duly constituted authorities. There is only one duly constituted authority. If you join the rebels, then you are disloyal because the rebels are not the duly constituted authorities. There is no crime of disloyalty if there is no rebellion. The law says “public officers or employees who have failed to resist a rebellion by all the means in their power.” That’s number one. (1) Failing to resist a rebellion by all the means in their power. Offenders – public officer or employee. There’s a mayor, 20 policemen with machine gun, m14, armalite, tank. When attacked with 15 NPAs, they ran away. That is disloyalty. Why? They failed to resist the rebellion by all the means in their power. Another example: NPAs entered the town. The mayor was told to continue acting as the mayor. There is only one duly constituted authority. You are committing number two, (2) continuing to discharge the duties of their offices under the control of the rebels. That’s disloyalty under Art. 137. Third act (3) accepting appointment to office under them. Rebel: “What is your rank?” Offender: Sergeant. Rebel: I will make you lieutenant. Thus, he became lieutenant under the rebels. That is disloyalty for accepting appointment to office under them. Another example: NPAs sent the mayor a letter informing him that they would attack in the evening. The mayor told them not to worry for he would order all the policemen to R and R. What crime did he commit? Rebellion, not only disloyalty. Why? Because he conspired with the rebels in committing rebellion. According to Reyes, the crime of disloyalty of public officers presupposes the existence of rebellion by other persons. The offender must not be in conspiracy with the rebels because if he were in conspiracy with the rebels, then he is not only liable for disloyalty but also for the crime of rebellion.

Art. 138 – Inciting to rebellion or insurrection. Any person who, without taking arms or being in open hostility against the Government, shall incite others to the

execution of any of the acts mentioned in Art. 134. If he participated in taking arms against the government or if he was in open hostility against the government, then he is not liable for inciting to rebellion only but he is liable for rebellion. “Shall incite others.” If after inciting, the people committed rebellion, he is not liable for inciting to rebellion only, but liable for rebellion as principal by induction. How? By means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or other representations tending to the same end. The inciter must not be a participant because if he were a participant, then he is liable for rebellion. Rebellion or insurrection does not result because if it resulted in rebellion or insurrection, then he is liable for rebellion. The incitement or the inciting to rebellion must be premeditated. There must be purpose to incite. If outburst only, the crime is not inciting to rebellion, some other crime.

Inciting to rebellion must be distinguished from proposal to commit rebellion. Rebellion should not be committed.

Art. 139 – Sedition. By the way, coup d’etat and rebellion are political crimes. Sedition is not necessarily political. Object may be political or social. Act of hate or revenge even against private persons. Sedition, how committed? Rising publicly and tumultuously. No words “taking arms.” In order to attain by force, intimidation, or by other means outside of legal methods. Sedition, even if without force or intimidation, but there are other means outside of legal methods, the offender is liable for sedition under any of these numbers 1-5.

Rebellion – rising publicly, taking up arms against the government. Coup d’etat – swift attack. Sedition – rising publicly and tumultuously. In sedition, the purpose is not to change the government; it’s to create disorder, commotion, chaos, etc.

First act (1) to prevent the promulgation or execution of any law or the holding of any popular election [before, former Mayor Borres was sued for sedition because he was shouting at the radio that those in COMELEC are “cheaters.” “Bomb them!” “Throw grenade, dynamite at them.” He wanted to prevent the holding of election]; (2) to prevent the National Government, or any provincial or municipal government or any public officer from freely exercising its or his functions, or prevent the execution of any administrative order [it must be public and tumultuous. If against public officer or employee, but not public and tumultuous, direct assault. Direct assault has the same aim as sedition minus tumultuous uprising]; (3) to inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the person or property of any public officer or employee [the rubble-rouser then said “This government is a cheater. There’s one bodega of NFA rice, but the rice were just stolen by people in NFA. Let’s attack them! Let’s destroy the door of that bodega and we’ll get the rice!” That is sedition, if the act is characterized as tumultuous]; (4) to commit, for any political or social end, any act of hate or revenge against private persons or any social class [Tenant: “Our landlord, our haciendero, we were not given our rightful share. Their bodega is full of rice but ours is only root crops. Let’s attack their bodega! Let’s kill our landlord!” But the landlord was not around. That is sedition. Act of hate or revenge against private person. Not only public officers or employees or government could be offended parties, but also private persons]; (5) to despoil, for any political or social end, any person, municipality or province, or the National Government, of all its property or any part thereof [same problem, same situation: if the tenants attacked the bodega of the landlord and took the rice, it is sedition because the law says “to despoil.” What is the meaning of “to despoil”? To rob. For any political or social end, any person, (may be private person), of all its property or any part thereof. Nature of crime – raising of commotions or disturbances in the state. Ultimate objective – violation of public peace.

What distinguishes rebellion from sedition is the objective or purpose. If the purpose is to overthrow the government, it’s rebellion. In sedition, it is sufficient that the public uprising is tumultuous.

Sedition must be distinguished from treason. Sedition cannot be committed by one person. It’s rising publicly and tumultuously. Tumultuous means more than three persons armed with means of violence.


Art. 140 – Penalty for sedition.

Art. 141 – Conspiracy to commit sedition. Mere conspiracy is punished. X, Y, Z, W conspired to commit sedition – liable. There is no proposal to commit sedition, limited to conspiracy only.

JUNE 08, 2010

Quiz:

1. A group of civilians swiftly attack the Supreme Court, Congress, Office of the President etc. for the purpose of seizing or diminishing state power. Is this coup d'etat? NO.

What is the reason? Because rebellion is directed against the Executive and Congress, not Judiciary.

2. Armed rebels by means of speeches, proclamation, writing and etc incited the people to commit rebellion. What is the answer? Rebellion. Remember armed rebel. Not inciting to rebellion because in inciting to rebellion, the inciter must not be a rebel. Di ba without taking arms against the government by means of speeches.

Mary Ann: Sir, it's not rebellion, you mentioned of armed rebel, one rebel, but rebellion is a crime of masses, you did not mention that there were other rebels. So my answer was no crime.Judge: Ah, there is a presumption that he was in conspiracy with the other rebels. Armed rebel, meaning, a participant in the crime of rebellion.

Mary Ann: But there was no mention that there were other rebels.

Judge: I presumed, ok, just give consideration, inciting to rebellion.

3. yes or no? yes (not discussed)

4. While congress was in session, a policeman arrested a Congressman with a pending warrant of arrest for homicide, is the police liable for parliamentary immunity? No. Because the peanalty for homicide is reclusion temporal. Mulapas na gani sa pricion correccional, wala nay parliamentary immunity. (If the penalty of the crime for which the person is accused of exceeds pricion correccional, there is no longer parliamentary immunity)

R.A. 8294: ILLEGAL POSSESSION

In relation to rebellion, sedition, coup d’état, we have to study P.D. 1866 as amended by R.A. 8294 and again amended lately. P.D. 1866 or R.A. 8294 is a decree who defined the laws on illegal and unlawful possession, manufacture, dealing in acquisition.

There are two kinds of firearms under this law: 1. High -powered and 2. Low-powered.

There are many Supreme Court decisions involving R.A. 8294. The last is People vs Selino. Before Selino, People vs wanpan lajalan.

Section 1: Any person who shall unlawfully manufacture, deal in, acquire, dispose or possess any low-powered firearm. (What is the meaning of low-powered firearm?) such as rimfire handgun, .380 or .32 and other firearm of similar, part of firearm, ammunition or machinery, tool or instrument used or intended to be used in the manufacture of any firearm or ammunition

What are the elements of illegal possession of firearm? The following:

1. Possession. May be constructive or actual (physical).

e.g. You have a house, there is a firearm inside your house, that's constructive possession. You have a car, a firearm is found in the baggage compartment, not in your personal possession, since you are the owner of the car, in evidence that you're the owner, you must be in control and possession of the thing you own, that's constructive possession.

Personal possession, in your pocket, in your wasteline, in a bag that you personally carry.

2. Animus possedendi. Intent to possess. Not criminal intent because R.A. 8294 is mala in se, but mala prohibita. Why is that important? Because if somebody place a firearm in your bag, you may be in possession of it but you have no intent to possess, you are not therefore liable.

What is the length of time before a person can be charged of illegal possession of firearm? 1 minute? 2 minutes? 1 day? Suppose 3 persons while walking on the street found a .38 caliber revolver and Mr. X picked it up and 3 policemen arrived and due to m\Mr. X's panic, he passed the revolver to his companion (Mr. Y), and passed it again to their other companion (Mr. Z). And the police arrested Mr. Z (last touch) for illegal possession. There was actually no intent to possess or animus possedendi. If possession is casual, no intent to possess, or you're just checking it out of curiosity, that's not illegal possession of firearm.

3. Lack of license or authority. There are two kinds of licenses. License to carry outside of residence and license to maintain a firearm in your residence. You may have a license to maintain a firearm in your residence but no license to carry a firearm outside. That's illegal possession of firearm. If the license is expired, it's illegal possession of firearm.

