TITLE ONE: CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND
Distinctions between espionage and treason
LAW OF NATIONS
1. Human Security Act of 2007 (RA 9372)
a. The Predicate crimes for violation of the Human
Security Act to attach
RICO PIMUKIDES
Rebellion or Insurrection
Coup d’état
Piracy
Murder
Kidnapping and serious illegal detention
Crimes involving destruction or under
ATE AADREE
The Law on Arson (PD 1613)
Toxic substances and hazardous and nuclear
waste control Act (RA 6969)
Atomic Energy Regulatory and Liability Act (RA
5207)
Anti-Hijacking Law (RA 6235)
Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law (PD
532)
Decree Codifying the Laws on Illegal and
Unlawful Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in,
• Acquisition or Disposition of Firearms,
Ammunitions or Explosives (PD 1866)
b. Elements of Terrorism
• sowing and creating a condition of widespread
and extraordinary fear and panic among the
populace
in order to coerce the government to give in to
an unlawful demand
2. Meaning of “giving aid or comfort” in treason
an act which strengthens or tends to strengthen
the enemy in the conduct of war against the
traitor’s country
an act which weakens or tends to weaken the
power of the traitor’s country to resist or to
attack
the enemy
3. Misprision of Treason
Committed by a Filipino citizen owing allegiance
to the government
Who has knowledge of any conspiracy to
commit treason
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
4.
Espionage is a crime not conditioned by the
citizenship of the offender. This is also true as
regards
treason, in view of the amendment to Article
114.
Treason is committed only in time of war while
espionage may be committed both in time of
peace and in time of war.
Treason is limited in two ways of committing
the crime: levying war and adhering to the
enemy,
giving them aid or comfort. Espionage may be
committed in many ways, enumerated in CA
616.
5. Who can be liable for Article 121 (Flight to enemy’s
country)
Both Filipino and alien residents in the country can be
held liable under Article 121 because the
law does not say “not being a foreigner.” Hence, the
allegiance contemplated in this article is
either natural or temporary allegiance.
6. Acts punished as piracy
The following are acts punishable as Piracy:
1.) Attacking or seizing a vessel on the high seas or in
Philippine waters;
2.) Seizing in the vessel while on the high seas or in
Philippine waters the whole or part of its cargo, its
equipment or personal belongings of its complement or
passengers.
7. Distinctions between piracy and robbery on
high seas
The distinction between piracy and robbery on the high
seas is that Piracy is committed by attacking or seizing a
vessel on the high seas or in the Philippine waters or by
seizing in the vessel while on the high seas or in
Philippine waters the whole or part of its cargo, its
equipment or personal belongings of its complement or
passengers. In robbery on the high seas, there is no
attack or seizure of the vessel.
8. Modes of committing treason and ways of
proving treason
The following are the modes of committing treason:
1. By levying war against the Government;
2 By adhering to the enemies of the Philippines, giving
them aid or comfort.
The following are ways of proving treason:
1. Testimony of two witnesses, at least, to the same
overt act; or
2. Confession of the accused in the open court.
9. Punishable acts and ways to commit espionage
under Commonwealth act no. 616 1941
The following are the punishable acts under
Commonwealth Act No. 616:
1. Unlawfully obtaining or permitting to be obtained
information affecting national defense.
2. Unlawful disclosing information affecting national
defense.
3. Disloyal acts or works in time of peace.
4. Disloyal acts or words in time of war.
5. Conspiracy to violate preceding sections.
6. Harboring or concealing violators of the law.
7. Designation of prohibited places by proclamation.
8. Photographing, etc., defensive installations
regulated; penalties.
9. Photographing, etc., from aircraft.
10. Reproducing, publishing, selling, etc., uncensored
copies.
11. Destroying or injuring or attempting to injure or
destroy war material in time of war.
12. Making or causing war material to be made in
defective manner.
13. Injuring or destroying national defense material,
premises, or utilities.
14. Making or causing to be made in a defective
manner, or attempting to make or cause to be made in
a defective manner, national defense material.
10. Acts punishable in PD 532 and elements of
Qualified piracy under it. Related cases, plus PPL vs
Tulin 2001
Punishable Acts under PIRACY:
· Any attack upon or seizure of any vessel;
· Taking away of the whole or part thereof or its
cargo, equipment, or the personal belongings of its
complement or passengers, irrespective of the value;
· By means of violence against or intimidation of
persons or force upon things.
Punishable Acts under HIGHWAY
ROBBERY/BRIGANDAGE:
· Seizure of any person for ransom, extortion or
other unlawful purposes;
· Taking away of the property of another by means
of violence against or intimidation of person or force
upon things of other unlawful means.
If the ACTS PUNISHABLE AS PIRACY are committed
under any of the following circumstances, it becomes
QUALIFIED PIRACY (PD 532):
· If physical injuries or other crimes are committed
as a result or on the occasion thereof;
· If rape, murder or homicide is committed as a
result or on the occasion of piracy;
· When the offenders abandoned the victims
without means of saving themselves;
· When the seizure is accomplished by firing upon
or boarding a vessel.
11. Highway robbery under PD 532 vs Robbery
committed on highway. Read cases
Highway robbery or brigandage refers to any of
the following acts:
1.) Seizing a person for ransom, extortion or other
illegal purposes
2.) Taking the property of another person by force or
intimidation, force on things or other illegal means
To complete the qualifications, it must be committed by
any person on any highway in the Philippines. Highways
in the Philippines include roads, bridges, railroads,
streets and even passages where vehicles engaged in
transport of persons and/or cargo pass through.
Unlike the Revised Penal Code's requirements on
brigandage the number of perpetrators doesn't matter;
hence even a single person who acted alone can be
guilty of highway robbery. The prosecution also has to
prove that the accused, were organized for the purpose
of indiscriminately committing robbery. If, however, the
robbery was aimed at a specific target, another article
of the Revised Penal Code (294) takes control.
Under Art. 306 of the Revised Penal Code, forming of a
band (which requires at least 4 persons) is an
aggravating circumstance for a group of people who
intend to commit robbery. Highway robbery under PD
532 is therefore different from robbery on the highway
under the Revised Penal Code in that PD 532 is specific
(and even worse) than mere robbery on the highway.
