PD 1612: ANTI-FENCING LAW

Section 5. Presumption of Fencing. Mere possession of any good, article, item, object, or anything of value
WHEREAS, reports from law enforcement agencies reveal that there is rampant robbery and thievery of
government and private properties;
WHEREAS, such robbery and thievery have become profitable on the part of the lawless elements because
of the existence of ready buyers, commonly known as fence, of stolen properties;lawphil.net
WHEREAS, under existing law, a fence can be prosecuted only as an accessory after the fact and punished
lightly;
WHEREAS, is imperative to impose heavy penalties on persons who profit by the effects of the crimes of
robbery and theft.
which has been the subject of robbery or thievery shall be prima facie evidence of fencing.
Section 6. Clearance/Permit to Sell/Used Second Hand Articles. For purposes of this Act, all stores,
establishments or entities dealing in the buy and sell of any good, article item, object of anything of value
obtained from an unlicensed dealer or supplier thereof, shall before offering the same for sale to the public,
secure the necessary clearance or permit from the station commander of the Integrated National Police in
the town or city where such store, establishment or entity is located. The Chief of Constabulary/Director
General, Integrated National Police shall promulgate such rules and regulations to carry out the provisions
of this section. Any person who fails to secure the clearance or permit required by this section or who
violates any of the provisions of the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder shall upon conviction be
punished as a fence. lawphi1.net

NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, President of the Philippines by virtue of the powers vested in Section 7. Repealing Clause. All laws or parts thereof, which are inconsistent with the provisions of this
me by the Constitution, do hereby order and decree as part of the law of the land the following: Decree are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

Section 1. Title. This decree shall be known as the Anti-Fencing Law. Section 8. Effectivity. This Decree shall take effect upon approval.

Section 2. Definition of Terms. The following terms shall mean as follows: Done in the City of Manila, this 2nd day of March, in the year of Our Lord, nineteen hundred and seventy-
nine.
(a) "Fencing" is the act of any person who, with intent to gain for himself or for another, shall
buy, receive, possess, keep, acquire, conceal, sell or dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or in any
other manner deal in any article, item, object or anything of value which he knows, or should be
known to him, to have been derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft.

(b) "Fence" includes any person, firm, association corporation or partnership or other
organization who/which commits the act of fencing.

Section 3. Penalties. Any person guilty of fencing shall be punished as hereunder indicated:

(a) The penalty of prision mayor, if the value of the property involved is more than 12,000 pesos
but not exceeding 22,000 pesos; if the value of such property exceeds the latter sum, the
penalty provided in this paragraph shall be imposed in its maximum period, adding one year for
each additional 10,000 pesos; but the total penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed
twenty years. In such cases, the penalty shall be termed reclusion temporal and the accessory
penalty pertaining thereto provided in the Revised Penal Code shall also be imposed.

(b) The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if the value of the
property robbed or stolen is more than 6,000 pesos but not exceeding 12,000 pesos.

(c) The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, if the value of the
property involved is more than 200 pesos but not exceeding 6,000 pesos.

(d) The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to prision correccional in its minimum
period, if the value of the property involved is over 50 pesos but not exceeding 200 pesos.

(e) The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period if such value is over five (5) pesos but not
exceeding 50 pesos.

(f) The penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum period if such value does not exceed 5 pesos.

Section 4. Liability of Officials of Juridical Persons. If the fence is a partnership, firm, corporation or
association, the president or the manager or any officer thereof who knows or should have known the
commission of the offense shall be liable.
Article 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. - Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are
punishable only in the cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor.

A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a
felony and decide to commit it.

There is proposal when the person who has decided to commit a felony proposes its execution to some
other person or persons.