Lack of license or authority. It's the Firearms and Explosives Division of the PNP who is authorized to issue license. You want to get a certification that you are a licensed firearm holder? Secure it from the Firearms and Explosives Section. It is a negative element; lack of license or authority. So the general rule, the prosecution must prove the third element, negative element. Because in a long line of decisions, many accused were acquitted for failure of the prosecution to prove the third element. How do you prove the negative element? Present a witness. A witness will testify, and when you ask him whether or not he has a license, what was the answer? No. Then you have already proven the negative element of lack of license or authority. Better still, you secure a certification from the Firearms and Explosives Section of the PNP to the effect that the accused is not a licensed firearm holder. Previous decision, paltik, you need not prove lack of lack of license or authority. Latest edition, 2009, Supreme Court changed its previous decision, even if its paltik, you present evidence that the accused had no license or authority. Is there an exception to the general rule that the prosecution has to prove lack of license or authority? YES. If you possess armalite or M-14, prosecution need not prove the negative element because no civilian is authorized to possess M-14 or even hand grenade.

In another case, the accused is charged of violation of R.A. 8294, possession of explosives. Convicted. He argued in the Supreme Court that it's not an explosive beacause it was not tested. Supreme Court said that it need not be tested to be considered an explosive.

In illegal possession of firearm, ownership is not an element. People vs de Gracia. Sergeant de Gracia was guarding a small building where the firearms of the ram were placed. Hundreds of firearms were placed there by Coronel Honasan and Coronel Matillano. He was guarding the building; he was arrested and was charged with illegal possession. He said "Im not the owner, the owners are Coronel Honasan and Coronel Matillano". Supreme Court said that ownership is immaterial.

Then Ladjalang. What is this case of Ladjalang? In Ladjalang, the Supreme Court said that If the firearm is used in committing another crime, you cannot prosecute hm foe illegal possession of firearm. Even if the other crime is punishable by arresto menor only, such as unjust vexation, if you charge against a person unjust vexation, you cannot prosecute him for illegal possesssion of firearm because another crime was committed. The Supreme Court was criticized by police officers. So it changed its decision. In two years time gi-usab. People vs Selino. you have to prove the other crime first before you drop the illegal possession of firearm case. Then another case, if you possess an unlicensed firearm during election period, two cases: illegal possession and violation of gun ban. So you cannot drop illegal possession. If the


prosecution can prove gun ban, illegal possession of firearm can be dismissed.

So low-powered firearm, jurisdiction MTC, reason: penalty is 6 years and below. Please take note, provided that no other crime was committed in paragraph 1 because if another crime was committed, i repeat, the illegal possession case will be dismissed but you have to prove first that another crime was committed. We thought before that if you possess barrel, trigger, or if a gun is no longer working, there is no illegal possession because the firearm is not complete. Wrong. Even if you have in you only barrel or trigger, you can be charged of illegal possession. Example, you have a trigger of 357 magnum, a high powered firearm, higher penalty. But then to accommodate Robin Padilla, Senator Revilla Sr. passed a law, provided no other crime was committed, reducing the penalty, nagawas si Robin Padilla. So this is called the Robin Padilla Law, R.A. 8294. So now, if you have a barrel or trigger of 357 magnum, what is the crime committed? Illegal possession of low-powered firearm. Ang trigger, trigger of a high-powered firearm is also considered illegal possession of low-powered firearm because the laws says in defining low-powered firearm,

"who shall unlawfully manufacture, deal in, acquire, dispose, or possess any low powered firearm, such as rim fire handgun, .380 or .32 and other firearm of

similar firepower, part of firearm, ammunition, or machinery, tool or instrument used or intended to be used in the manufacture of any firearm or ammunition"

so even if it's only a barrel or trigger of a firearm or even a revolver, that is punishable under section 1, part of firearm. And if what is involved is only a part of a high-powered firearm, considered low-powered firearm.

Second paragraph (Section 1) is high-powered: RTC. If the firearm is classified as high-powered firearm:

"which includes those with bores bigger in diameter than .38 caliber and 9 millimeter such as caliber .40, .41, .44, .45 and also lesser calibered firearms but considered powerful such as caliber .357 and caliber .22 center-fire magnum and other firearms with firing capability of full automatic and by burst of two or three: Provided, however, That no other crime was committed by the person arrested."

meaning, if the accused used an unlicensed firearm and another crime was committed, he cannot be prosecuted for illegal possession of firearm but the latest decision is Selino, you have to prove the other crime. If homicide or murder is committed you cannot prosecute the accused for illegal possession of firearm because such use of an unlicensed firearm is considered as an aggravating circumstance absorbed in homicide or murder.

"If homicide or murder is committed with the use of an unlicensed firearm, such use of an unlicensed firearm shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance." (3rd paragraph, Section 1)

"If the violation of this Sec. is in furtherance of or incident to, or in connection with the crime of rebellion or insurrection, sedition, or attempted coup d'etat, such violation shall be absorbed as an element of the crime of rebellion, or insurrection, sedition, or attempted coup d'etat." (4th paragraph, Section 1)

Because in rebellion, rising publicly and taking arms. Please take note, attempted coup d'etat. Why attempted? Because if the coup d'etat is successful who else would prosecute? They are the ones already in power, why should you prosecute yourself?

"The same penalty 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 paragraphs or willfully or knowingly allow any of them to use unlicensed firearms or firearms without any legal authority to be carried outside of their residence in the course of their employment." (5th paragraph, Section 1)

If you have a security agency and you give unlicensed firearms your guards, you are also liable. Of course you cannot imprison the corporation, so who will be liable? The owner, president, manager, director or other responsible officer.

For carrying licensed firearm, take note, carrying licensed firearm, outside the residence without legal authority, arresto mayor.

"The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon any person who shall carry any licensed firearm outside his residence without legal authority therefor." (6th paragraph, Section 1)

Section 2: Presumption of illegal manufacture of firearms and ammunition (not dicussed)

Section 3: Unlawful manufacture, sale, acquisition, disposition or possession of explosives. This section on explosives is basically the same with firearms, that if used in furtherance furtherance of, or incident to, or in connection with the crime of rebellion, insurrection, sedition or attempted coup d'etat = ABSORBED. If used in murder or homicide = AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE

"Sec. 3. Unlawful manufacture, sale, acquisition, disposition or possession of explosives. — The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal and a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000) shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully manufacture, assemble, deal in, acquire, dispose or possess hand grenade(s), rifle grenade(s), and other explosives, including but not limited to 'pillbox,' 'molotov cocktail bombs,' 'fire bombs,' or other incendiary devices capable of producing destructive effect on contiguous objects or causing injury or death to any person.

"When a person commits any of the crimes defined in the Revised Penal Code or special laws with the use of the aforementioned explosives, detonation agents or incendiary devices, which results in the death of any person or persons, the use of such explosives, detonation agents or incendiary devices shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance.

"If the violation of this Sec. is in furtherance of, or incident to, or in connection with the crime of rebellion, insurrection, sedition or attempted coup d'etat, such violation shall be absorbed as an element of the crimes of rebellion, insurrection, sedition or attempted coup d'etat.

"The same penalty 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 explosives 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 paragraphs."

What is the definition of explosives? Including but not limited to 'pillbox,' 'molotov cocktail bombs,' 'fire bombs,' or other incendiary devices capable of producing destructive effect on contiguous objects or causing injury or death to any person.

Take note that the use of the these explosives, detonation agents or incendiary devices, which results in the death of any person or persons, the use of such explosives, detonation agents or incendiary devices shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance.

Presumption of unlawful manufacture, you just read section 4.

Section 5 is tampering of firearm's serial number. Penalty is prision correccional . Probationable.

"Sec. 5. Tampering of firearm's serial number. — The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully tamper, change, deface or erase the serial number of any firearm.

If there is 357 magnum, high-powered, it has a high penalty. While I was still on practice, we plead to a lesser offense. So what is the lesser offense of illegal possession of firearms? You check P.D. 1866, instead of illegal possession of firearm, plead only tampering of


firearm's serial number. So from 17 years, you have prision correccional, ubos kaayo, then file petition for probation, your client is released.

Section 6 is repacking or altering the composition of lawfully manufactured explosives (not discussed)

Section 7 is unauthorized issuance of authority to carry firearm and ammunition.

Chapter Four: ASSAULT UPON, AND RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO, PERSONS IN AUTHORITY AND THEIR AGENTS

Next is CHAPTER 4: Assault upon and resistance and disobedience to persons in authority and their agents.

Art. 148. Direct assaults. — Any person or persons who, without a public uprising, shall employ force or intimidation for the attainment of any of the purpose enumerated in defining the crimes of rebellion and sedition, or shall attack, employ force, or seriously intimidate or resist any person in authority or any of his agents, while engaged in the performance of official duties, or on occasion of such performance, shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine not exceeding P1,000 pesos, when the assault is committed with a weapon or when the offender is a public officer or employee, or when the offender lays hands upon a person in authority. If none of these circumstances be present, the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period and a fine not exceeding P500 pesos shall be imposed.