12. A PH airlines aircraft is bound for Davao. While
the pilot and co-pilot are taking snacks at the airport
lounge, some of the armed men were also there. The
pilots were followed by these men on their way to the
aircraft. As soon as the pilots entered the cockpit, they
pulled out their firearms and gave instructions where
to fly the aircraft. Does the anti-hijacking law apply?
The anti-hijacking law applies. Any person who
compels a change in the course or destination of an
aircraft of Philippine registry, or who seizes or usurps
the control thereof while it is in flight, violates the anti-
hijacking law.
In this case, the aircraft is of Philippine registry.
The men followed the pilots to the cockpit, pulled out
their firearms, and instructed the pilots where to fly the
aircraft. This is considered as an act of seizing of control
while the aircraft is in flight.
13. Necessary requisites before Anti-hijacking law
or RA 6235
The following are the necessary requisites before the
Anti-Hijacking Law may apply (a) the aircraft must be of
Philippine registry and (b) it must be in flight
14. When is an aircraft considered 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.
15. IF THE AIRCRAFT IS OF FOREIGN REGISTRY, IS IT
REQUIRED THAT IT IS IN FLIGHT BEFORE R.A. 6235
APPLIES?
It is not required that an aircraft of foreign registry is in
flight before R.A. 6235 applies because air crafts of
foreign registry are considered in transit while they are
in foreign countries.
16. IS THERE HIJACKING IN THE ATTEMPTED STAGE?
No, there is no attempted stage in hijacking. R.A. 6235
(Anti-Hijacking Law) is a special law where the
attempted stage is not punishable.
17. IN THE COURSE OF THE HIJACKING, A PASSENGER
OR COMPLEMENT WAS SHOT AND KILLED. WHAT
CRIME OR CRIMES WERE COMMITTED?
The crime committed remains to be a violation of the
Anti-Hijacking Law or R.A. 6235, but the penalty thereof
shall be higher because a passenger or complement of
the aircraft had been killed. The crime of homicide or
muder per se is not punished.
18. IF THE AIRCRAFT IS OF PHILIPPINE REGISTRY BUT IT
IS NOT IN FLIGHT AND ANY OF THE FOUR
CIRCUMSTANCES MENTIONED UNDER R.A. 6235 IS
COMMITTED, WHAT LAW APPLIES?
In the case at bar, the acts committed will be punished
under Revised Penal Code (RPC) or the applicable
special penal laws and not under Anti-hijacking Law.
The correlative crime may be one of grave coercion or
grave threat. If somebody is killed, the crime is
homicide or murder, as the case may be.
19. Mrs. X was on board her Mercedes Benz, when her
personal driver, Isabelo pulled over the side of the
highway. A man, who introduced himself as Mito,
boarded the car. Isabelo explained to Mrs. X that Mito
was his nephew and they wanted to get money from
her. At this junction, Mito poked a gun at Mrs. X’s
neck. Frightened, Mrs. X immediately handed over to
Mito all the money in her bag. Are Isabelo and Mito
liable for highway robbery under P.D. 532 for the
reason that the robbery was committed along a
highway?
No, Mito Isabelo and Mito are not liable for highway
robbery under P.D. 532 because it is not committed
indicriminately against persons who commute in such
highways, regardless of the potentiality they offer.
There is likewise no frequency in the commission of the
robbery. Thus, highway robbery under P.D. 532 should
be committed randomly and spontaneously.
In the case at bar, the crime committed is
ordinary robbery because the victim who is Mrs. X is a
predetermined victim.
20. A war between Philippines and China was declared
as the latter sought to invade the country. Members of
the Chinese army then bought bandages from a
drugstore owned by Rufino. When the Philippine army
found out, Rufino was charged and later on convicted
of treason. Was his conviction proper? Explain.
No. The conviction of Rufino was not proper. In the 2nd
mode of committing treason, adherence to the enemy
means intent to betray or favors the enemy and disloyal
to his country’s policy of interest and giving aid or
comfort means act which strengthens the enemy in the
conduct of war and which weakens the power of
traitor’s country.
In the case at bar, the sale of bandages by
Rufino to the enemy does not per se constitute treason,
because the said bandages does not necessarily carry an
intention on the part of the vendor neither to adhere to
the enemy nor to give aid or comfort to them.
21. While the S.S. Nagoya Maru was negotiating
the sea route from Hong Kong towards Manila, and
while still 300 miles from Aparri, Cagayan, its engines
malfunctioned. The Captain ordered the ship to stop
for emergency repairs lasting for almost 15 hours. Due
to exhaustion, the officers and crew fell asleep. While
the ship was anchored, a motorboat manned by
renegade Ybanags from Claveria, Cagayan, passed by
and took advantage of the situation. They cut the
ship’s engines and took away several heavy crates of
electrical equipment and loaded them in their
motorboat. Then they left hurriedly toward Aparri. At
daybreak, the crew found that a robbery took place.
They radioed the Aparri Port Authorities resulting in
the apprehension of the culprits. Supposing that while
the robbery was taking place, the culprits stabbed a
member of the crew while sleeping. What crime was
committed? Explain.
The crime committed is qualified piracy. According to
Article 123 of the Revised Penal Code, Piracy is qualified
if any of the following circumstances is present: 1.
When the offenders have seized a vessel by boarding or
firing upon the same, 2. Whenever the pirated have
abandoned their victims without means of saving
themselves or, 3. Whenever the crime of piracy is
accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries, or
rape. In this case, the crime of Piracy was present
accompanied by physical injuries/homicide when the
culprits stabbed a member of the crew while sleeping.
21. While the S.S. Nagoya Maru was navigating the sea
route from Hongkong towards Manila, and while still
300 miles from Aparri, Cagayan, its engines
malfunctioned. The Captain ordered the ship to stop
for emergency repairs lasting for almost 15 hours. Due
to exhaustion, the officers and crew fell asleep. While
the ship was anchored, a motorboat manned by
renegade Ybanags from Claveria, Cagayan, passed by
and took advantage of the situation. They cut the
ship's engines and took away several heavy crates of
electrical equipment and loaded them in their
motorboat. Then they left hurriedly towards Aparri. At
daybreak, the crew found that a robbery took place.
They radioed the Aparri Port Authorities resulting in
the apprehension of the culprits. Supposing that while
the robbery was taking place, the culprits stabbed a
member of the crew while sleeping. What crime was
committed? Explain.
The crime committed was Qualified Piracy as provided
for in Article 123 of the RPC because the crime of piracy
was accompanied by physical injuries.