 Requisites of Conspiracy
1) 2 or more persons came to an agreement
2) Agreement concerned the commission of a felony
3) Execution of the felony be decided upon
 Requisites of Proposal
1) That a person has decided to commit a felony
 Person proposing must be decided on committing the felony
 Must be decided and concrete, not a mere suggestion
 Proposal must be on the execution of a felony, not its preparatory acts
2) That he proposes its execution to some other person or persons
 The person to whom the proposal is made need not agree with it
 If the person to whom the proposal is made agrees, then it would be a
conspiracy to commit a felony
 GEN RULE: Conspiracy & proposal to commit felony are NOT crimes
o Conspiracy and proposal to commit crimes are only preparatory acts, which the law
generally regards as innocent or permissible
 EXCEPTION: When the law specifically provides a penalty therefor
o E.g. conspiracy to commit treason, rebellion, and sedition (these should NOT be actually
committed)
 Vs. conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal liability
o When conspiracy relates to a crime actually committed, it is NOT a felony but only a
manner of incurring criminal liability. The act of one is the act of all.
o All the conspirators who carried out the plan and personally took part in its execution are
equally liable
o When conspiracy is only a manner of incurring criminal liability, it is not punishable as a
separate offense
o Indicators of conspiracy: circumstances of their participation showed unity of purpose and
unity in the execution of the unlawful acts
 Vs. evident premeditation
EVIDENT PREMEDITATION CONSPIRACY
Sufficient period of time must elapse to Arises on the very instant the plotters
afford full opportunity for meditation and agree, expressly or impliedly, to commit
reflection and for the perpetrator to the felony and forthwith decide to
deliberate on the consequences of his pursue it. Once the assent is established,
intended deed each and everyone of the conspirators is
made criminally liable for the crime
committed by anyone of them.
 Reason behind making conspiracy and proposal to commit a crime against the internal and external
security of the state punishable
o Ordinarily, the State survives the victim and the culprit cannot find in the success of his
work any impunity
o In crimes against the external and internal security of the State, if the culprit succeeds in
his criminal enterprise, he would obtain the power and impunity for the crime committed.
Article 48. Penalty for complex crimes. - When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave
felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other, the penalty for the most
serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period.
 Though 2 or more crimes are actually committed, they constitute only 1 crime in the eyes of the law.
o Single act
o Offender only has 1 criminal intent
o Only 1 penalty is imposed
 EFFECTS:
o the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its
maximum period
o only one information should be filed
 APPLIES ONLY: when the RPC does NOT provide for a definite specific penalty for a complex crime
 2 kinds of complex crimes:
1. COMPOUND CRIME: When a single act constitutes 2 or more grave or less grave felonies
 Requisites
1) Only a single act is performed by the offender
2) The act produces
o 2 or more grave felonies
o 2 or more less grave felonies
o 1 or more grave and 1 or more less grave felonies
 Examples
 Grenade throw produced murder and multiple attempted murders
 Bombing a plane produced a complex crime of multiple murder and
destruction of property
 Every single burst of shots from a machine gun (separate bursts,
separate acts and separate crimes)
 Single shot killed 2 persons
 NO COMPLEX CRIME for light felonies (e.g. slight physical injuries, damage to
property)
 TREATED SEPARATELY: Several light felonies resulting from a single
act is not complex
 ABSORBED BY THE GRAVE FELONY: When the crime is committed by
force or violence, slight physical injuries are absorbed (necessary
consequence of the force or violence inherent in direct assault and
rape)
 NO COMPLEX CRIME for crimes punishable by special laws (not “grave or less
grave felonies”)
 Special penal law punishing illegal possession of firearms cannot be
complexed with a charge of theft of firearm
 Crimes through negligence are covered by Art. 48
 Mass killings with only a single criminal impulse constitute a single offense
(People v. Lawas)
 Applies ONLY where there is no evidence as to the numbers killed by
each of the accused!!!
 Single criminal impulse / same motive / single purpose theory has no
legal basis, as Art. 48 speaks of a single act
2. COMPLEX CRIME PROPER: When an offense is a necessary means for committing the other
 Requisites
1) At least 2 offenses are committed
2) One or some of the offenses must be necessary to commit the other
3) Both or all the offenses must be punished under the same statute
 NO COMPLEX CRIME when the 2 crimes are punished under different statutes
 “Necessary means” does NOT mean “indispensable means”
 Examples
 Falsification of a public document by an accountable officer is
necessary to commit malversation
 Simple seduction by means of usurpation of official functions
 Abduction as a necessary means for committing rape
o NOTE: Applies ONLY for the first act of intercourse.
Subsequent acts of intercourse are separate acts of rape
and can no longer be complexed with forcible abduction