Article 148: Direct Assault. If you want to answer correctly, you should know the essence of the crime, you should know the reason behind the law or passage of the law. What is the essence or nature of direct assaults. Direct assault punishes spirit of lawless and contempt or hatred for the authority or the rule of law. You do not respect authority. If there's a police, you know he's a police, serving a warrant of arrest, you disobeyed, then you defy authority. If there's a mayor, enforcing an ordinance and you know he's a mayor, sukol ka, that is direct assault. You do not respect authority. That is the essence of direct assault. If there's a professor of a recognized private school that you don't like, you boxed him, that is direct assault. Other examples: a layer cross-examining, a sherrif serving writ of attachment or writ of execution.

Direct assault may be committed against private persons.In direct assault there may be material consequences, it may result in death, it may result in frustrated homicide, it may result in physical injuries. That is only incidental to the main purpose of lawlessness. or lack of respect. Int he case of Ladjalang, Lagjalang knew that police officers were going to serve a search warrant, he picked up his armalite and fired upon the police officers who served the search warrant. Defiance of law is the spirit behind the doing of the act. So the offender is utterly lawless or is against the law.

The accused are not numerous enough to constitute an uprising, if more than 3 and the uprising is tumultuous, it is sedition, if it is not tumultuous, but the object is rebellion or sedition, it is direct assault. There is an additional penalty for attacking an ambassador or minister, R.A. 75. How do you distinguish direct assaults from ordinary assaults resulting in physical injuries or even death. Direct assaults are crimes against public order, ordinary assaults, under Articles 263-266, crimes against persons, murder, homicide, serious physical injuries, less serious physical injuries, not slight pysical injuries because it is absorbed in direct assault. There are two ways of committing the crime of direct assaults:

1) without public uprising, by employing force or intimidation for the attainment of any of the purposes enumerated in defining the crimes of rebellion and sedition. This may be committed against a private individual, act of hatred or revenge against private persons;

2) without public uprising, by attacking, by employing force, by seriously intimidating or seriously resisting (please take note of the word 'seriously' before intimidating and resisting) any person in authority or any of his agents while engaged in the performance of official

duties or on the occasion of such performance.. So the offended party may be assaulted while engaged in the performance of official duty or by reason of the performance of official duty. If he was assaulted by reason of that official duty, you have to know the motive. If the motive is not because of past performance, it is not direct assault, it may be physical injuries. Example, if a judge who is on his way to his court and a person, while waiting for a taxi, had an altercation resulting to the judge being punched, it is not direct assault because the judge was not in the performance of his official duty, padung pa. Past performance? No. What crime is committed? Of course if there is no intention to kill, physical injuries, it may be serious if a tooth has been removed, deformity. Direct assault may be complexed with other crimes. Direct assault with homicide. While in the performance of official duty, a mayor has been assaulted. He went to a beach resort to enforce and ordinance but he was shot to death by the owner. That's direct assault with homicide. If it's only the knee that has been shot, that's direct assault with physical injuries. What is important is defiance. What is the purpose? If the purpose is to defy the law, defy authority, that is direct assault. Material consequences are only incidental.

If the person assaulted is an agent of a person in authority, the intimidation or resistance must be serious. But if the person assaulted is a person in authority, the degree of force is immaterial. However, the intimidation must be serious. Please take note of the elements of the first form of direct assault. Is it necessary that the offended party in the first form of direct assault be a person in authority or his agent? Article 148 does not seem to require. Then take note of the elements of the second form of direct assault. What is the meaning of 'attack'? It is an offensive or antagonistic movement or action of any kind. What degree of force is required or is necessary? It the offended party is only an agent of a person in authority, the force employed must be of a serious nature. But it need not be serious if the offended party is a person in authority. But the intimidation or resistance must be serious whether the offended party is an agent only or he is a person in authority. The resistance must be active and serious. The intimidation must produce its effect immediately because if the intimidation is not immediate, the crime is not direct assault, it may be grave threat only.

=> Now who is a person in authority? Any person directly vested with jurisdiction whether as an individual or as a member of some court or government corporation, etc. Brgy. Captain, Brgy. Chairman is a person in authoriy. What is the meaning of 'directly vested with jurisdiction'. It means the power or authority to govern and excecute the laws. Governor, mayor are persons in authority. Not all persons in authority are public officers, not all public officers are persons in authority.

Who is an agent of a person in authority? An agent of a person in authority is one who by direct provision of law or by election or by appointment by competent authority is charged with the maintenance of public order and protection and security of life and property (e.g. policemen, brgy tanods).

Third element: 'in the performance of duty or by reason thereof' requires that at the time such assault or intimidation is made upon the person in authority or his agent is engaged in the actual performance of his official duty or at least that the assault or the intimidation is done by reason of the past performance of said duty. Now when a person in authority goes beyond his powers and violate any recognized rights of citizens, then the latter may resist the invasion especially when it is clear and manifest.

Direct assault is committed even if several days has transpired between the performance of duty and the assault. When a person in authority or his agent is the one who provokes and attacks another person, the latter is entitled to defend himself and cannot be liable for direct assault or resistance. Do not forget that in direct assault, the accused must know that the person assaulted is a person in authority or an agent of a person in authority. Why is that important? Because if he knows that he is a person in authority or an agent, and he defies him, that is lawlessness, lack of respect. So knowledge of the accused that the victim is a person in authority or an agent of a person in authority is important. There is no direct assault if the accused did not know that. One other point, this


knowledge must be alleged in the information because this is one of the most important elements in direct assault. If it is alleged in the information, but the prosecution failed to prove that element, the crime is not direct assault but physical injuries only if the victim did not die because physical injuries is included in direct assault as one of the elements.

What is the meaning of the phrase 'on occasion of such performance'? It means that the impelling motive of the attack is the performance of official duty. What is the meaning of the phrase 'on occasion’? It means the cause or by reason of the past performance of past duty even if at the very time of the assault no official duty is being discharged. When is evidence of motive important in direct assault. It is important when the assault is not done in the actual performance of official duty.

Qualified direct assault: 1) committed with weapon 2) offender is a public officer or employee 3) offender lays hand upon a person in authority. Do not forget, the crime of slight physical injuries is absorbed in direct assault. Necessary consequence of the force or violence inherent in all kinds of assault.

Next, Indirect Assault.

Art. 149. Indirect assaults. — The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods and a fine not exceeding P500 pesos shall be imposed upon any person who shall make use of force or intimidation upon any person coming to the aid of the authorities or their agents on occasion of the commission of any of the crimes defined in the next preceding article.

Do not forget there is no indirect assault if there is no direct assault. Any person who shall make use of force or intimidation upon any person coming to the aid of the authorities or their agents on occasion of the commission of any of the crimes defined in Article 148. So here a person in authority or his agent is the victim of the forms of direct assault defined in Article 148 and a person comes to the aid of such authority or his agent and then the offender makes use of force or intimidation upon such person coming to the aid of the person in authority or his agent. Is the crime indirect assault if a private individual who is aiding a policeman in making a lawful arrest is attacked by a person to be arrested? It cannot be indirect assault because the policeman who is being aided is not a victim of direct assault. Is this direct assault? Answer is no. The offended party in indirect assault may be a private person.

Art. 150: Disobedience to summons issued by the National Assembly (Congress), its committees or subcommittees, by the Constitutional Commissions, its committees, subcommittees or divisions.

Here a person person who, having been duly summoned to attend as a witness before the National Assembly, (Congress), its special or standing committees and subcommittees, the Constitutional Commissions and its committees, subcommittees, or divisions, or before any commission or committee chairman or member authorized to summon witnesses, refuses, without legal excuse, to obey such summons, or being present before any such legislative or constitutional body or official, refuses to be sworn or placed under affirmation or to answer any legal inquiry or to produce any books, papers, documents, or records in his possession, when required by them to do so in the exercise of their functions. Or has restrain another from attending as a witness, or who shall induce disobedience to a summon or refusal to be sworn by any such body or official.

Please take note of the phrase 'without legal excuse'. If the witness is called to testify but the inquiry is not in aid of legal legislation, but in aid of re-election, then he will not be held liable under Article 150. The person who disobeys may also be held in contempt of the legislative body.

Article 151: Resistance and disobedience to a person in authority or the agents of such person.

Any person who not being included in the provisions of the preceding articles shall resist or seriously disobey any person in authority, or the agents of such person, while engaged in the performance of official

duties. The phrase 'by reason of past performance' is no longer found here. So take note of that. What is the concept? Failure to comply with orders directly issued by the authorities in the exercise of their official duties. The person in authority or his agent must be in the actual performance of his official duty. Because there can be no resistance or disobedience when there is nothing to resist or disobey. The disobedience consist in the failure or refusal to obey a direct order from the authority or his agent. A person cannot be guilty of disobedience to an order which is not addressed to him.