II. TITLE TWO: CRIMES AGAINST FUNDAMENTAL LAWS
OF THE STATE
1. Who are persons liable for violation of the
Anti-Torture Act (RA 9745)
Section 13. Who are Criminally Liable. –
PRINCIPALS:
a. Any person who actually participated
Or induced another in the commission
of torture or other cruel, inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment or
who cooperated in the execution of the
act of torture or other cruel, inhuman
and degrading treatment or
punishment by previous or
simultaneous acts shall be liable as
principal
b. Any superior military, police or law
enforcement officer or senior
government official who issued an
order to any lower ranking personnel to
commit torture for whatever purpose
shall be held equally liable as principals.
c. The immediate commanding officer of
the unit concerned of the AFP or the
immediate senior public official of the
PNP and other law enforcement
agencies shall be held liable as a
principal to the crime of torture or
other cruel or inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment for any act or
omission, or negligence committed by
him/her that shall have led, assisted,
abetted or allowed, whether directly or
indirectly, the commission thereof by
his/her subordinates. If he/she has
knowledge of or, owing to the
circumstances at the time, should have
known that acts of torture or other
cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment shall be
committed, is being committed, or has
been committed by his/her
subordinates or by others within
his/her area of responsibility and,
despite such knowledge, did not take
preventive or corrective action either
before, during or immediately after its
commission, when he/she has the
authority to prevent or investigate
allegations of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment but failed to prevent or
investigate allegations of such act,
whether deliberately or due to
negligence shall also be liable as
principals.
ACCESSORIES:
Any public officer or employee shall be liable as an
accessory if he/she has knowledge that torture or other
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment
is being committed and without having participated
therein, either as principal or accomplice, takes part
subsequent to its commission in any of the following
manner:
(a) By themselves profiting from or assisting the
offender to profit from the effects of the act of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment;
(b) By concealing the act of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment and/or destroying the effects or
instruments thereof in order to prevent its
discovery; or
(c) By harboring, concealing or assisting the escape
of the principal/s in the act of torture or other
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment: Provided, That the accessory acts
are done with the abuse of the official's public
functions.
2. Classes of Arbitrary Detention:
(1) Arbitrary detention by detaining a person
without legal ground. (Art. 124)
(2) Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the
proper judicial authorities. (Art. 125)
(3) Delaying release. (Art. 126)
3. What are the legal grounds for detention?
The following are legal grounds for the detention of any
person:
(a) The commission of a crime;
(b) Violent insanity or any other ailment requiring
the compulsory confinement of the patient in a
hospital. (Art. 124, par.2)
4. WHEN IS AN ARREST BY A PEACE OFFICE OR BU A
PRIVATE PERSON CONSIDERED LAWFUL?
LEGAL GROUNDS FOR THE DETENTION OF ANY
PERSON? (ART. 124(2) of the RPC)
The following are legal grounds for the detention of
any person:
1. The commission of a crime
2. Violent insanity or any other ailment requiring
the compulsory confinement of the patient in
a hospital
Sec. 5. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. – A peace
officer or a private person may, without a warrant,
arrest a person:
(a) When, in his presence, the person to be ar
rested has
committed, is actually committing, or is attempting
to commit an offense;
(b) When an offense has just been committed and he
has probable
cause to believe based on personal knowledge o
f facts or circumstances that the person to be
arrested has committed it; and
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who
has escaped
from a penal establishment or place where he is se
rving final
judgment or is temporarily confined while his case i
s pending, or
has escaped while being transferred from one confi
nement to another.
In cases falling under paragraphs (a) and (b) above,
the person
arrested without a warrant shall be forthwith delive
red to the
nearest police station or jail and shall be proceeded
against in accordance with section 7 of Rule 112.
More infos:
A POLICE OFFICER WAS CHASING A PERSON WHO H
AD JUST
COMMITTED AN OFFENSE. THE PERSON WENT INSI
DE A HOUSE,
SO THE POLICE OFFICER FOLLOWED. INSIDE THE H
OUSE, THE
POLICE OFFICER SAW DRUGS LYING AROUND.
CAN HE CONFISCATE THE DRUGS AND USE THEM AS
EVIDENCE?
>
Yes. The plain view doctrine is applicable to this c
ase because there was a valid prior intrusion. The
police officer inadvertently
discovered the evidence, he had a right to be there
, and the evidence was immediately apparent.
WHAT IF THE OFFICER MERELY PEEKS THROUGH THE
WINDOW OF THE HOUSE AND SEES THE DRUGS, CAN
HE CONFISCATE THEM AND USE THEM AS EVIDENCE?
> He can confiscate them, without prejudice though to
his liability for violation of domicile.
> He cannot use them as evidence because the seizure
cannot be
justified under the plain view doctrine, there being
no previous valid intrusion.
WHAT IS THE EFFECT IF A WARRANTLESS ARREST IS
ILLEGAL?
>
It doesn't render void all other proceedings, includin
g those leading to the conviction of the accused nor can
the state deprived of its right to convict the guilty when
all the facts of record point
to his culpability
5. WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN VIOLATION OF
DOMICILE AND TRESPASS TO DWELLING?
The differences between violation of domicile and
trespass to dwelling are;
The offender in violation of domicile is a public
officer acting under color of authority;
In trespass to dwelling, the offender is a private person
or public officer acting in a private capacity.
Violation of domicile is committed in 3 different ways:
(1) by entering the dwelling of another against the will
of the latter;
(2) searching papers and other effects inside the
dwelling without the previous consent of the owner;
or
(3) refusing to leave the premises which he entered
surreptitiously, after being required to leave the
premises.
Trespass to dwelling is committed only in one way;
that is, by entering the dwelling of another against the
express or implied will of the latter.
