pp vs. gregorio perfector.docx

7/26/2019 PP vs. GREGORIO PERFECTOR.docx

1/8

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT

Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. L-18463 October 4, 1922

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHLPPNE SL!N"S,plaintiff-appellee,

vs.

GREGORO PERFECTOR,defendant-appellant.

Alfonso E. Mendoza and the appellant in behalf of the latter.

Attorney-General Villa-Real for appellee.

M!LCOLM, J.:

The important uestion is here suarel! presented of "hether article #$% of the &panish Penal Code,

punishin' (An! person "ho, b! . . . "ritin', shall defame, abuse, or insult an! Minister of the Cro"n or

other person in authorit! . . .,( is still in force.

About Au'ust #), *+#), the &ecretar! of the Philippine &enate, ernando M. uerrero, discovered that

certain documents "hich constituted the records of testimon! 'iven b! "itnesses in the investi'ation of oil

companies, had disappeared from his office. &hortl! thereafter, the Philippine &enate, havin' been called

into special session b! the overnor-eneral, the &ecretar! for the &enate informed that bod! of the loss

of the documents and of the steps taen b! him to discover the 'uilt! part!. The da! follo"in' the

convenin' of the &enate, &eptember /, *+#), the ne"spaper La Nacion, edited b! Mr. re'orio Perfecto,published an article readin' as follo"s0

1alf a month has elapsed since the discover!, for the first time, of the scandalous robber! of

records "hich "ere ept and preserved in the iron safe of the &enate, !et up to this time there is

not the sli'htest indication that the author or authors of the crime "ill ever be discovered.

To find them, it "ould not, perhaps, be necessar! to 'o out of the &ente itself, and the persons in

char'e of the investi'ation of the case "ould not have to displa! 'reat sill in order to succeed in

their undertain', unless the! should encounter the insuperable obstacle of offical concealment.

2n that case, ever! investi'ation to be made "ould be but a mere comed! and nothin' more.

After all, the perpetration of the robber!, especiall! under the circumstances that have surrounded

it, does not surprise us at all.

The e3ecution of the crime "as but the natural effect of the environment of the place in "hich it

"as committed.

1o" man! of the present &enators can sa! "ithout remorse in their conscience and "ith serenit!

of mind, that the! do not o"e their victor! to electoral robber!4 1o" ma!4

The author or authors of the robber! of the records from the said iron safe of the &enate have,perhaps, but follo"ed the e3ample of certain &enators "ho secured their election throu'h fraud

and robber!.

The Philippine &enate, in its session of &eptember +, *+#), adopted a resolution authori5in' its committee

on elections and privile'es to report as to the action "hich should be taen "ith reference to the article

published inLa Nacion. 6n &eptember *$, *+#), the &enate adopted a resolution authori5in' the President

of the &enate to indorse to the Attorne!-eneral, for his stud! and correspondin' action, all the papers

1


2/8

referrin' to the case of the ne"spaper La Nacion and its editor, Mr. re'orio Perfecto. As a result, an

information "as filed in the municipal court of the Cit! of Manila b! an assistant cit! fiscal, in "hich the

editorial in uestion "as set out and in "hich it "as alle'ed that the same constituted a violation of article

#$% of the Penal Code. The defendant re'orio Perfecto "as found 'uilt! in the municipal court and a'ain

in the Court of irst 2nstance of Manila.

7urin' the course of the trial in the Court of irst 2nstance, after the prosecution had rested, the defensemoved for the dismissal of the case. 6n the sub8ect of "hether or not article #$% of the Penal Code, under

"hich the information "as presented, is in force, the trial 8ud'e, the 1onorable eor'e R. 1arve!, said0

This antiuated provision "as doubtless incorporated into the Penal Code of &pain for the

protection of the Ministers of the Cro"n and other representatives of the 9in' a'ainst free speech

and action b! &panish sub8ects. A severe punishment "as prescribed because it "as doubtless

considered a much more serious offense to insult the 9in':s representative than to insult an

ordinar! individual. This provision, "ith almost all the other articles of that Code, "as e3tended to

the Philippine 2slands "hen under the dominion of &pain because the 9in':s sub8ect in the

Philippines mi'ht defame, abuse or insult the Ministers of the Cro"n or other representatives of 1is

Ma8est!. ;e no" have no Ministers of the Cro"n or other persons in authorit! in the Philippinesrepresentin' the 9in' of &pain, and said provision, "ith other articles of the Penal Code, had

apparentl! passed into (innocuous desuetude,( but the &upreme Corut of the Philippine 2slands

has, b! a ma8orit! decision, held that said article #$% is the la" of the land to-da!. . . .