Paragraph 2 is simple imprudence. This is disobedience which is not of a serious nature.

When the disobedience to an agent of a person in authority is not of a serious nature, the penalty of arresto menor or a fine ranging from 10 to P100 pesos shall be imposed upon the offender.

You should distinguish direct assault from resistance or serious disobedience. When the attack or employment of force is not deliberate, the crime is only resistance or disobedience.

Art. 152. Persons in authority and agents of persons in authority; Who shall be deemed as such. — Any person directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as an individual or as a member of some court or governmental corporation, board, or commission, shall be deemed a person in authority. A barrio captain and a barangay chairman shall also be deemed a person in authority.

Meaning, power to govern, execute the laws or administer justice. Teachers, professors, persons charged with supervision of public or duly recognized private schools, colleges snd universities shall be deemed persons in authority. Also lawyers in the actual performance of their professional duties or on the occasion of such perfomance.Please take note that teachers, professors, etc are persons in authority only for purposes of direct assault, but not for indirect assault. Under the Local Government Code, punong-barangay, sangguniang memebers and lupon members in their jurisdiction are agents of persons in authority. So, if in one barangay, the Chief Justice of lupong-tagapamayapa is attacked by a respondent because of the performace of him being the lupong-tagapamayapa, the crime is direct assault.

Chapter Five: PUBLIC DISORDERS

What is the essence of the crime? It is creating public disorder. This crime is brought about by creating serious disturbances in public places, public buildings and even in private places where public functions or performances are held. Like Cebu Coliseum, it i a privately-owned place where public performances are held, so if a person creates disorder, he may be held liable under this chapter.There are four crimes classified under public disorders.

1) Art. 153. Tumults and other disturbance of public orders; Tumultuous disturbance or interruption liable to cause disturbance. — There are 5 acts punished under this article:

a. causing any serious disturbance in a public place, office, or establishment, b. interrupting or disturbing public performances, functions or gatherings, or peaceful meetings, if the act is not included in the provisions of Articles 131 and 132. c. making any outcry tending to incite rebellion or sedition or in such place shall display placards or emblems which provoke a disturbance of the public order. d. displaying placards or emblems which provoke a disturbance of the public order in such place. e. burying with pomp the body of a person who has been legally executed.

The serious disturbance here must be planned or intended. If not planned or intended, the crime may only be punished under Article !55: Alarms. If the act of disturbing or interrupting a meeting or religious ceremony is committed by public officers, they're participants therein, Article 153 should be applied.


How do you distinguish Article 131 from Article 153? In Article 131, the public officer is not a participant while in Article 153, he is a participant. In Article 131, the offender is a public officer, in Article 153, he need not be a public officer.

What is the meaning of 'outcry'? In inciting to sedition or rebellion, there is intention to incite the people to commit sedition or rebellion. Here 'outcry', means to shout subversive or provocative words tending to stir up the people to obtain by means of words or violence any of the objects of sedition or rebellion. So how do you distinguish inciting to sedition or rebellion from public disorder? In inciting to sedition or rebellion, the act must be done with the idea aforethought of inducing his hearers or readers to commit the crime of sedition or rebellion, if the outcry is more or less an unconscious outburst which, although rebellious or seditious in nature, is not intentionally calculated to induce others to commit rebellion or sedition, it is only public disorder.

What is he meaning of the term 'tumultuos'? More than three persons are armed with means of violence.

2) Art. 154. Unlawful use of means of publication and unlawful utterances. There are four acts punished:

a. publishing or causing to be published as news any false news which may endanger the public order, or cause damage to the interest or credit of the State;

b. encouraging disobedience to the law or to the constituted authorities or praise, justify, or extol any act punished by law;

c. maliciously publishing or causing to be published any official resolution or document without proper authority, or before they have been published officially; or

d. printing, publishing, or distributing or causing to be printed, published, or distributed books, pamphlets, periodicals, or leaflets which do not bear the real printer's name, or which are classified as anonymous.

3) Art. 155. Alarms and scandals. Warning, there is only one crime here, alarms and scandals, it's not separate. Scandal here does not refer to immorality. The essence here is disturbance of the tranquility and public peace. The 'scandal' here is not grave scandal under crime against public morals.

a. discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or other explosives calculated to cause alarm or danger;

b. instigate or take an active part in any charivari or other disorderly meeting offensive to another or prejudicial to public tranquility;

c. while wandering about at night or while engaged in any other nocturnal amusements, shall disturb the public peace; or

d. while intoxicated or otherwise, shall cause any disturbance or scandal in public places, provided that the circumstances of the case shall not make the provisions of Article 153 applicable.

If the purpose is to disturb the tranquillity of the community, it's alarms and scandals. If you discharge a firearm, you shot the foot, without intending to kill the person, that's discharge of firearm. But if you discharge a firearm with the intention to kill the person, however you missed, that's attempted homicide or murder as the case may be. Was shot but the wound was not fatal-attempted only; was shot and the wound was fatal but did not die-frustrated; person died-murder or homicide as the case may be.

Instigating or taking an active part in any charivari. E.g. Noise barrage.

Any person who while wandering about at night or while engaged in any other nocturnal amusements. If you’re living inside a subdivision and you have a neighbour who is practicing band disturbing the entire subdivision, it's alarms and scandals. But if it's only you who's being disturbed by your neighbour, that's not alarms and scandals because it's not the entire community that's affected. So what is the crime? Unjust vexation only because the noise created annoyance.

In alarms and scandals, the offense must be caused in a public place or must affect public peace but

the disturbance must only be of a minor degree, it is not minor, that is public disorder already. It is not tumultuous.

Under paragraph 1, the discharge should not be aimed at a person. If a person discharge a firearm in the middle of the night without a particular target or subject, that's alarms and scandals. But if there's a purpose such as to threaten, as I said it's discharge of firearm.

'Which produces alarm or danger' means calculated to cause alarm or danger. You follow the Spanish text. If the disturbance is of a serious nature, the case will fall under Article 153: Public disorder, not paragraph 4 of this article.

4) Art. 156. Delivery of prisoners from jails. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person who shall remove from any jail or penal establishment any person confined therein or shall help the escape of such person, by means of violence, intimidation, or bribery. If other means are used, the penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed.

If the escape of the prisoner shall take place outside of said establishments by taking the guards by surprise, the same penalties shall be imposed in their minimum period.

So elements, there is a person confined in jail or penal establishment, he may be a detention prisoner or a convicted prisoner. Take the case of Rolito Go, he escaped, his wife bribed and conspired with the guard on duty and the guard off duty, a driver was already waiting for him outside the jail, he was already convicted at that time. What crime did the wife commit? Delivering prisoner from jail. What crime did Rolito Go commit? Invasion of service of sentence. What crime did the guard on duty commit? Infidelity in the custody of the prisoner. Why infidelity? Because the crime of infidelity can only be committed by a custodian. How about the guard off duty? Delivering prisoner from jail, not for infidelity because he was not the custodian at that time. What crime did the driver commit? Delivering prisoner from jail.

The offender here is usually an outsider. The guard of the jail who is off duty may be held liable for delivering prisoner from jail. Violence, intimidation or bribery is not necessary. Bribery is not the offender's act of receiving a bribe. What other crime was committed in the Rolito Go case? On the part of the wife, in addition to delivering prisoner from jail, corruption of public officer. On the part of the person who received the bribe, the crime is bribery.

A person delivering a prisoner from jail may be held liable as accessory if the crime committed by the prisoner for which he is confined or serving sentence is treason, murder or parricide.

Chapter Six: EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE

There are three acts punished:

1) Art. 157. Evasion of service of sentence. The offender is a convict by final judgment, he is serving sentence which consist in deprivation of liberty, he evades the service of his sentence by escaping during the term of his sentence.

Latest decision on the matter. The judgment of the court has scheduled for promulgation, the accused did not appear, or he may have appeared but later on, he fled or jumped bail, let's say the penalty will prescribe in 10 years. Then he reappeared after 10 years, he was charged evasion of service, his defense was that he can no longer be charged because the penalty has already prescribed. Supreme court said NO because in evasion by escaping which is Article 157, you will begin to count the prescriptive period after the escape, meaning, sentence then in jail/detain then escape. It is only after the escape that the prescriptive period will begin to run. Supreme court said prescription of penalty will not apply because he never served prison. You have to at least be imprisoned, even for an hour, before you escape in order for the prescription of penalty to set in.

2) Art. 158. Evasion of service of sentence on the occasion of disorder, conflagrations, earthquakes, or other


calamities; including mutiny in which he has not participated. A convict who shall evade the service of his sentence, by leaving the penal institution where he shall ha ve been confined, on the occasion of disorder resulting from a conflagration, earthquake, explosion, or similar catastrophe, or during a mutiny in which he has not participated, shall suffer an increase of one-fifth of the time still remaining to be served under the original sentence, which in no case shall exceed six months, if he shall fail to give himself up to the authorities within forty-eight hours following the issuance of a proclamation by the Chief Executive announcing the passing away of such calamity.