6. PUNISHABLE ACTS IN THE ANTI-TORTURE ACT OF
2009 (R.A. 9745)
SEC. 4. Acts of Torture. — For purposes of this Act,
torture shall include, but not be limited to, the
following:
(a) Physical torture is a form of treatment or
punishment inflicted by a person in authority or agent
of a person in authority upon another in his/her custody
that causes severe pain, exhaustion, disability or
dysfunction of one or more parts of the body, such as:
(1) Systematic beating, headbanging, punching, kicking,
striking with truncheon or rifle butt or other similar
objects, and jumping on the stomach;
(2) Food deprivation or forcible feeding with spoiled
food, animal or human excreta and other stuff or
substances not normally eaten;
(3) Electric shock;
(4) Cigarette burning; burning by electrically heated
rods, hot oil, acid; by the rubbing of pepper or other
chemical substances on mucous membranes, or acids or
spices directly on the wound(s);
(5) The submersion of the head in water or water
polluted with excrement, urine, vomit and/or blood
until the brink of suffocation;
(6) Being tied or forced to assume fixed and stressful
bodily position;
(7) Rape and sexual abuse, including the insertion of
foreign objects into the sex organ or rectum, or
electrical torture of the genitals;
(8) Mutilation or amputation of the essential parts of
the body such as the genitalia, ear, tongue, etc.;
(9) Dental torture or the forced extraction of the teeth;
(10) Pulling out of fingernails;
(11) Harmful exposure to the elements such as sunlight
and extreme cold;
(12) The use of plastic bag and other materials placed
over the head to the point of asphyxiation;
(13) The use of psychoactive drugs to change the
perception, memory, alertness or will of a person, such
as:
(i) The administration of drugs to induce confession
and/or reduce mental competency; or
(ii) The use of drugs to induce extreme pain or certain
symptoms of a disease; and
(14) Other analogous acts of physical torture; and
(b) “Mental/Psychological Torture” refers to acts
committed by a person in authority or agent of a person
in authority which are calculated to affect or confuse
the mind and/or undermine a person’s dignity and
morale, such as:
(1) Blindfolding;
(2) Threatening a person(s) or his/her relative(s) with
bodily harm, execution or other wrongful acts;
(3) Confinement in solitary cells or secret detention
places;
(4) Prolonged interrogation;
(5) Preparing a prisoner for a “show trial”, public display
or public humiliation of a detainee or prisoner;
(6) Causing unscheduled transfer of a person deprived
of liberty from one place to another, creating the belief
that he/she shall be summarily executed;
(7) Maltreating a member/s of a person’s family;
(8) Causing the torture sessions to be witnessed by the
person’s family, relatives or any third party;
(9) Denial of sleep/rest;
(10) Shame infliction such as stripping the person
naked, parading him/her in public places, shaving the
victim’s head or putting marks on his/her body against
his/her will;
(11) Deliberately prohibiting the victim to communicate
with any member of his/her family; and
(12) Other analogous acts of mental/psychological
torture.
SEC. 5. Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment
or Punishment. — Other cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment refers to a deliberate and
aggravated treatment or punishment not enumerated
under Section 4 of this Act, inflicted by a person in
authority or agent of a person in authority against
another person in custody, which attains a level of
severity sufficient to cause suffering, gross humiliation
or debasement to the latter. The assessment of the
level of severity shall depend on all the circumstances of
the case, including the duration of the treatment or
punishment, its physical and mental effects and, in
some cases, the sex, religion, age and state of health of
the victim.
SEC. 7. Prohibited Detention. — Secret detention places,
solitary confinement, incommunicado or other similar
forms of detention, where torture may be carried out
with impunity
7. RULE IN UNLAWFUL ARREST AND INCRIMINATING
AN INNOCENT PERSON
a. May arbitrary detention be committed if the
offended party is no kept within an enclosure to
restrict him of his freedom of locomotion? Read
all related cases include the case of ASTORGA
VS PEOPLE.
Arbitrary Detention is committed by any public officer
or employee who, without legal grounds, detains a
person. The elements of the crime are:
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
2. That he detains a person.
3. That the detention is without legal grounds.
• in establishing the intent to deprive the victim
of his liberty, it is not necessary that the
offended party be kept within an enclosure to
restrict her freedom of locomotion
In the case of People v. Acosta, which involved the
illegal detention of a child, we found the accused-
appellant therein guilty of kidnapping despite the lack
of evidence to show that any physical restraint was
employed upon the victim. However, because the victim
was a boy of tender age and he was warned not to
leave until his godmother, the accused-appellant, had
returned, he was practically a captive in the sense that
he could not leave because of his fear to violate such
instruction.
In the case of People v. Cortez, we held that, in
establishing the intent to deprive the victim of his
liberty, it is not necessary that the offended party be
kept within an enclosure to restrict her freedom of
locomotion. At the time of her rescue, the offended
party in said case was found outside talking to the
owner of the house where she had been taken. She
explained that she did not attempt to leave the
premises for fear that the kidnappers would make good
their threats to kill her should she do so. We ruled
therein that her fear was not baseless as the kidnappers
knew where she resided and they had earlier
announced that their intention in looking for her cousin
was to kill him on sight. Thus, we concluded that fear
has been known to render people immobile and that
appeals to the fears of an individual, such as by threats
to kill or similar threats, are equivalent to the use of
actual force or violence.
In the case of Astorga v. People, the restraint resulting
from fear is evident. Inspite of their pleas, the witnesses
and the complainants were not allowed by petitioner to
go home. This refusal was quickly followed by the call
for and arrival of almost a dozen reinforcements, all
armed with military-issue rifles, who proceeded to
encircle the team, weapons pointed at the
complainants and the witnesses. Given such
circumstances, we give credence to SPO1 Capoquians
statement that it was not safe to refuse Mayor Astorgas
orders. It was not just the presence of the armed men,
but also the evident effect these gunmen had on the
actions of the team which proves that fear was indeed
instilled in the minds of the team members, to the
extent that they felt compelled to stay in Brgy. Lucob-
Lucob. The intent to prevent the departure of the
complainants and witnesses against their will is thus
clear.
• 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 victims
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.
b. A police officer surreptitiously placed a
marijuana stick in a student’s pocket and then
arrested him for possession of marijuana
cigarette. What crime can the police officer be
charged with?
• The offender may be charged of ARTICLE 2-
SECTION 29 of REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165.
Criminal Liability for Planting of Evidence or
Art. 363. Incriminating Innocent Person of
the RPC.
• ARTICLE 2- SECTION 29 of REPUBLIC ACT
NO. 9165. Criminal Liability for Planting of
Evidence. – Any person who is found guilty
of “planting” any dangerous drug and/or
controlled precursor and essential chemical,
regardless of quantity and purity, shall
suffer the penalty of death.