The 1elbi' case is a precedent "hich, b! the rule of stare decisis, is bindin' upon this court until

other"ise determined b! proper authorit!.

2n the decision rendered b! the same 8ud'e, he concluded "ith the follo"in' lan'ua'e0

2n the


3/8

e3amination, and >#? that article #$% of the &panish Penal Code is no lon'er in force. &ubseuentl!, on a

motion of reconsideration, the court, bein' of the opinion that the Court of irst 2nstance had committed a

pre8udicial error in deprivin' the accused of his ri'ht to cross-e3amine a principal "itness, set aside the

8ud'ment affirmin' the 8ud'ment appealed from and ordered the return of the record to the court of ori'in

for the celebration of a ne" trial. ;hether such a trial "as actuall! had, is not no"n, but at least, the

record in the 1elbi' case has never a'ain been elevated to this court.

There ma! perchance e3ist some doubt as to the authorit! of the decision in the 1elbi' case, in vie" of the

circumstances above described. This much, ho"ever, is certain0 The facts of the 1elbi' case and the case

before us, "hich "e ma! term the Perfecto case, are different, for in the first case there "as an oral

defamation, "hile in the second there is a "ritten defamation. Not onl! this, but a ne" point "hich, under

the facts, could not have been considered in the 1elbi' case, is, in the Perfecto case, ur'ed upon the

court. And, finall!, as is apparent to all, the appellate court is not restrained, as "as the trial court, b! strict

adherence to a former decision. ;e much prefer to resolve the uestion before us unhindered b!

references to the 1elbi' decision.

This is one of those cases on "hich a variet! of opinions all leadin' to the same result can be had. A

ma8orit! of the court are of the opinion that the Philippine =ibel =a", Act No. #//, has had the effect ofrepealin' so much of article #$% of the Penal Code as relates to "ritten defamation, abuse, or insult, and

that under the information and the facts, the defendant is neither 'uilt! of a violation of article #$% of the

Penal Code, nor of the =ibel =a". The vie" of the Chief ustice is that the accused should be acuitted for

the reason that the facts alle'ed in the information do not constitute a violation of article *$% of the Penal

Code. Three members of the court believe that article #$% "as abro'ated completel! b! the chan'e from

&panish to American soverei'nt! over the Philippines and is inconsistent "ith democratic principles of

'overnment.

;ithout pre8udice to the ri'ht of an! member of the court to e3plain his position, "e "ill discuss the t"o

main points 8ust mentioned.

*. Effect of the hilippine Libel La!" Act No. #$$" on article #%& of the 'panish enal (ode. The

=ibel =a", Act No. #//, "as enacted b! the Philippine Commission shortl! after or'ani5ation of this

le'islative bod!. &ection * defines libel as a (malicious defamation, e3pressed either in "ritin',

printin', or b! si'ns or pictures, or the lie, or public theatrical e3hibitions, tendin' to blacen the

memor! of one "ho is dead or to impeach the honest!, virtue, or reputation, or publish the alle'ed

or natural deffects of one "ho is alive, and thereb! e3pose him to public hatred, contempt or

ridicule.( &ection * provides that (All la"s and parts of la"s no" in force, so far as the same ma!

be in conflict here"ith, are hereb! repealed. . . .(

That parts of la"s in force in *+)* "hen the =ibel =a" too effect, "ere in conflict there"ith, and that the

=ibel =a" abro'ated certain portion of the &panish Penal Code, cannot be 'ainsaid. Title D of Boo 22 ofthe Penal Code, coverin' the sub8ects of calumn! and insults, must have been particularl! affected b! the