 When the offender executes various acts, he must have a single purpose
 17 falsified money orders presented for cashing on one occasion =
one criminal intent = one complex crime of estafa through multiple
falsifications (NOT 17 separate estafas and 17 separate falsifications)
 27 falsified vouchers, but NOT to commit estafa or malversation =
liable for 27 falsifications (various acts were not executed for the
attainment of a single purpose
 NO COMPLEX CRIME when the definition of a felony includes another as a
means of commission
 Murder committed by means of fire or explosion = Murder (no
complex crime of arson or destruction of property)
 Illegal possession of firearms, murder, arson, robbery, and other
common crimes are absorbed in rebellion
 NO COMPLEX CRIME when one offense is committed to conceal the other (not a
necessary means to commit, but a means to conceal)
 Burning a house to conceal the crime of homicide (separate crimes
of homicide and arson)
 Falsification to conceal malversation (separate crimes)
 Special complex crimes not covered by Art. 48
o Rape with Homicide (Art. 266-B)
 By reason or occasion of the rape (attempted, frustrated, or consummated), a
homicide is committed
o Arson with homicide (Art. 320, as amended by RA 7659)
o Kidnapping with murder or homicide (Art. 267, as amended by RA 7659)
 When the 2 crimes committed fall under the exclusive jurisdictions of 2 different courts, the higher
court shall try the complex crime
o The court shall retain jurisdiction even if the crim over which it originally exercised
exclusive jurisdiction was not proven
 Art. 48 is intended to favor the culprit
o Imposition of the maximum period of the gravest penalty is better than the aggregate of
the penalties for each offense, if imposed separately
o When 2 or more crimes are the result of a single act, the offender is deemed less perverse
than when he commits said crimes through separate and distinct acts
o If one crime imposed only fine and the other imprisonment, only the imprisonment
sentence shall be imposed.
 PLURALITY OF CRIMES
o DEF’N: Successive execution by the same individual of different criminal acts upon any of
which no conviction has yet been declared
o Kinds
1) Formal or ideal
 Art. 48 provides for 2 cases of this kind of plurality
 There is but one criminal liability
 3 groups
o Art. 48 complex crimes
 o Law specifically fixes a single penalty for 2 or more  Related to Par. 1 of Art. 4
offenses committed (e.g. robbery with homicide) ART 4, PAR. 1 ART. 49
o Offender commits continued crimes 1. Aberratio Ictus (mistake in the RULES BELOW APPLY ONLY TO ERROR IN
2) Real or material blow) PERSONAE.
 Different crimes in law as well as in the conscience of the offender 2. Error in Personae (mistake in the  Applies only where
 Offender shall be punished for each and every offense committed identity) 1) there is a mistake in the
o Distinguished from recidivism 3. Praeter Intentionem (more serious identity of the victim of
PLURALITY RECIDIVSIM consequence caused is not the crime and
No conviction of any of the crimes There must be conviction by final intended) 2) the penalty for the crime
committed judgment of the first or prior offense committed is different
o CONTINUED CRIME (not same or equal) from
 DEF’N: single crime consisting of a series of acts, but all arising from one that for the crime
criminal resolution / criminal impulse (only 1 penalty is imposed) intended to be committed
 NOT A COMPLEX CRIME as the offender here does not perform a single act but  Only one person is affected
a series of acts, and one offense is not a necessary means for committing the  Only one crime is produced (no
other complex)
 Thus, the penalty for continued crime is not to be imposed in the  RULES FOR WHEN THE CRIME COMMITTED WAS DIFFERENT FROM THAT INTENDED
maximum period 1) Penalty for the felony committed > offense accused intended to commit =
 No provision in RPC or other penal law defining and specifically penalizing a Penalty corresponding to the offense intended (max period)
continuing crime. The principle is applied in connection with 2 or more crimes 2) Penalty for the felony committed < offense accused intended to commit =
committed with a single intention Penalty of the felony committed (max period)
 NOT A TRANSITORY CRIME (moving crime) in criminal procedure (to determine 3) The above rules shall NOT apply if the acts committed shall also constitute an attempt or
venue) frustration of another crime, IF the law prescribes a higher penalty for either of the latter
 Transitory crimes such as kidnapping for ransom, wherein the victim offenses = Penalty for the attempted or the frustrated crime shall be imposed (max period)
is taken from one place and brought to the other, would allow  Distinguished from Art. 48
prosecution to proceed in either place ART. 48 ART. 49
 The place where the essential ingredients are committed – rather Two or more crimes from a single act Only one person is affected and only one
than the singleness of the crime – is considered in transitory crimes crime is produced
 Distinguished from real or material plurality Penalty for the most serious crime is to be Lesser penalty is to be imposed in its
CONTINUED CRIME REAL OR MATERIAL PLURALITY imposed in its maximum period maximum period
Series of acts performed by the Series of acts performed by the
offender offender
Different acts constitute only one Each act performed by the offender
crime, as all of the acts performed constitutes a separate crime
arises from one criminal resolution