• Art. 363. Incriminating Innocent Person. —
Any person who, by any act not
constituting perjury, shall
directly incriminate or impute to an
innocent person the commission of a crime,
shall be punished by arresto
menor. (Revised Penal Code)
• Elements:
1. That the offender performs an act;
2. That by such act he directly
incriminates or imputes to an innocent
person the commission of a crime
3. That such act does not constitute perjury
How is incriminating innocent person
committed?
●Incriminating innocent person is
committed by performing an act (not
constituting perjury) by which the offender
directly incriminates or imputes to an
 innocent person the commission of a Ammunition. – The unlawful
crime. (Art. 363) It does not apply to false acquisition, possession of firearms and
accusations but to acts tending directly to ammunition shall be penalized as
cause false accusations, such as "planting"
follows:
evidence and the like.

III. TITLE THREE: CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER

Small Arm For individual use; fired
1. Enumerate the crimes against public order from hand or shoulder;
➢ Rebellion or Insurrection not capable of full
➢ Coup d’etat automatic burst
➢ Conspiracy to commit coup d’etat, Class-A Light Weapons Self-loading weapons not
rebellion or insurrection exceeding 7.62MM; fully
➢ Disloyalty of public officers or automatic
employees Class-B light Weapons Designed for use by two
➢ Inciting to rebellion (2) or more persons;
➢ Sedition exceeding 7.62MM less
➢ Conspiracy to commit sedition than 100MM
➢ Inciting to sedition
➢ Acts tending to prevent the meeting of
Congress and similar bodies
Act Penalty Remarks
➢ Disturbance in the proceedings of Unlawfully acquire or Prision
Congress and similar bodies possess small arm mayor
➢ Violation of parliamentary immunity medium
➢ Illegal assemblies Unlawfully acquire or Prision
➢ Illegal associations possess class-A light mayor
➢ Direct assault weapons maximum
➢ Indirect assault Unlawfully acquire or
Reclusion
➢ Disobedience to summons issued by possess class-B light
perpetua
Congress, its committees, etc., by the weapons
constitutional commissions, its Firearm loaded with Unlawfully
committees, etc. ammunition or inserted acquire or
➢ Resistance and disobedience to a with a loaded possess
magazine; fitted with small, class-
person in authority or the agents of
laser or gadgets used to A, or class-B
such persons
guide the shooter to hit One firearms
➢ Tumults and other disturbances
the target; mounted degree
➢ Unlawful use of means of publication with scope or silencer; higher
and unlawful utterances accompanied with an
➢ Alarms and scandals extra barrel; and
➢ Delivering prisoners from jails converted to be
➢ Evasion of service of sentence capable of full
➢ Evasion on occasion of disorders automatic burst
➢ Violation of conditional pardon Unlawfully acquire or
➢ Quasi-recidivisim possess major part of a
small arm
Prision
2. RA 10591 on the New Firearms Law Unlawfully acquire or Absorbed in
mayor
PENAL PROVISIONS possess ammunition for unlawful
minimum
small arm acquisition
or
Section 28. Unlawful Acquisition, or possession
Possession of Firearms and of small arm
Unlawfully acquire or etat, such violation shall be absorbed as an
possess major part of a element of the crime of rebellion or
class-A light weapon insurrection, or attempted coup d’ etat.
Unlawfully acquire or Absorbed in
possess ammunition for Prision unlawful
If the crime is committed by the person without
class-A light weapon mayor acquisition
medium or using the loose firearm, the violation of this Act
possession shall be considered as a distinct and separate
of class-A offense.
light
weapon 4. Definition and Liability
Unlawfully acquire or ➢ Firearm - refers to any handheld or
possess major part of a portable weapon, whether a small arm
class-B light weapon
or light weapon, that expels or is
Unlawfully acquire or Absorbed in
designed to expel a bullet, shot, slug,
possess ammunition for Prision unlawful
class-B light weapon mayor acquisition missile or any projectile, which is
maximum or discharged by means of expansive force
possession of gases from burning gunpowder or
of class-B other form of combustion or any similar
light instrument or implement. For purposes
weapon of this Act, the barrel, frame or receiver
is considered a firearm.
3. RA 10591, section 29 - Use of Loose Firearm in o Refer to above table
the Commission of a Crime. – ➢ Ammunition - refers to a complete
The use of a loose firearm, when inherent in the unfixed unit consisting of a bullet,
commission of a crime punishable under the gunpowder, cartridge case and primer
Revised Penal Code or other special laws, shall or loaded shell for use in any firearm.
be considered as an aggravating circumstance: o Refer to above table
Provided, That if the crime committed with the ➢ Antique Firearm - refers to any: (1)
use of a loose firearm is penalized by the law firearm which was manufactured at
with a maximum penalty which is lower than least seventy-five (75) years prior to the
that prescribed in the preceding section for current date but not including replicas;
illegal possession of firearm, the penalty for (2) firearm which is certified by the
illegal possession of firearm shall be imposed in National Museum of the Philippines to
lieu of the penalty for the crime charged: be curio or relic of museum interest;
Provided, further, That if the crime committed and (3) any other firearm which derives
with the use of a loose firearm is penalized by a substantial part of its monetary value
the law with a maximum penalty which is equal from the fact that it is novel, rare,
to that imposed under the preceding section for bizarre or because of its association
illegal possession of firearms, the penalty of with some historical figure, period or
prision mayor in its minimum period shall be event.
imposed in addition to the penalty for the crime o Persons owning this type of fire
punishable under the Revised Penal Code or arm shall register the same and
other special laws of which he/she is found secure a collector’s license.
guilty. Proper storage of antique
firearm shall be strictly
If the violation of this Act is in furtherance of, or imposed. Noncompliance shall
incident to, or in connection with the crime of be considered as illegal
rebellion of insurrection, or attempted coup d’ possession of the firearm.