=ibel =a". 2ndeed, in the earl! case of Pardo de Tavera vs.arcia alde5 >F*+)#G, *. Phil., @%H?, the

&upreme Court spoe of the =ibel =a" as (reformin) the pree3istin' &panish la" on the sub8ect

of calumnia and in*uria.( Recentl!, specific attention "as 'iven to the effect of the =ibel =a" on the

provisions of the Penal Code, dealin' "ith calumn! and insults, and it "as found that those provisions of

the Penal Code on the sub8ect of calumn! and insults in "hich the elements of "ritin' an publicit! entered,

"ere abro'ated b! the =ibel =a". >People vs.Castro F*+##G, p. H@#, ante.?

The =ibel =a" must have had the same result on other provisions of the Penal Code, as for instance article

#$%.

The facts here are that the editor of a ne"spaper published an article, naturall! in "ritin', "hich ma! have

had the tendenc! to impeach the honest!, virtue, or reputation of members of the Philippine &enate,

thereb! possibl! e3posin' them to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule, "hich is e3actl! libel, as defined b!

the =ibel =a". &ir . . &tephen is authorit! for the statement that a libel is indictable "hen defamin' a

(bod! of persons definite and small enou'h for individual members to be reco'ni5ed as such, in or b!

means of an!thin' capable of bein' a libel.( >7i'est of Criminal =a", art. #%/.? But in the


4/8

criticisms, no matter ho" severe, on a le'islature, are "ithin the ran'e of the libert! of the press, unless the

intention and effect be seditious. > ;harton:s Criminal =a", p. #**.? ;ith these facts and le'al principles

in mind, recall that article #$% be'ins0 An! person "ho, b! . . . !ritin), shall defame, abuse, or insult an!

Minister of the Cro"n or other person in authorit!,( etc.

The =ibel =a" is a complete and comprehensive la" on the sub8ect of libel. The "ell-no"n rule of

statutor! construction is, that "here the later statute clearl! covers the old sub8ect-matter of antecedentacts, and it plainl! appears to have been the purpose of the le'islature to 'ive e3pression in it to the "hole

la" on the sub8ect, previous la"s are held to be repealed b! necessar! implication. >* =e"is: &utherland

&tatutor! Construction, p. @%$.? or identical reasons, it is evident that Act No. #// had the effect so much

of this article as punishes defamation, abuse, or insults b! "ritin'.

Act No. #+# of the Philippine Commission, the Treason and &edition =a", ma! also have affected article

#$%, but as to this point, it is not necessar! to mae a pronouncement.

#. Effect of the chan)e from 'panish to Amercian sevorei)nty over the hilippine son article #%& of

the 'panish enal (ode. Appellant:s main proposition in the lo"er court and a'ain ener'eticall!

pressed in the appellate court "as that article #$% of the &panish Penal Code is not no" in forcebecause abro'ated b! the chan'e from &panish to American soverei'nt! over the Philippines and

because inconsistent "ith democratic principles of 'overnment. This vie" "as indirectl! favored b!

the trial 8ud'e, and, as before stated, is the opinion of three members of this court.

Article #$% is found in Chapter of title 222 of Boo 22 of the &panish Penal Code. Title 2 of Boo 22 punishes

the crimes of treason, crimes that endan'er the peace or independence of the state, crimes a'ainst

international la", and the crime of pirac!. Title 22 of the same boo punishes the crimes of lese ma*este,

crimes a'ainst the (ortesand its members and a'ainst the council of ministers, crimes a'ainst the form of

'overnment, and crimes committed on the occasion of the e3ercise of ri'hts 'uaranteed b! the

fundamental la"s of the state, includin' crime a'ainst reli'ion and "orship. Title 222 of the same Boo, in

"hich article #$% is found, punishes the crimes of rebellion, sedition, assaults upon persons in authorit!,and their a'ents, and contempts, insults, in*urias, and threats a'ainst persons in authorit!, and

insults, in*urias, and threats a'ainst their a'ents and other public officers, the last bein' the title to Chapter