Convicts who, under the circumstances mentioned in the preceding paragraph, shall give themselves up to the authorities within the above mentioned period of 48 hours, shall be entitled to the deduction provided in Article 98.

E.g. The jail has been flooded which resulted to it being opened in order for the prisoners to be saved; those who returned, within 48 hours after the proclamation of the President of the passing away of such calamity, shall not be punished but shall instead be rewarded. So here, it's failure to return that is punished.

3) Art. 159. Other cases of evasion of service of sentence. — Violation of conditional pardon.

Conditional pardon is a contract between the President and the prisoner. And the president shall pardon after the sentence shall have become final. So there is a contract between the President and the prisoner for the prisoner not to commit another crime during the period of conditional pardon. If a person for example has been charged of estafa during the period of conditional pardon, can he be charged for violating Article 159: violation of conditional pardon? The answer is a big NO. Why? Because you can only be charged for violation of Article 159 after being convicted of the alleged crime committed (2nd offense). Because there is a possibility that you will be committed, meaning, you did not commit another crime, you did nor violate the conditional pardon. Repeat, a prisoner can only be charged with violation of conditional pardon if the alleged crime committed resulted in conviction.

The offender here can be rearrested and reincarcerated without trial. You should distinguish violation of conditional pardon from evasion of service. Violation of conditional pardon does not disturb public order. There is no evasion of service of sentence in the following instances 1) if the escapee is only a detention prisoner (not yet convicted); 2) if he is a youthful offender under rehabilitation (but this is already modified by R.A 9344: Juvenile Justice Law); 3) there is no evasion if a deportee violates the deportation order.

JUNE 10, 2010

Short Quiz

1. PO1 Binay served a warrant of arrest issued by the Sandiganbayan against Police Superintendent Mar for the commission of the crime of malversation. Police Senior Superintendent Mar said “You cannot arrest me. I am your superior officer.” Then he boxed PO1 Binay. What crime was commited by Police Superintendent Mar? Qualified direct assault

2. What crime is committed if a policeman is pushed and giving him fist blows without hitting him? Resistance to an agent of person in authority

3. A lawyer cross-examined at witness. The witness got irked. After the trial, they had an altercation outside the court room. The following day, the witness hit with fist blows the lawyer when they met at the Ayala Mall. The lawyer’s front tooth was extracted. What is the crime committed by the witness? Serious physical injuries or direct assault

4. Is there self-defense in direct assault? Yes

5. - 7. When is direct assault qualified?

committed with a weapon (even a stone is a weapon); offender is public officer or employee; offender lays hands upon a person in authority

8. What crime is committed if a person disrupts a meeting of the barangay council? Unjust vexation or public disorder

9. What crime is committed if a person fires a handgun disturbing the tranquility of the community? Alarms and scandals

10. What crime is committed if a person fires a handgun for the purpose of scaring another (there is no intention to kill)? Illegal discharge of firearm or unjust vexation

Art. 160 – Commission of another crime during service of penalty imposed for another previous offense. Quasi-recidivism. Art. 160 does not define a crime. It defines a special aggravating circumstance. Where a person, after having been convicted by final judgment [if there is an appeal, there is no quasi-recidivism], shall commit a new felony before beginning to serve such sentence, or while serving the same [not after release]. Penalty – maximum period prescribed by law for the new felony. X committed estafa. Convicted. Served sentence. While serving sentence, he was charged for violation of RA 9165 (Dangerous Drugs Law). Is he a quasi-recidivist? The answer is no because the second offense must be a felony (acts or omissions punishable by the Revised Penal Code). Reverse, a person is convicted of violation of RA 9165 (Dangerous Drugs Law). While serving sentence, he committed estafa. Is he a quasi-recidivist? Yes because the first offense need not a felony. Only the second offense must be a felony.

Distinguish quasi-recidivism from reiteracion. The aggravating circumstance of reiteracion requires that the offender against whom it is considered shall have served out his sentence. In quasi-recidivism, while serving the same. Served out his sentence for the prior offenses.

Basic Notes:

Can the crime of direct assault can be complexed with the material consequence of the unlawful act? Yes. Direct assault with homicide. Direct assault with serious physical injuries or less serious physical injuries but not direct assault with slight physical injuries. Slight is absorbed in direct assault as an element.

Who is considered person in authority? Any person directly vested with jurisdiction.

Is it important that the offender knows that the person he is attacking is a person in authority? No, it is enough that the offender should know that the offended party was exercising some form of authority.

What kind of force is required to constitute to be employed to constitute direct assault? The force must be serious and must be of such character as to show contempt of authority.

What brings about the crime of indirect assault? Indirect assault comes about only when direct assault is committed. In other words, there can be no indirect assault when there is no direct assault.

Art. 152, as amended, when any person comes in aid of persons in authority, said person, at that moment, is no longer a civilian. He is considered “agent of person in authority.” If such person were the one attacked, the crime would be direct assault. Under the Rules of Court (Criminal Procedure), a police officer, in effecting arrest, may summon assistance from anybody. The person, whose assistance is called, will be considered “agent of person in authority.” As Art. 149 now stands, the crime of indirect assault can only be committed if a private person who comes in the aid of an agent of a person in authority, on the occasion of direct assault against the latter, is assaulted. He does not become another agent of a person in authority.

Distinguish between resistance and direct assault. Resistance or serious disobedience – committed


only by resisting or seriously disobeying a person in authority or his agent. Direct assault – committed in four ways: (1) attacking; (2) employing force; (3) seriously intimidating; and (4) seriously resisting.

Supposed the offender did not use any force in resisting a person in authority. What crime is committed? It’s resistance or serious disobedience.

Serious disturbance requires that such must be planned or intended.

If a firearm is discharged, what are the crimes that may possibly arise? Alarms and scandals if the offender discharges the firearm in a public place but the firearm is not pointed to a particular person when discharged. Illegal discharge if the firearm was directed to a particular person who was not hit if intent to kill is not proved. Attempted homicide or murder if the person was hit. Automatically, the crime is attempted homicide or murder if there is intent to kill. Physical injuries if the person was hit and injured but there was no intent to kill. Threat if the weapon was not discharged but was merely pointed to another. Grave coercion if the threat was directed, immediate and serious, and the person is compelled or prevented to do something against his will. There are two kinds of grave coercion: (1) compulsive grave coercion [to compel] and (2) preventive grave coercion.

Distinction between alarms and scandal, and unjust vexation.

If directed to a particular person or family, unjust vexation only.

Distinguish delivering prisoners from jail from infidelity.

Evasion of service of sentence.

Quasi-recidivism and recidivism proper.

Distinguish violation of conditional pardon from evasion.

When can there be a violation of conditional pardon? When the condition is violated during the remaining period of the sentence.

R.A. 9851

One half is political international law, the other half criminal law.

What is the short title of the Act? Philippine Act on Crimes against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide and other Crimes against Humanity.

(1) International Humanitarian Law; (2) Genocide; and (3) other Crimes against Humanity.

Declaration of Principles and State Policies

(c) It shall be the responsibility of the State and all other sectors concerned to resolved armed conflict in order to promote the goal of "Children as Zones of Peace";

What is the meaning of "Children as Zones of Peace"? Is it defined by law? Is there any definition under this law? You have to wait for any IRR. But under Republic Act 7610 (Child Abuse Act), this phrase "Children as Zones of Peace" is also mentioned. What is the historical background? During the time of Bishop Fortich of Negros, there was an agreement between the military and the NPA to establish zones of peace in barangays or clusters of barangays. The NPAs cannot recruit, conduct political action in these barangays. The military cannot also attack the place and conduct military operations. They were called zones of peace. In relation to children, children should not be utilized as soldiers. Not as spies, couriers or runners because they are considered zones peace. Who are guilty of employing children as soldiers? The Philippines is guilty because there are paramilitary forces using children. The NPAs are also guilty. They also use children as spies, as couriers. The MNLF and MILF are also mentioned in the report of the UN.

(e) The most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished and their effective prosecution must be

ensured by taking measures at the national level, in order to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus contribute to the prevention of such crimes, it being the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes;

This law is one of the exceptions to the principle of territoriality because even if the crime of genocide or other crimes against humanity are committed outside the Philippine territory especially if the culprit is a Filipino citizen or if the crime is committed by foreigner but a Filipino citizen is a victim, Philippine courts exercise jurisdiction except if that guy was already charged or tried in another foreign tribunal because there is double jeopardy.

(g) The State recognizes that the application of the provisions of this Act shall not affect the legal status of the parties to a conflict, nor give an implied recognition of the status of belligerency.