➢ Demilitarized Firearm - refers to a o Private person – prision mayor
firearm deliberately made incapable of maximum
performing its main purpose of firing a o Public officer or employee –
projectile. reclusion perpetua
o None
➢ Imitation Firearm - refers to a replica of 5. Enumerate the coverage of an unlicensed
a firearm, or other device that is so firearm under the new firearms law (RA 10591)
substantially similar in coloration and ➢ Unlawful acquisition or possession of
overall appearance to an existing Small arms, Class-A Firearms, Class-B
firearm as to lead a reasonable person Firearms, Antique Firearms, Imitation
to believe that such imitation firearm is Firearms used in the commission of a
a real firearm. crime, and Loose Firearms.
o An imitation firearm used in the 6. Persons liable in rebellion
commission of a crime shall be
Any person who promotes, maintains or
considered a real firearm as
defined in this Act and the heads a rebellion or insurrection by
person who committed the directing the others, speaking for them,
crime shall be punished in signing their receipts and other
accordance with this Act: documents issued in their name, or
Provided, That injuries caused performing similar acts, on behalf of the
on the occasion of the conduct rebels; and
of competitions, sports, games,
or any recreation activities Any person merely participating or
involving imitation firearms executing the commands of others in a
shall not be punishable under rebellion or insurrection.
this Act.
7. Rebellion vs Subversion
➢ Loose Firearm - refers to an
unregistered firearm, an obliterated or Rebellion Subversion
Committed by rising Mere affiliation or
altered firearm, firearm which has been
publicly and taking up membership in a
lost or stolen, illegally manufactured
arms against the subversive
firearms, registered firearms in the Government organization is
possession of an individual other than sufficient
the licensee and those with revoked Punishable under the Punished under RA
licenses in accordance with the rules RPC 1700 Anti-Subversion
and regulations. law
o Section 29 there must be a public Mere membership in a
➢ Planting of Evidence - any person who uprising and taking of subversive association
shall willfully and maliciously insert; arms against the is sufficient and the
place, and/or attach, directly or Government taking up of arms by a
indirectly, through any overt or covert member of a
act, any firearm, or ammunition, or subversive
parts thereof in the person, house, organization against
the Government is but
effects, or in the immediate vicinity of
a circumstance which
an innocent individual for the purpose
raises the penalty to
of implicating or incriminating the be imposed upon the
person, or imputing the commission of offender.
any violation of the provisions of this Crime against public Crime against national
Act to said individual. order security
Force and violence is Force and violence is
 necessary not necessary performances,
functions or
8. Rebellion vs Coup d’etat gatherings not
Rebellion Coup d’etat included in Art. 131
Need not be Committed by and 132.
committed by any members of the Rising publicly and Making an outcry
public officer or military, police, or tumultuously against (shout subversive or
employee public officer the government in a provocative words to
There must be public Non required forceful, intimidating stir up the people) to
uprising or illegal way incite rebellion or
To overthrow the Attack against dully sedition
existing government constituted authorities to prevent the Displaying placards
in the government execution of a law, which provoke a
Instill a government of Diminish or seize state administrative order, disturbance of public
rebels power or a popular election order
With or without With or without
support by public support by civilians to obstruct the Burying with pomp the
officers government or any body of a person
public officer from legally executed
freely performing his
9. Coup d’etat and the New Firearms Law (10591)
functions
If the violation of this Act (10591) is in
to inflict act of hate or First 2 acts are
furtherance of, or incident to, or in connection revenge against a aggravated when
with the crime of rebellion of insurrection, or public officer or committed
attempted coup d’ etat, such violation shall be employee or their tumultuously – 3 or
absorbed as an element of the crime of property. more armed persons
rebellion or insurrection, or attempted coup d’ or provided with
etat. (Sec. 29, par. 2) means of violence
If the crime is committed by the person
12. Persons liable in illegal assemblies
without using the loose firearm, the violation of
➢ The organizers or leaders of the
this Act shall be considered as a distinct and
meeting
separate offense. (Sec. 29, par. 3) ➢ Persons merely present at the meeting
who have common intent to commit
10. Inciting to Rebellion vs. Proposal to Commit the felony of illegal assembly.
Rebellion
Inciting to rebellion Proposal to commit 13. Acts punishable in alarms and scandals
rebellion ➢ discharging any firearm, rocket,
Not required that the Person who proposes firecracker, or other explosives
offender decided to decided to commit
calculated to cause alarm or danger
commit rebellion rebellion
➢ instigating or taking an active part in
Act of inciting is done Person who proposes
publicly uses secret means any charivari or other disorderly
meeting offensive to another or
11. Sedition vs. Tumults and other disturbance of prejudicial to public tranquility;
public order ➢ disturbing the public peace while
Sedition Tumults wandering about at night or while
Objective is to violate Cause serious engaged in any other nocturnal
the public peace disturbance in a public amusements
place ➢ causing any disturbance or scandal in
Purpose is either Interruption or public places while intoxicated or
political or social disturbing otherwise, provided that the
 circumstances of the case do not fall
under Article 153 (Tumults)
14. RA 6968 (Coup d’etat) how is the crime of coup
d’etat committed
The crime of coup d’etat is committed is
a swift attack accompanied by violence,
intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth,
directed against duly constituted authorities of
the Republic of the Philippines, or any military
camp or installation, communications networks,
public utilities or other facilities needed for the
exercise and continued possession of power,
singly or simultaneously carried out anywhere
in the Philippines by any person or persons,
belonging to the military or police or holding
any public office or employment, with or
without civilian support or participation, for the
purpose of seizing or diminishing state power.
15. Rebellion vs. Coup d’etat
Rebellion Coup d’etat
Need not be Committed by
committed by any members of the
public officer or military, police, or
employee public officer
There must be public Non required
uprising
To overthrow the Attack against dully
existing government constituted authorities
in the government
Instill a government of Diminish or seize state
rebels power
With or without With or without
support by public support by civilians
officers
REBELLION is committed when a
multitude of persons rise publicly in arms for
the purpose of overthrowing the duly
constituted government, to be replaced by a
government of the rebels. It is carried out by
force and violence, but need not be participated
in by any member of the military, national
police or any public officer.
COUP D'ETAT is committed when
members of the military, Philippine National
Police, or public officer, acting as principal
offenders, launched a swift attack through
strategy, stealth, threat, violence or
intimidation against duly constituted
authorities of the Republic of the Philippines,
military camp or installation, communication
networks, public facilities or utilities needed for
the exercise and continued possession of
governmental powers, for the purpose of
seizing or diminishing state powers.
Unlike rebellion which requires a public
uprising, coup d’état may be carried out singly
or simultaneously and the principal offenders
must be members of the military, national
police or public officer, with or without civilian
support. The criminal objective need not be to
overthrow the existing government but only to
destabilize or paralyze the existing
government.
Can there be a complex crime of coup d’etat with
sedition?
No, coup d’etat can not be complexed with
sedition. Art 48 provides that 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 in its maximum period.