. The first t"o articles in Chapter define and punish the offense of contempt committed b! an! one "ho

shall be "ord or deed defame, abuse, insult, or threathen a minister of the cro"n, or an! person in

authorit!. The "ith an article condemnin' challen'es to fi'ht duels intervenin', comes article #$%, no"

bein' "ei'hed in the balance. 2t reads as follo"s0 (An! person "ho, b! "ord, deed, or "ritin', shall

defame, abuse, or insult any Minister of the (ro!n or other person in authority, "hile en'a'ed in the

performance of official duties, or b! reason of such performance, provided that the offensive minister or

person, or the offensive "ritin' be not addressed to him, shall suffer the penalt! of arresto mayor,( that

is, the defamation, abuse, or insult of an! Minister of the (ro!n of the Monarchy of 'pain >for there could

not be a Minister of the Cro"n in the


5/8

&tates, the la!s of the country in support of an established reli'ion or abrid)in) the freedom of the press,

or authori5in' cruel and unusual punishments, and he li+e" !ould at once cease to be of obli)atory

force "ithout an! declaration to that effect.( To uote a'ain from the Pollard vs.1a'an F*H@$G, 1os., #*).?

6n American occupation of the Philippines, b! instructions of the President to the Militar! Commander

dated Ma! #H, *H+H, and b! proclamation of the latter, the municipal la"s of the conuered territor!

affectin' private ri'hts of person and propert! and providin' for the punishment of crime "ere nominall!

continued in force in so far as the! "ere compatible "ith the ne" order of thin's. But President Mc9inle!,

in his instructions to eneral Merritt, "as careful to sa!0 (The first effect of the militar! occupation of the

enem!:s territor! is the severance of the former political relation of the inhabitants and the establishment of

a ne" political po"er.( rom that da! to this, the ordinaril! it has been taen for 'ranted that the provisions

under consideration "ere still effective. To paraphrase the lan'ua'e of the


6/8

'overnment, and a ne" theor! of 'overnment, as set up in the Philippines. 2t "as in no sense a

continuation of the old, althou'h merel! for convenience certain of the e3istin' institutions and la"s "ere

continued. The demands "hich the ne" 'overnment made, and maes, on the individual citi5en are

lie"ise different. No lon'er is there a Minister of the Cro"n or a person in authorit! of such e3alted

position that the citi5en must spea of him onl! "ith bated breath. (,n the eye of our (onstitution and la!s"

every man is a soverei)n" a ruler and a freeman" and has e2ual ri)hts !ith every other man. ;e have no

ran or station, e3cept that of respectabilit! and intelli'ence as opposed to indecenc! and i'norance, andthe door to this ran stands open to ever! man to freel! enter and abide therein, if he is ualified, and

"hether he is ualified or not depends upon the life and character and attainments and conduct of each

person for himself. Ever! man ma! la"full! do "hat he "ill, so lon' as it is not malum in se ormalum

prohibitum or does not infrin'e upon the uall! sacred ri'hts of others.( >&tate vs.&hepherd F*+)G, *//

Mo., #)$I ++ A. &. R., %#@.?

2t is true that in En'land, from "hich so man! of the la"s and institutions of the


7/8

!R!ULLO, C.J., concurrin'0

2 concur "ith the dispositive part of the fore'oin' decision, that is, "ith the acuittal of the accused, for the

sole reason that the facts alle'ed in the information do not constitute a violation of article #$% of the Penal

CodeI for althou'h that article is in force "ith respect to calumn!, in8uria, or insult, b! deed or "ord, a'ainst

an authorit! in the performance of his duties or b! reason thereof, outside of his presence, it is repealed b!

the =ibel =a" in so far as it refers to calumn!, in8uria, or insult committed a'ainst an authorit! b! "ritin' orprintin', as "as that inserted in the said information.

ROMU!L"E(, J., concurrin'0

2 concur "ith the result. 2 believe that the responsibilit! of the accused has not been sho"n either under

article #$% of the Penal Code or under the =ibel =a".

2 am of the opinion that article #$% of the Penal Code is still in force, e3cept as it refers to (Ministers of the

Cro"n,( "hom "e do not have in our overnment, and to calumn!, in*uria, or insult, b! "ritin' or printin',

committed a'ainst an authorit! in the performance of his duties or b! reason thereof, "hich portion "as

repealed b! the =ibel =a".