Article 49. Penalty to be imposed upon the principals when the crime committed is different from that
intended. - In cases in which the felony committed is different from that which the offender intended to
commit, the following rules shall be observed:

1. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be higher than that corresponding to the
offense which the accused intended to commit, the penalty corresponding to the latter shall be
imposed in its maximum period.

2. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be lower than that corresponding to the one
which the accused intended to commit, the penalty for the former shall be imposed in its
maximum period.

3. The rule established by the next preceding paragraph shall not be applicable if the acts
committed by the guilty person shall also constitute an attempt or frustration of another crime,
if the law prescribes a higher penalty for either of the latter offenses, in which case the penalty
provided for the attempted or the frustrated crime shall be imposed in its maximum period.
Article 4. Criminal liability. - Criminal liability shall be incurred: 1) Act performed would be an offense against persons OR property
 Vs. Persons
1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from o Parricide
that which he intended. o Murder
o Homicide
2. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property, were it o Infanticide
not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the employment of o Abortion
inadequate or ineffectual means. o Duel
o Physical injuries
o Rape
 One who commits an intentional felony is responsible for all the consequences which may naturally  Vs. Property
and logically result therefrom, whether foreseen or intended or not o Robbery
o “El que es causa de la causa es causa del mal causado” (he who is the cause of the cause is o Brigandage
the cause of the evil caused) o Theft
 Requisites for Par. 1 o Usurpation
1) An intentional felony (act/omission punished by the RPC) must be committed by means of o Culpable insolvency
dolo / malice o Swindling and other deceits
 Wrongful acts arising from imprudence are covered by Art. 365 (criminal o Chattel mortgage
negligence) o Arson and other crimes involving destruction
2) Wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct, natural, and logical consequence of the o Malicious mischief
felony committed 2) Act was done with evil intent
 PROXIMATE CAUSE – that cause, which, in natural and continuous sequence,  Must be an intentional, not culpable, felony
unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, and without 3) Its accomplishment is inherently impossible (physical or legal), OR
which the result would not have occurred. that the means employed is either inadequate or ineffectual
 The following are NOT efficient intervening causes 4) Act performed should not constitute a violation of another RPC provision
o Weak physical condition of the victim  INDETERMINATE OFFENSE
o Nervousness or temperament of the victim o Purpose of the offender in performing an act is uncertain (e.g. People v. Lamahang)
o Causes inherent in the victim (not knowing how to swim) o Intent of the accused must be viewed from the nature of the acts executed by him – NOT
o Neglect of the victim or third person (refusal to seek from his own admission
medical attention)
o Erroneous or unskillful medical or surgical treatment
 Death is presumed to be the natural consequence of the physical injuries Article 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted felonies. - Consummated felonies as well as those
inflicted when the following are established: which are frustrated and attempted, are punishable.
 The victim at the time the physical injuries were inflicted was in
normal health A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
 Death may be expected from the physical injuries inflicted present; and it is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the
 Death ensued within a reasonable time felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the
 Felony committed is NOT the proximate cause of the resulting injury when will of the perpetrator.
 There is an active force that intervened between the felony
committed and the resulting injury, and such active force is a distinct There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly or over acts, and
act or fact absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the accused, does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or
OR accident other than this own spontaneous desistance.
 The resulting injury is due to the intentional act of the victim
 A person who creates in another’s mind an immediate sense of danger, which
causes the latter to do something resulting in the latter’s injuries, is liable for  CONSUMMATED FELONY
the resulting injuries o All the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present
 3 acts under Par. 1  FRUSTRATED FELONY
o Error in Personae (mistake in the identity of the victim) o Offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a
o Aberratio ictus (mistake in the blow) consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent
o Praeter intentionem (result is greater than that intended) of the will of the perpetrator
 IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES o Elements