In this case, coup d’etat and sedition are two
distinct acts because the persons liable for coup d’etat
and sedition are different. Further, in complex crimes
the offender must have a single purpose, the purpose of
coup d’etat is always political while sedition might be
for social ends.
Lastly, coup d’etat can be committed without
committing sedition, and vice versa. Hence, they are not
a necessary means of committing the other.
16. If the attack in coup d’etat is quelled but the leader
is unknown, who shall be deemed the leader thereto?
The leader being unknown, any person
who in fact directed the others, spoke for them,
signed receipts and other documents issued in
their name, or performed similar acts, on behalf
 of the group shall be deemed the leader of said
coup d’état.
17. Supposing a public-school teacher participated
in a coup d’etat using an unlicensed firearm.
What crime or crimes did he commit?
military camp or installation, communication
networks, public facilities or utilities needed for
the exercise and continued possession of
governmental powers, for the purpose of
seizing or diminishing state powers.

Being a public officer, the public-school
teacher committed only coup d’état for his
participation therein. His use of an unlicensed
firearm is absorbed in the coup d’état under the
new firearms law as provided for in Section 29
or RA 10951.
18. Rebellion vs coup d’etat – based on their
constitutive elements as criminal offense
Unlike rebellion which requires a public
uprising, coup d’état may be carried out singly
or simultaneously and the principal offenders
must be members of the military, national
police or public officer, with or without civilian
support. The criminal objective need not be to
overthrow the existing government but only to
destabilize or paralyze the existing
government.

Rebellion Coup d’etat 19. INCITING TO REBELLION, INSURRECTION,

Need not be Committed by SEDITION, INCITING TO SEDITION. Memorize
committed by any members of the elements of rebellion and sedition. Read all
public officer or military, police, or cases including People vs. Dasig, 221 SCRA 549
employee public officer REBELLION OR INSURRECTION
There must be public Non required Public uprising and taking arms against the
uprising
government (force/violence), the purpose of
To overthrow the Attack against dully
existing government constituted authorities which is either:
in the government -to remove from the allegiance
Instill a government of Diminish or seize state to said government or its laws –
rebels power -he territory of the Philippines
With or without With or without or any part thereof
support by public support by civilians -any body of land, naval or
officers
other armed forces
to deprive the chief executive or congress,
REBELLION is committed when a
wholly or partially, of any of their powers or
multitude of persons rise publicly in arms for
prerogatives
the purpose of overthrowing the duly
COUP D E’TAT
constituted government, to be replaced by a
Swift attack accompanied by violence,
government of the rebels. It is carried out by
intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth
force and violence, but need not be participated
Directed against duly constituted authorities
in by any member of the military, national
of
police or any public officer.
-any military camp or
installation
COUP D'ETAT is committed when
-communication networks or
members of the military, Philippine National
public utilities
Police, or public officer, acting as principal
-other facilities needed for the
offenders, launched a swift attack through
exercise and continued
strategy, stealth, threat, violence or
possession of power
intimidation against duly constituted
authorities of the Republic of the Philippines,
 Singly or simultaneously carried out anywhere
in the Philippines
by any person or persons belonging to the
military or police or holding any public office or
employment; with or without civilian support or
participation
With or without civilian support or
participation
For the purpose of seizing or diminishing state
power
INCITING TO REBELLION OR INSURRECTION
That the offender does not take arms or is not
in open hostility against the government
That he incites others to the execution of any
of the acts of rebellion
That the inciting is done by means of
speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems,
banners or other representations tending to the
same end
SEDITION
Offenders rise publicly and tumultuously
employing force, intimidation, or other means
outside of legal methods
to attain any of the following objectives:
-prevent the promulgation or
execution of any law or the
holding of any popular election
-prevent the national
government or any provincial or
municipal government, or any
public officer from exercising its
or his functions or prevent the
execution of an administrative
order
-inflict any act of hate or
revenge upon the person or
property of any public officer or
employee
-commit, for any political or
social end, any act of hate or
revenge against private persons
or any social classes
-despoil, for any political or
social end, any person,
municipality or province, or the
national government of all its
property or any part thereof
INCITING TO SEDITION
the offender does not take a direct part in the
crime of sedition
he incites others to the accomplishment of
any of the acts which constitute sedition
inciting is done by means of speeches,
proclamations, writing, emblems, cartoons,
banners, or other representations tending to
the same end
People vs. Dasig
One afternoon, Pfc. Manatad, Pfc. Tizon and
Pfc. Catamora were tasked by their
commanding officer to man the traffic at 2
streets of Mandaue City. While on duty,
Catamora saw 8 persons, including accused
Nunez, acting suspiciously. He noticed one of
them giving instructions to two of the men to
approach Manatad. Catamora followed the two
men, but sensing that they were being
followed, the men went to the middle of the
road and engage Catamora to a gun battle.
Catamora then heard a series of shots from the
other group and afterwards, he saw Manatad
sprawled on the ground. Catamora sought
refuge at a nearby building from where he saw
2 persons take Manatad’s gun and fired at him
to make sure he was dead. The group then fled
the scene. Later on, 2 teams of police officers
were tasked to conduct surveillance on a
suspected safehouse of members of the NPA
sparrow unit in Cebu City. When they reached
the place, the group saw Rodrigo Dasig and
Nunez trying to escape. The two men were
apprehended, and their firearms were
confiscated. Dasig confessed in the hospital that
he and the group of Nunez killed Manatad and
that he and Nunez were members of the
Sparrow unit. He was found guilty of murder
with direct assault.
HELD: Dasig should be prosecuted for rebellion.
Appellant not only confessed voluntarily his
membership with the Sparrow unit, but also his
participation and that of his group in the killing
 of Manatad. The Sparrow unit is the liquidation
squad of the NPA with the objective of
overthrowing the duly constituted government.
It is therefore not hard to comprehend that the
killing of Manatad was committed as a means
to or in furtherance of the subversive ends of
the NPA. As such, appellant is liable for
rebellion and not murder with direct assault
upon a person in authority. Acts committed in
furtherance of rebellion though crimes in
themselves are deemed absorbed in one single
crime of rebellion. The act of killing a police
officer, knowing too well that the victim is a
person in authority, is a mere component of
rebellion or an act done in furtherance of
rebellion. It cannot be made the basis of a
separate charge.