What is the meaning of status of belligerency? When an armed group has already occupied a certain territory and there is a semblance of government and they are dealing with international groups and agencies, they will be conferred the status of belligerency, one step before becoming a state. The New People’s Army dealt to the government in the hope that it would be given the status of belligerency. No, because they have no effective control of any territory in the Philippines. They have shadow government but they have no fixed place where their leaders can givern. The MILF used to have that place in Mindanao which Pres. Estrada ordered an assault. What do you call that place? Camp Abubakar. They had a government. They had judiciary – Sharia Courts but when that place was attacked, they retreated and it was found out that they do not constitute belligerent communities although they dealt with foreign countries with respect to some form of trade.

Definitions (Judge Paredes’ stories were omitted)

(a) "Apartheid' means inhumane acts committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.

(b) "Arbitrary deportation or forcible transfer of population" means forced displacement of the persons concerned by expultion by expulsion or other coercive acts.

(c) "Armed conflict" means any use of force or armed violence between States or a protracted armed violence between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups within that State. Armed conflict may be international, or non-international or internal

Example of protracted armed violence between governmental authority and organized armed groups. Communist Party of the Philippines and its military wing, the New People’s Army, the longest running guerilla war in the world. 33 years. Between armed groups (MILF vs. MNLF). All these conflicts whether between countries, between armed groups, between the governments and armed groups, you apply IHL, Protocol I and II of the Geneva Convention of the Code and Customs of War.

Such force or armed violence may give rise to a situation to which the Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949 including their Common Article III. Under letter c, Section 3 of this law, armed conflicts are classified into international conflict, that is, between two or more states including belligerent occupation, or non-international armed conflict, between governmental authorities (Philippines GRP) versus organized armed group (CPP-NPA-NDF) or between such groups within a state (MNLF vs. MILF). Are they bound by IHL? Yes.

(d) "Armed forces" means all organized armed forces groups and units that belong to a party to an armed conflict

There are requisites: (1) under a command responsible to that party for the conduct of its


subordinates; (2) shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which enforces compliance with International Humanitarian Law.

(e) "Attack directed against any civilian population" means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in Section 6 of this Act against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack.

(f) "Effective command and control" or " effective authority and control" means having the material ability to prevent and punish the commission of offenses by subordinates.

(g) "Enforced or involuntary disappearance of persons" means the arrest, detention, or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization

(h) "Enslavement" means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership over a person, etc.

(i) "Extermination" means the international infliction of conditions of life, inter alia, the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of a part of a population.

(j) "Forced pregnancy" means the unlawful confinement of a women to be forcibly made pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population carrying out other grave violations of international law.

(k) "Hors de Combat" means a person who:

(1) is in the power of an adverse party;(2) has clearly expressed an intention to surrender; or(3) has been rendered unconscious or otherwise incapacitated by wounds or sickness and therefore is incapable of defending himself: Provided, that in any of these cases, the person form any hostile act and does not attempt to escape.

(l) "Military necessity" means the necessity of employing measures which are indispensable to achieve a legitimate aim of the conflict and are not otherwise prohibited by International Humanitarian Law

(m) "Non-defended locality" means a locality that fulfills the following conditions:

(1) all combatants, as well as mobile weapons and mobile military equipment, must have been evacuated;(2) no hostile use of fixed military installations or establishments must have been made;(3) no acts of hostility must have been committed by the authorities or by the population; and(4) no activities in support of military operations, must have been undertaken.

(n) "No quarter will be given' means refusing to spare the life of anybody, even of persons manifestly unable to defend themselves or who clearly express their intention to surrender.

(o) "Perfidy" means acts which invite the confidence of an adversary to lead him/her to believe he/she is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of International Humanitarian Law, with the intent to betray that confidence, including but not limited to:

(1) feigning an intent to negotiate under a flag of truce;

(2) feigning surrender;(3) feigning incapacitation by wounds or sickness;(4) feigning civilian or noncombatant status; and(5) feigning protective status by use of signs, emblems or uniforms of the United Nations or of a neutral or other State not party to the conflict.

(p) "Persecution" means the international and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of identity of the group or collectivity.

(q) "Protect(ed) person" in an armed conflict means:

(1) a person wounded, sick or shipwrecked, whether civilian or military;

(2) a prisoner of war or any person deprived of liberty for reasons related to an armed conflict;(3) a civilian or any person not taking a direct part or having ceased to take part in the hostilities in the power of the adverse party;

(4) a person who, before the beginning of hostilities, was considered a stateless person or refugee under the relevant international instruments accepted by the parties to the conflict concerned or under the national legislation of the state of refuge or state of residence;

(5) a member of the medical personnel assigned exclusively to medical purposes or to the administration of medical units or to the operation of or administration of medical transports; or

(6) a member of the religious personnel who is exclusively engaged in the work of their ministry and attached to the armed forces of a party to the conflict, its medical units or medical transports, or non-denominational, noncombatant military personnel carrying out functions similar to religious personnel.

(r) " Superior" means:

(1) a military commander or a person effectively acting as a military commander; or(2) any other superior, in as much as the crimes arose from activities within the effective authority and control of that superior.

(s) "Torture" means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical, mental, or psychological, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions.

(t) "Works and installations containing dangerous forces" means works and installations the attack of which may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population, namely: dams, dikes, and nuclear, electrical generation stations.

War Crimes.

(a) In case of an international armed conflict, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:

(1) Willful killing;(2) Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments;(3) Willfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health;


(4) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;(5) Willfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial; (6) Arbitrary deportation or forcible transfer of population or unlawful confinement;(7) Taking of hostages;(8) Compelling a prisoner a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile power; and (9) Unjustifiable delay in the repatriation of prisoners of war or other protected persons.

JUNE 15, 2010

CRIMES AGAINST IHL

War Crimes

There are other acts here.

(b) In case of a non-international armed conflict, serious violations of common Article 3 to the four (4) Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely , any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including member of the armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause;

(1) Violence to life and person, in particular, willful killings, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;(2) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;(3) Taking of hostages; and(4) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognized as indispensable.

(c) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely:

(1) Internationally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities;

(2) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, object which are not military objectives;

(3) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions or Additional Protocol III in conformity with intentional law;

(4) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as ling as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict;

(5) Launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated;

(6) Launching an attack against works or installations containing dangerous forces in the knowledge that such attack will cause excessive loss of life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects, and causing death or serious injury to body or health .

(7) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives, or making non-defended localities or demilitarized zones the object of attack;

(8) Killing or wounding a person in the knowledge that he/she is hors de combat, including a combatant who, having laid down his/her arms or no longer having means of defense, has surrendered at discretion;

(9) Making improper use of a flag of truce, of the flag or the military insignia and uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions or other protective signs under International Humanitarian Law, resulting in death, serious personal injury or capture;

(10) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives. In case of doubt whether such building or place has been used to make an effective contribution to military action, it shall be presumed not to be so used;

(11) Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind, or to removal of tissue or organs for transplantation, which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his/her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons;

(12) Killing, wounding or capturing an adversary by resort to perfidy;

(13) Declaring that no quarter will be given;

(14) Destroying or seizing the enemy's property unless such destruction or seizure is imperatively demanded by the necessities of war;(15) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;(16) Ordering the displacements of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand;

(17) Transferring, directly or indirectly, by the occupying power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory;

(18) Commiting outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatments;

(19) Commiting rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions or a serious violation of common Article 3 to the Geneva Convensions;

(20) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations;

(21) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indespensable to their survival, including willfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols;

(22) In an international armed conflict, compelling the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in


the belligerent's service before the commencement of the war;

(23) In an international armed conflict, declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party;

(24) Commiting any of the following acts:

(i) Conscripting, enlisting or recruiting children under the age of fifteen (15) years into the national armed forces;(ii) Conscripting, enlisting or recruiting children under the age of eighteen (18) years into an armed force or group other than the national armed forces; and(iii) Using children under the age of eighteen (18) years to participate actively in hostilities; and

(25) Employing means of warfare which are prohibited under international law, such as:

(i) Poison or poisoned weapons;(ii) Asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices;(iii) Bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with hard envelopes which do not entirely cover the core or are pierced with incisions; and(iv) Weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare which are of the nature to cause superfluous injury or unecessary suffering or which are inherently indiscriminate in violation of the international law of armed conflict.

Then, Sec. 5. Genocide - means any of the following acts with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, religious, social or any other similar stable and permanent group

Sec. 6. Other Crimes against Humanity.

We are more interested in Chapters 4, 5 and 6. The first part is political law. If ever it would come out in the Bar, during your time, it would fall under International Law with emphasis on IHL, Protocols I and II.

Then, penal provisions. Sec. 7 – Penalties. Violations of Secs. 4, 5 and 6, reclusion temporal.

Chapter V – Some Principles of Criminal Liability.

This is important. In addition to existing provisions in Philippine law on principles of criminal responsibility, a person shall be criminally liable as principal for a crime defined and penalized in this Act if he/she:

(1) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or through another person;

(2) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime [this is principal by induction];

(3) In any other way contributes to the commission or attempted commission of such a crime:

A person shall be criminally liable as accomplice for facilitating the commission of a crime defined and penalized in this Act.