6ohnson" 'treet" Avance7a and Villamor" 66." concur.

NO) 1, 2*1*People vs. Perfecto89 hil ::$F!CTS+The &ecretar! of the Philippine &enate, ernando M. uerrero, discovered that certain documents, "hichconstituted the records of testimon! 'iven b! "itnesses in the investi'ation of oil companies, had disappeared from hisoffice. The da! follo"in' the convenin' of the &enate, the ne"spaper =a Nacion, edited b! Mr. re'orio Perfecto, publishedan article re'ardin' "hat happened. Perfecto "as prosecuted for "ritin' an editorial a'ainst the Philippine &enate. Theeditorial in uestion "as alle'ed to have violated Art. #$% of the Penal Code, punishin' insults to Ministers of the Cro"n.

SSUE+;hether Article #$% of the &panish Penal Code is still in force.RULNG+The &upreme Court acuitted him, holdin' that the particular article, of the said Code had been automaticall!abro'ated, bein' political in nature, upon the advent of American soverei'nt!. urthermore, Article #$% of the Penal Code iscontrar! to the 'enius and fundamental principles of the American character and s!stem of 'overnment. The 'ulf "hich

separates this article from this spirit "hich inspires all penal le'islation of American ori'in, is as "ide as that "hich separatesa monarch! from a democratic republic lie that of the


8/8

pu#lic law' (t is a !eneral principle of the pu#lic law that on acquisition of territory the pre)iouspolitical relations of the ceded re!ion are totally a#ro!ated ** "political" #ein! used to denominate thelaws re!ulatin! the relations sustained #y the inha#itants to the so)erei!n$

FACTS:

This is a case relatin! to the loss of some documents which constituted the records of testimony !i)en#y witnesses in the Senate in)esti!ation of oil companies$ The newspaper +a ,acion edited #y %r$ -re!orioPerfecto pu#lished an article a#out it to the e.ect that "the author or authors of the ro##ery of

the records from the iron safe of the Senate ha)e perhaps #ut followed the e/ample of certain Senators whosecured their election throu!h fraud and ro##ery$"

Consequently the ttorney*-eneral throu!h a resolution adopted #y the Philippine Senate 0led aninformation alle!in! that the editorial constituted a )iolation of article 256 of the Penal Code$

The defendant -re!orio Perfecto was found !uilty in the municipal court and a!ain in the Court of irst(nstance of %anila$ISSUE:

hether or not article 256 of the Spanish Penal Code was a#ro!ated with the chan!e from Spanish tomerican so)erei!nty

hether or not Perfecto is !uilty of li#el

!EL":

(t is a !eneral principle of the pu#lic law that on acquisition of territory the pre)ious political relations of theceded re!ion are totally a#ro!ated ** "political" #ein! used to denominate the laws re!ulatin! the relationssustained #y the inha#itants to the so)erei!n$

n merican occupation of the Philippines #y instructions of the President to the %ilitary Commander and#y proclamation of the latter the municipal laws of the conquered territory a.ectin! pri)ate ri!hts of personand property and pro)idin! for the punishment of crime e$!$ the Spanish Penal Code were nominallycontinued in force in so far as they were compati#le with the new order of thin!s$

rticle 256 was enacted #y the -o)ernment of Spain to protect Spanish ocials who were therepresentati)es of the 7in!$ 8ut with the chan!e of so)erei!nty a new !o)ernment and a new theory of!o)ernment was set up in the Philippines$ ,o lon!er is there a %inister of the Crown or a person in authorityof such e/alted position that the citi9en must spea: of him only with #ated #reath$ Said article is contrary to

the !enius and fundamental principles of the merican character and system of!o)ernment$ (t was crowded out #y implication as soon as the ;nited States esta#lished its authority in thePhilippine (slands$

"rom an entirely di.erent point of )iew it must #e noted that this article punishes contempts a!ainste/ecuti)e ocials althou!h its terms are #road enou!h to co)er the entire ocial class$ Punishment forcontempt of non*

pp vs. gregorio perfector.docx

Documents