o Commission of an impossible crime is indicative of criminal propensity or criminal tendency 1) Offender performs all the acts of execution
on the part of the actor. 2) All the acts performed would produce the felony as a consequence (subjective
o Requisites: phase passed)
3) But the felony is NOT produced
 4) By reasons of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator
 ATTEMPTED FELONY
o Offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not
perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause
or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance
o Elements
1) Offender commences the commission of the felony by overt acts
 OVERT ACTS – physical activity or deed, indicating the intent to
commit a particular crime, more than a mere planning or
preparation, which if carried to its complete termination following its
natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by
the voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and
necessarily ripen into a concrete offense
 Vs. Preparatory Acts – no direct connection with the crime of
murder which A intended to commit
2) He does NOT perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony
(subjective phase not passed)
3) The offender’s act is NOT stopped by his own spontaneous desistance
4) The non-performance of all acts of execution was due to cause or accident
other than his spontaneous desistance
 FRUSTRATED v. ATTEMPTED v. IMPOSSIBLE
FRUSTRATED ATTEMPTED IMPOSSIBLE
Offender has not accomplished his criminal purpose
Objective phase reached: Subjective phase not passed:
Offender has performed all Offender merely commences
the acts of execution which the commission of a felony
would produce the felony as a directly by overt acts and does
consequence NOT perform all the acts of
execution
It is possible to accomplish the evil intent of the offender Evil intent of the offender
CANNOT be accomplished
What prevented its accomplishment is the intervention of a Inherent impossibility or
certain cause or accident in which the offender had no part inadequate or ineffectual
means employed
 How to determine if the crime is only attempted, frustrated, or consummated
o Nature of crime
o Elements constituting the felony
o Manner of committing the same
 Manner of committing the crime
o Formal crimes (committed in one instant; no attempt)
 E.g. slander, false testimony
o Crimes consummated by mere attempt or proposal or by overt act
 E.g. flight to enemy’s country (mere attempt to flee is a consummated felony);
corruption of minors (mere proposal to the minor to satisfy the lust of another
will consummate the offense)
o Felony by omission
 No attempted stage as the offender does not execute acts. He omits to perform
an act which the law requires him to do
o Crimes requiring the intervention of 2 persons to commit them are consummated by mere
agreement
 E.g. Betting in sports contests; corruption of public officers; - the offer made by
one party constitutes attempted felony if the same is rejected or frustrated if
the same is returned
o Material crimes (3 stages of execution)
Article 11. Justifying circumstances. - The following do not incur any criminal liability:  Insulting words without physical assault could not constitute
unlawful aggression. Neither would a mere threatening attitude.
1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided that the following circumstances  When the aggressor flees, unlawful aggression no longer exists –
concur; unless it was merely to take a more advantageous position to insure
the success of his attack
First. Unlawful aggression.  No unlawful aggression when there is an agreement to fight
(challenge accepted)
Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it. 2) REASONABLE NECESSITY of the means employed to prevent or repel it
 Reasonableness depends on the existence of unlawful aggression
Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. and the nature and extent of the aggression and the surrounding
circumstances
2. Any one who acts in defense of the person or rights of his spouse, ascendants, descendants, or 1) Necessity of the course of action
legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters, or his relatives by affinity in the same degrees  Place and occasion of the assault considered
and those consanguinity within the fourth civil degree, provided that the first and second  Darkness of the night and the surprise which
requisites prescribed in the next preceding circumstance are present, and the further requisite, characterized the assault considered
in case the revocation was given by the person attacked, that the one making defense had no  TIME of the existence of unlawful aggression
part therein. (and other elements) is considered. E.g. mortal
wounds inflicted when it existed, minor
3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stranger, provided that the first and wounds after it ceased = self-defense still
second requisites mentioned in the first circumstance of this Article are present and that the applies
person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive.  Person defending is not expected to control
his blow (heat of the moment; no time to
4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does not act which causes damage to analyze the blow; aggression is sudden)