Then, there is attempt. A person shall be criminally liable for a crime defined and penalized in this Act if he/she attempts to commit such a crime.

Sec. 9 is important for purposes of taking the Bar. This Act shall apply equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity [whether as president, prime minister, defense minister, field commander or field soldier]. In particular, official capacity as a head of state or government, a member of a government or parliament, an elected representative or a

government official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this Act [you cannot interpose the defense of immunity], nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence. However:

(a) Immunities or special procedural rules that may be attached to the official capacity of a person under Philippine law other than the established constitutional immunity from suit of the Philippine President during his/her tenure, shall not bar the court from exercising jurisdiction over such a person [If you are immune during your incumbency, but after your term, you are no longer immune from suit.]; and(b) Immunities that may be attached to the official capacity of a person under international law may limit the application of this Act, not only within the bounds established under international law.

Then, responsibility of superiors. One of the debates in the international community on international law is command responsibility. What was the defense of Hermann Göring of Air Force in Nazi, Germany during the Nuremberg Trial, “I am a soldier, I’m only following the orders of the commander in chief.” But then the Tribunal said “yes, but the order of your commander in chief is illegal in international law. What was the defense of Tomuyuki Yamashita when he was tried here in the Philippines? “I did not order death march. I did not order massacre of civilians.” Supreme Court said “Gen. Yamashita is responsible for acts of his subordinates. He is responsible for acts committed by unrestrained soldiers.”

Sec. 10. Responsibility of Superiors. - In addition to other grounds of criminal responsibility for crimes defined and penalized under this Act, a superior shall be criminally responsible as a principal for such crimes committed by subordinates [So the issue is now settled – command responsibility] under his/her effective command and control, or effective authority and control as the case may be, as a result of his/her failure to properly exercise control over such subordinates, where:

(a) That superior either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known that the subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes [This is the defense of Gen. Palparan for violations of human rights. But there is command responsibility. All those soldiers accused of murder were under his command];(b) That superior failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his/her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution.

Sec. 11. Non-prescription. - The crimes defined and penalized under this Act, their prosecution, and the execution of sentences imposed on their account, shall not be subject to any prescription.

Sec. 12. Orders from a Superior. - The fact that a crime defined and penalized under this Act has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a government or a superior, whether military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless all of the following elements occur [so the following elements must be satisfied before a defense is setup or interposed]:

(a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the government or the superior in question;(b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful; and(c) The order was not manifestly unlawful.

For the purposes of this section, orders to commit genocide or other crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.

Sec. 13. Protection of Victims and Witnesses.

Section 14. Reparations to Victims. - In addition to existing provisions in Philippine law and procedural rules for reparations to victims, the following measures shall be undertaken:


(a) The court shall follow the principles relating to the reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation.

Then, applicability of International Law and Other Laws.

(a) The 1948 Genocide Convention;(b) The 1949 Genava Conventions I-IV, their 1977 Additional Protocols I [applies only to international armed conflicts] and II [applies to non-international armed conflict] and their 2005 Additional Protocol III;(c) The 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, its First Protocol and its 1999 Second Protocol;(d) The 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child and its 2000 Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict;(e) The rules and principles of customary international law;(f) The judicial decisions of international courts and tribunals;(g) Relevant and applicable international human rights instruments;(h) Other relevant international treaties and conventions ratified or acceded to by the Republic of the Philippines; and(i) Teachings of the most highly qualified publicists and authoritative commentaries on the foregoing sources as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law.

Sec. 16. Suppletory Application of the Revised Penal Code and Other General or Special Laws.

Chapter VII is important. This is an exception to the territoriality rule.

The State shall exercise jurisdiction over persons, whether military or civilian, suspected or accused of a crime defined and penalized in this Act, regardless of where the crime is committed, provided, any one [not all] of the following conditions is met:

(a) The accused is a Filipino citizen;(b) The accused, regardless of citizenship or residence, is present in the Philippines; or(c) The accused has committed the said crime against a Filipino citizen.

In the interest of justice, the relevant Philippine authorities may dispense with the investigation or prosecution of a crime punishable under this Act if another court or international tribunal is already conducting the investigation or undertaking the prosecution of such crime.

Then, the court which will try – RTC.

JUNE 17, 2010

IHL, AMENDMENTS TO RA 8294

Section 15. Applicability of International Law.- In the application and interpretation of this Act, Philippine courts shall be guided by the following sources:

(a) The 1948 Genocide Convention;(b) The 1949 Geneva Conventions I-IV, their 1977 Additional Protocols I and II and their 2005 Additional Protocol III;(c) The 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, its First Protocol and its 1999 Second Protocol;(d) The 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child and its 2000 Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict;(e) The rules and principles of customary international law;(f) The judicial decisions of international courts and tribunals;(g) Relevant and applicable international human rights instruments;

(h) Other relevant international treaties and conventions ratified or acceded to by the Republic of the Philippines; and(i) Teachings of the most highly qualified publicists and authoritative commentaries on the foregoing sources as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law.

Section 16. Suppletory Application of the Revised Penal Code and Other General or Special Laws. - The provisions of the Revised Penal Code and other general or special laws shall have a suppletory application to the provisions of this Act.

[Chapter 7, Jurisdiction, is important. Again, this is an exception to the territoriality principle.]

Section 17. Jurisdiction.- The State shall exercise jurisdiction over persons, whether military or civilian, suspected or accused of a crime defined and penalized in this Act, regardless of where the crime is committed, [even if the crime is committed in foreign jurisdictions, Philippine courts could take cognizance of those cases] provided, any one of the following conditions is met:

(a) The accused is a Filipino citizen;(b) The accused, regardless of citizenship or residence, is present in the Philippines; or [we follow the jurisdiction over person prince. But in other countries, they issue international warrant of arrest](c) The accused has committed the said crime against a Filipino citizen. [the law does not say Filipino citizens. So even if there is only one victim.]

In the interest of justice, the relevant Philippine authorities may dispense with the investigation or prosecution of a crime punishable under this Act if another court or international tribunal is already conducting the investigation or undertaking the prosecution of such crime. [Purpose here is to avoid double jeopardy because double jeopardy is a principle universally observed. I said to avoid double jeopardy because during the investigation stage, there is no double jeopardy yet. Double jeopardy comes after conviction by final judgment of a competent tribunal.] Instead, the authorities may surrender or extradite suspected or accused persons in the Philippines to the appropriate international court, if any, or to another State pursuant to the applicable extradition laws and treaties.

No criminal proceedings shall be initiated against foreign nationals suspected or accused of having committed the crimes defined and penalized in this Act if they have been tried by a competent court outside the Philippines in respect of the same offense and acquitted, [so double jeopardy applies] or having been convicted, already served their sentence.

Sec. 18. Philippine Court, Prosecutors and Investigators. - The Regional Trial Court of the Philippines shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction over the crimes punishable under this Act. Their judgments may be appealed or elevated to the Court of Appeals and to the Supreme Court as provided by law.

The Supreme Court shall designate special courts to try cases involving crimes punishable under this Act. For these cases, the Commission on Human Rights, the Department of Justice, the Philippine National Police or other concerned law enforcement agencies shall designate prosecutors or investigators as the case may be.

The State shall ensure that judges, prosecutors and investigators, especially those designated for purposes of this Act, receive effective training in human rights, International Humanitarian Law and International Criminal Law.

Coverage of the exam (Chapter 4, 5, 6). The rest is political law.

Amendments to RA 8294

Section 1. Section 3 of Presidential Decree No. 1866, as amended by RA 8294, is hereby further amended to read as follows:


http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/presdecs/pd1983/pd_1866_1983.html#s3

http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/presdecs/pd1983/pd_1866_1983.html#s3

Section 3. Unlawful Manufacture, Sales, Acquisition, Disposition, Importation or Possession of an Explosive or Incendiary Device. [the words “incendiary device” are not found in RA 8294.]

What portions are amended? There is an additional phrase in Sec. 3 “with knowledge of its existence and its explosive or incendiary character.” With respect to incendiary devices, the accused must have knowledge of the incendiary device and its explosive or incendiary character. You can therefore interpose the defense of lack of knowledge but not criminal intent because this is mala prohibita. “Where the explosive or incendiary device is capable of producing destructive effect on contiguous objects or causing injury or death to any person” this is added. This is not found in the old law. Actually, the amendments here are Supreme Court decisions or jurisprudence.

Provided, That mere possession of any explosive or incendiary device shall be prima facie evidence that the person had knowledge of the existence and the explosive or incendiary character of the device. [This is prima facie evidence, meaning, it may be rebutted.]

Provided, however, That a temporary, incidental, casual, harmless, or transient possession or control of any explosive or incendiary device, without the knowledge of its existence or its explosive or incendiary character, shall not be a violation of this Section. [Example: While walking, you saw what appears to be a firearm or explosive. You are curious. You scrutinized it. That is temporary, incidental, casual, harmless, or transient possession. That is a good defense.]

