PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.

ARNALDO BOSITO Y CHAVENIA

G.R. No. 209346, 12 January 2015, SECOND DIVISION (Carpio, J.)

It is incumbent upon appellant to prove the elements of self-defense: (1) unlawful

aggression on the part of the victim; (2) reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or
repel it; and (3) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person claiming self-defense.

Bosito was charged in an Information for the murder of Willy Berba

Bonaobra. Upon arraignment, Bosito pleaded not guilty and invoked self-defense.
The Regional Trial Court found Bosito guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime
of murder and disregarded the latters claim for self-defense. The Court of Appeals
affirmed the trial court stating that Bositos plea of self-defense has been rebutted
by the positive and categorical testimony of prosecution witness Adonis who had
convincingly established that the unlawful aggression emanated from Bosito and not
from the victim hence, the present petition.

ISSUE:

Should Bosito be acquitted on the basis of self-defense?

RULING

No. In the present case, Bosito would like the Court to believe that he
acted in self-defense. By invoking self-defense, Bosito admits killing the victim and
the constitutional presumption of innocence is effectively waived. The burden of
evidence then shifts to Bosito that the killing was justified and that he incurred no
criminal liability. Thus, it is incumbent upon Bosito to prove the elements of self-
defense: (1) unlawful aggression on the part of the victim; (2) reasonable necessity of
the means employed to prevent or repel it; and (3) lack of sufficient provocation on
the part of the person claiming self-defense.

Bosito claims that the unlawful aggression consisted of Bonaobras group

ganging up on him and attempting to stab him with a knife. However, aside from
Bositos self-serving testimony, the defense did not present any witness to
corroborate his testimony that Bonaobra pulled a knife and tried to stab him. The
means employed by Bosito to prevent or repel the supposed unlawful aggression
was likewise beyond reasonably necessary. The number, nature, and gravity of the
wounds sustained by Bonaobra reveal a determined effort to kill and contradict
Bositos claim of self-defense. Self-defense, to be successfully invoked, must be
proven by clear and convincing evidence that excludes any vestige of criminal
aggression on the part of the person invoking it. Bosito failed to present adequate
evidence to prove otherwise. Thus, his claim of self-defense cannot stand.

UST Law Review, Vol. LIX, No. 1, May 2015