another, provided that the following requisites are present; 2) Necessity of the means used
 Reasonable necessity does not imply material
First. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists; commensurability between the means of
attack and defense. What the law requires is
Second. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it; rational equivalence
 Test of reasonableness of the means used
Third. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it.  Nature and quality of the weapon
o Use of superior weapon
5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office. may be reasonable if it
CANNOT be shown that
6. Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for some lawful purpose. the person assaulted
had other available
means OR if there were
 JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES other means, he could
o No crime committed, as the act was justified. Thus, no criminal liability will be incurred. coolly choose the less
o Burden of proof: on the accused to prove the justifying circumstance to the satisfaction of deadly weapon to repel
the Court the assault
o Fists v. fists, only if both
 SELF-DEFENSE (par 1) parties are of the same
o Requisites: size and strength
1) UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION  Physical condition, character, and
 DEF’N: Equivalent to assault or threatened assault of an immediate size of the person defending
and imminent kind.  Physical condition, character, and
 There must be actual physical force or actual use of a weapon. size of the person attacking
 There must be peril to one’s life, limb, or right.  Place and occasion of the assault
 INDISPENSIBLE REQUISITE (complete or incomplete self-defense)  Act of the victim must be perceivable as a
 Fulfillment of a duty or exercise of a right in a more or less violent danger to life, limb, or rights
manner would be a lawful aggression (e.g. from the police or the  When the attack was by fists, using a dagger
husband of one’s paramour) was not necessary
 Slapping one on the face is unlawful aggression (face = dignity)  The act must be commensurate (groping in a
public place does not warrant being killed)
  Reasonable necessity of the means employed
to be liberally construed in favor of law-
abiding citizens
3) LACK OF SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION on the part of the person defending
himself
 One defending himself must not have given cause for the aggression
by his unjust conduct or by inciting or provoking the assailant
 3rd requisite is present in the following scenarios
1) When no provocation at all was given to the aggressor by
the person defending himself
2) Even if a provocation was given, it was not sufficient
3) Even if the provocation was sufficient, it was not given by
the person defending himself
4) Even if the provocation was given by the person
defending himself, it was not proximate and immediate
to the act of aggression
 Exercise of a right cannot give rise to sufficient provocation
 Provocation need not be with violence
o Rights included
 Right to life (defense of the person or body of the one assaulted)
 Property rights (See Art. 249 of the Civil Code)
 NOTE: defense of property is not of such importance as the right to
life. It can be invoked as a justifying circumstance ONLY when it is
coupled with an attack on the person of one entrusted with said
property (People v. Apolinar)
 Right to honor
 Right to chastity
 Defense of home
o Reason why self-defense is lawful
 Impulse of self-preservation. A person will not succumb to an unlawful
aggression without offering any resistance
o Accused must rely on the strength of his own evidence and not on the weakness of the
prosecution
o Must be proven by sufficient, satisfactory, and convincing (clear and convincing) evidence
o Retaliation is not self-defense
 In retaliation, the aggression that was begun by the injured party already
ceased to exist
 DEFENSE OF RELATIVES (par 2)
o Requisites
1) UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION
 Can be based on the honest belief of the one making a defense
2) REASONABLE NECESSITY of the means employed to prevent or repel it
3) In case the provocation was given by the person attacked, the one making a
defense had NO PART therein.
 Even if the provocation was made by the person attacked, it is
nevertheless a valid defense so long as the accused played no part in
the provocation
 The existence of a running feud between the victim and the accused
was considered by the Court against the latter, in that the accused
was fueled by revenge rather than compassion for his relative.
(People v. Toring)
 BUT Reyes states that even if the accused was ALSO induced by
hatred or revenge, there would still be a legitimate defense of
relative as long as the 3 requisites are present.
o Relatives that can be defended
 Spouse
 Ascendants
 Descendants
 Legitimate, natural, or adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity in
the same degrees
 Relatives by affinity are those tied to marriage
 Death of the spouse terminates the relationship by affinity, UNLESS
the marriage has resulted in issue who is still living, in which case the
relationship of affinity continues
 Relatives by consanguinity within the fourth civil degree
 Consanguinity refers to blood relatives