Provided, Further, That the temporary, incidental, casual, harmless, or transient possession or control of any explosive or incendiary device for the sole purpose of surrendering it to the proper authorities shall not be a violation of this Section. [There are actually cases involving this proviso. There is amnesty. Explosives and firearms. You placed in it your car. You were caught at the checkpoint. You can easily answer that you are on your way to PNP to surrender. That’s a good defense. Sole purpose of surrendering it to the proper authorities shall not be a violation of this Section. It was applied in the case of People vs. Abadilla.]

Provided, finally, That in addition to the instances provided in the two (2) immediately preceding paragraphs, the court may determine the absence of the intent to possess, otherwise referred to as 'animus possidendi", in accordance with the facts and circumstances of each case [Remember one of the elements of illegal possession is intent to possess or anumus possidendi. You may raise that issue. What are the issues to be resolved? (1) Whether or not there was intent to possess. That is a question of fact. The issue is not criminal intent.

The there is another amendment Sec. 3-A. This is an additional section.

SEC 3-A. Unlawful Manufacture, Sales, Acquisition, Disposition, Importation or Possession of a Part [part of firearm], Ingredient, Machinery, Tool or Instrument Used or Intended to be Used for the Manufacture, Construction, Assembly, Delivery or Detonation.

Provided, That the mere possession of any part, ingredient, machinery, tool or instrument directly used in the manufacture, construction, assembly, delivery or detonation of any explosive or incendiary device, by any person whose business activity, or employment does not lawfully deal with the possession of such article shall be prima facie evidence that such article is intended to be used by that person in the unlawful/illegal manufacture, construction, assembly, delivery or detonation of an explosive or incendiary device.

Provided, That a temporary incidental, casual, harmless or transient possession, without the knowledge of its existence or character, etc. [is a good defense.]

Another proviso, for the sole purpose is to surrender the materials to the authorities. Again the court may determine the absence of intent to posses.

Another section is added – Sec. 3-B (Penalty). The only change is that the penalty is higher. Why? Because not only fishermen, but terrorists use explosives. For knowingly allowing any explosive or incendiary device or parts thereof, the penalty is reclusion perpetua, against owner, president, manager, director who shall willfully allow any explosive or incendiary device to be used.

Then Sec. 3-C is another amendment. Relationship of Other Crimes with a Violation of this Decree and the Penalty Therefor. When a violation of Section 3, 3-A or 3-B of this Decree is a necessary means for committing any of the crimes defined in the RPC or special laws, or is in furtherance of, incident to, in connection with, by reason of, or on occasion of any of the crimes defined in the RPC or special laws, the penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine ranging from One hundred Thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be imposed.

Murder with the use of explosives. Use of explosives is special aggravating circumstance under this amendment

Then Sec. 3-D – Former Conviction or Acquittal; Double Jeopardy. - Subject to the provisions of the Rules of Court on double jeopardy, if the application thereof is more favorable to the accused, the conviction or acquittal of the accused or the dismissal of the case for violation of this Decree shall be a bar to another prosecution of the same accused for any offense where the violation of this Decree was a necessary means for committing the offense or in furtherance thereof. Example: if use of explosives or firearm was necessary means to commit rebellion, sedition or coup d’etat, it’s absorbed in rebellion, sedition, coup d’etat, but the penalty is reclusion perpetua. The accused can no longer be charged for violation of this firearm and explosives law.

The other provisions are not very important.

Sec. 4-A. Penalty for planting evidence – reclusion perpetua. If a person or policeman places inside the handbag of another person a firearm, that’s planting evidence. The penalty is reclusion perpetua. Planting evidence is defined in this amendment. It shall mean the willful act by any person of maliciously and surreptitiously inserting, placing, adding or attaching, directly or indirectly, through any overt or covert act, whatever quantity of any explosive or incendiary device or any part, ingredient, etc. for the purpose of incriminating or imputing the commission of any violation of this Decree.

Take note, act by any person of maliciously and surreptitiously inserting. “Malicious” – it’s an RPC word “malice’. “Surreptitiously,” secretly. If the firearm is placed in front of you, that’s not surreptitious. So that’s not planting evidence.

Then continuous trial.

If you want to import, sell, or possess chemicals or accessories for explosives, secure a license from the PNP Firearms and Explosives Section.

Types of Chemicals/Accessories Covered – Chlorates, nitrates, nitric acid and such other chemicals and accessories that can be used for the manufacture of explosives and explosive ingredients.

Title IV – Crimes Against Public Interest

What is the essence of this crime? It perpetrates a fraud upon public in general. Here, like estafa, there is deceit or fraud, but the fraud is against public interest. Because if the fraud is against private interest, the crime is estafa. They are similar.

There are 28 crimes under crimes against public interest.

Chapter 1 – Forgeries. There are 10 crimes under forgeries.

Art. 161. Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands, forging the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive. There are three (3) acts punished under Art. 161 – forging great seal, forging


signature, forging stamp. Make no mistake about Art. 161. This is forging the signature of the President in his official capacity. For example, one makes a document, imitating the signature of the President, appointing Mr. De los Santos as RTC Judge. That is forging the signature of the President in his official capacity. Because if you forge the signature of the President in his private capacity [you bought a car and you signed as Noynoy, he’s forging the signature of the President in his private capacity], the crime is falsification. If you forge the signature of the President in his official capacity, the complete name of the crime is forging the signature of the Chief Executive. Forgery and falsification are not acceptable. The offense is not falsification of public document.

Art. 162. Using forged signature or counterfeit seal or stamp mentioned in Art. 161. Do not forget, the user is not the forger. Please take note, “knowingly make use of the counterfeit seal or forged signature.” If he does not know that it is forged or counterfeit, then he is not liable. If a person forged the signature of the President and he uses the document which he forged, the crime is forging the signature of the President. Use is absorbed in forgery. Besides, the user of the forged signature is presumed to be the forger. That’s our consistent jurisprudence.

Then Sec. 2 – Counterfeiting Coins. There are 3 crimes under counterfeiting coins.

By the way, what is counterfeiting? It is remaking or manufacturing without authority. It is not necessary that the money is legal tender. What is punished here are persons who counterfeit coins.

Art. 163. Making and importing and uttering false coins. There are three (3) acts punished: making; importing; uttering. In the case of uttering, such coins or counterfeited coins be in connivance with counterfeiters or importers. This “uttering is actually “passing.” A coin is false or counterfeited if it is forged or it is not authorized by the government as legal tender. What is the meaning of “to import?” It’s to bring into port without authority. “To utter“means to pass counterfeited coins. Then mutilation of coins. Any person who shall mutilate coins of legal currency. Those out of circulation do not fall under this article. There must also be intent to damage or to defraud another. Then importing or uttering in connivance with mutilator or importer. What is mutilation? It is taking off part of the metal either by filing it or substituting another it for another metal of inferior quality. So the coin here must be legal tender. Coin of foreign currency, not included.

Art. 165. Selling. There are 2 acts punished – possession of coin counterfeited or mutilated by another person with intent to utter the same, knowing that it is false or mutilated. Please take note, “with intent to utter.” If you have a coin, it is false or mutilated, and you put it under the glass of your table, you will not be prosecuted for possession of mutilated or false coin. Why? There is no intent to utter. There is no overt act of using it as payment. Please take note “knowing that it is false or mutilated.” Lack of knowledge is a good defense. Then actually uttering such false or mutilated coin knowing the same to be false or mutilated. Lack of knowledge is a good defense.

Then Sec. 3 – Forging treasury or bank notes, obligations and securities; importing and uttering false or forged notes, obligations and securities.

Forgery is giving a document the appearance of a true and genuine document.

Sec. 3 applies to papers which are in the form of obligations and securities of the Republic of the Philippines as its own obligation and which is given the same status as legal tender. Land Bank bonds for example. Sample of obligations and securities – sweepstakes ticket, lotto. There was an old person who bought sweepstakes. Since the last digit was not correct, he bought another ticket, cut it and pasted it. When he presented it to PCSO, he was arrested. That is forging an obligation or security. Since he was caught immediately, the Supreme Court ruled that it was an impossible crime of forging obligations and securities

There 3 acts punished under Art. 166: Forging treasury or bank notes on other documents payable to bearer; importing, and uttering.

Art. 167. Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments not payable to bearer. The purpose here is to maintain the integrity of that currency.

Art. 168. Illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank notes and other instruments of credit. The accused here performs any of these acts: using any forged or falsified document; possessing with intent to use any of such forged or falsified document. If you have a fake money and you frame it, you will not be prosecuted for possession of false money bill because there is no intent to use it to the damage of another. If there are ten in your pocket and you use it to pay, there is already intent to use. So it’s already a crime.

Art. 169. How forgery is committed. It’s a reading matter.

By the way, Land Bank bonds are certificates of indebtedness. There is a law against defacement, mutilation, tearing, burning or destroying of BSP notes.


criminal law review transcription 1st installment.doc

Documents