o Justification: humanitarian sentiment and impulse of blood (men rush to the rescue of
those close to them by ties of blood)
 DEFENSE OF STRANGER (par 3)
o Requisites
1) UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION
2) REASONABLE NECESSITY of the means employed to prevent or repel it
3) The person defending be NOT induced by REVENGE, RESENTMENT, or other
EVIL MOTIVE
 It is required that the accused by actuated by a disinterested or
generous motive
 BUT “be not induced” means that even if the accused has a standing
grudge against the victim, if he enters upon the defense of a stranger
our of generous motive (not out of his grudge) to save him from
serious bodily harm or death, the 3rd requisite still excists.
o Justification: The ordinary man would not stand idly by and see his companion killed
without attempting to save his life.
o STRANGERS: any person not included in the enumeration of relatives mentioned in Art. 11,
Par. 2.
 AVOIDANCE OF GREATER EVIL OR INJURY (par 4)
o Requisites:
1) The evil sought to be avoided actually exists
 Not merely expected or anticipated or may happen in the future
 Evil must not have resulted from a violation of law by the actor
2) The injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it
 Instinct of self-preservation will always make one feel that his own
safety is of greater importance than that of another
 Greater evil should not be brought about by the negligence or
imprudence of the actor
3) There be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it
o “Damage to another”
 Injury to persons
 Damage to property
o There is civil liability under this paragraph
 Gen Rule: no civil liability in justifying circumstances
 Exception: Par. 4, Art. 11. Civil liability is borne by the persons benefited
 FULFILLMENT OF DUTY OR LAWFUL EXERCISE OF RIGHT OR OFFICE (par 5)
 o Requisites: o BOTH persons giving and executing the orders must be acting within the limitations of the
1) The accused acted in the performance of a duty OR in the lawful exercise of a law
right or office o Examples of absence of the 3rd requisite
2) The injury caused or the offense committed be the necessary consequence of  Executioner put the convict to death on a day earlier than the date fixed by the
the due performance of duty OR the lawful exercise of such right or office court
o Illegal performance of duty o When the order is NOT for a lawful purpose, the subordinate who obeyed it is criminally
 The act of the victim in putting his hands in his pocket is not sufficient to justify liable
the accused to shoot him. The deceased was unarmed and the accused could  One who prepared a falsified document with full knowledge of its falsity is not
have first warned him to stop, raise his hands, etc. instead of shooting him on excused even if he merely acted in obedience to the order of a superior
the mere suspicion that the deceased was armed.  A soldier who tortured to death the deceased upon orders of his superior is
o This defense is distinct from that of self defense liable, as such an order was illegal and the accused was not bound to obey it.
 Escaping prisoner who attacked the policeman with a weapon already turned o Subordinate is NOT liable for carrying out an illegal order of his superior
around and ran when he was shot  if he is NOT aware of the illegality of the order AND
 No unlawful aggression = no self defense  he is NOT negligent
 BUT the accused is a public officer acting in the fulfillment of a duty,
thus his aggression is not unlawful
o Lawful exercise of right or office
 DOCTRINE OF SELF HELP (Art. 429, Civil Code)
 Owner may use such force as may be reasonably necessary to repel
or prevent an actual or threatened unlawful physical invasion or
usurpation of his property.
 If in protecting his possession of the property, he injured (not
seriously) the one trying to get it from him, he is justified
 Not necessary that there be an unlawful aggression against the
person charged with the protection of the property.
o NOTE: If there is unlawful aggression, Par. 1 applies
(defense of the right to property)
 Actual invasion of property may consist of a mere disturbance of possession OR
of a real dispossession
 DISTURBANCE – force may be used against it at any time, as long as
it continues, even beyond the prescriptive period for an action of
forcible entry.
 REAL DISPOSSESSION – force to regain possession can be used
ONLY immediately after the dispossession.
o If the property is immovable, there should be no delay in
the use of force to recover it. A delay (even if excusable)
will bar the right to use force.
o Once the usurper’s possession has become firm by the
lapse of time, the lawful possessor must resort to the
competent authority to recover his property.
 Exercise of office
 Executioner of the Bilibid Prison cannot be held liable for murder of
the execution performed by virtue of his functions, as he was merely
acting in the lawful exercise of his office (when the Death Penalty
was still in force)
 Surgeon who amputated the leg of a patient to save him from
gangrene is not liable for mutilation

 OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED FOR SOME LAWFUL PURPOSE (par 6)

o Requisites
1) An order has been issued by a superior
2) Such order must be for some lawful purpose
3) The means used by the subordinate to carry out the order is lawful