20. Elements of sedition and statements
constituting inciting to sedition
SEDITION
Offenders rise publicly and tumultuously
employing force, intimidation, or other means
outside of legal methods
to attain any of the following objectives:
-prevent the promulgation or
21. During the May 2010 elections, five persons,
execution of any law or the
holding of any popular election
-prevent the national
government or any provincial or
municipal government, or any
public officer from exercising its
or his functions or prevent the
execution of an administrative
order
-inflict any act of hate or
revenge upon the person or
property of any public officer or
employee
-commit, for any political or
social end, any act of hate or
revenge against private persons
or any social classes
-despoil, for any political or social end, any
person, municipality or province, or the national
government of all its property or any part
thereof
INCITING TO SEDITION
the offender does not take a direct part in the
crime of sedition
he incites others to the accomplishment of
any of the acts which constitute sedition
inciting is done by means of speeches,
proclamations, writing, emblems, cartoons,
banners, or other representations tending to
the same end
Statements constituting inciting to sedition
- Tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful
officer in executing the functions of his
office; or
- Tend to instigate others to cabal and
meet together for unlawful purposes;
or
- Suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies
or riots; or
- Lead or tend to stir up the people
against the lawful authorities or to
disturb the peace of the community,
the safety and order of the
Government.
armed with guns and knives, attacked a
jeepney wherein eight policemen, the chief of
police, and other passengers were riding. Two
policemen, the jeepney driver and two
children were killed while two policemen were
wounded. The accused were charged with
sedition. Was the charge correct? What are the
elements of seditions?
The crime committed is not sedition as
the purpose of the attack was not to:
-prevent the promulgation or
execution of any law or the
holding of any popular election;
-prevent the national
government or any provincial or
municipal government, or any
public officer from exercising its
or his functions or prevent the
 execution of an administrative other effects
order; inside the
-inflict any act of hate or dwelling
revenge upon the person or without the
previous
property of any public officer or
consent of
employee; or the owner
-commit, for any political or 3. Refusing to
social end, any act of hate or leave the
revenge against private persons premises,
or any social classes. after having
surreptitious
The fact that the crime took place ly entered
during the May 2010 elections is merely said
dwelling and
incidental.
after having
22. Who are public officers been
required to
A public officer is any person, who, by direct
leave the
provision of law, popular election or same
appointment by competent authority, shall take
part in the performance of public functions in 25. Art 157 Evasion of service of sentence
the government, or shall perform in said The penalty of prision correccional in its
government or in any of its branches public medium and maximum periods shall be
duties as an employee, agent or subordinate imposed upon any convict who shall evade
official of any rank or class. It includes persons service of his sentence by escaping during the
performing public duties as an employee, agent term of his imprisonment by reason of final
or subordinate official, of any rank or class. judgment. However, if such evasion or escape
23. 3 ways of committing arbitrary detention shall have taken place by means of unlawful
1- Detaining a person without legal grounds. entry, by breaking doors, windows, gates, walls,
2- Delay in the delivery of detained persons roofs, or floors, or by using picklocks, false keys,
arrested without warrant to proper judicial deceit, violence or intimidation, or through
authorities. connivance with other convicts or employees of
3- Delaying release of prisoners.
the penal institution, the penalty shall be
prision correccional in its
24. Violation of domicile vs trespass to dwelling
maximum period.
Violation of Trespass to Dwelling
Domicile Elements:
Offender is a public Offender is a private 1- Offender is a convict by final judgement
officer individual or public 2- He is serving his sentence which consist in
officer acting as a deprivation of liberty
private individual 3- He evades the service of his sentence by
3 different ways of Committed by entering escaping during the term of his sentence
committing: the dwelling of another
1. Entering the against the express or Qualifying circumstance:
dewing of implied will of the latter
another Evasion of escape takes place:
against the
1- By means of unlawful entry (by scaling)
latter’s will
2- By breaking doors, windows, gates, walls,
2. Searching
papers and roofs, or floors
 3- By using picklocks, false keys, disguise,
deceit, violence, or intimidation
4- Through connivance with other convicts or
employees of the penal institution
26. Illegal firearms as an element of the crimes of
rebellion, insurrection, sedition, or attempted
coup d’etat. Include cases on when it becomes
aggravating only without absorption.
Illegal firearms is absorbed as an element in the
crimes of rebellion, insurrection, sedition, or
attempted coup d’état.
Rule 1: If the crime committed with the
use of an illegal firearm is penalized
with a maximum penalty which is lower
than that prescribed in RA 10591 for
illegal possession of firearm, the
penalty for illegal possession of firearm
shall be imposed in lieu of the penalty
for the crime charged.
Rule 2: If the crime committed with the
use of an illegal firearm is penalized
with a maximum penalty which is equal
to that imposed under RA 10591, the
penalty of prision mayor in its minimum
period shall be imposed in addition to
the penalty for the crime.
However, if the unlicensed firearm was not
used in the commission of the other crime, the
absorption principle is also not applicable. The
two offenses will be treated as distinct and
separate from each other.
27. Can the trial court convict the accused of two
crimes: murder and illegal possession of
firearms? How about direct assault and illegal
possession of firearms?
Section 29 of RA 10951 provides that
the use of a loose firearm, when inherent in the
commission of a crim punishable under the RPC
or other special laws, shall be considered as an
aggravating circumstance. Thus, illegal
possession of firearms in the crime of murder
shall be appreciated as a mere aggravating
circumstance.
In cases of direct assault with the use of
a loose firearm, the crime of illegal possession
would be absorbed in the crime of direct
assault. However, Sect 29 of RA 10591 provides
that, “if the crime committed with the use of a
loose firearm is penalized by the law with a
maximum penalty which is lower than that
prescribed for illegal possession of firearm, the
penalty for illegal possession of firearm shall be
imposed in lieu of the penalty for the crime
charged.”
The crime of qualified direct assault is
punished by prision correccional medium and
maximum which is lower than that of illegal
possession. Hence, the penalty that would be
imposed is that for the crime of illegal
possession.
28. If in the commission of direct assault with
multiple attempted homicide the accused used
an unlicensed firearm, can he be convicted
separately of the offenses of (a) Illegal
possession of firears under PD 1866, as
amended by RA 8294, and (b) direct assault
with attempted homicide? Read all the cases
including the case of People Vs. Ladjalaam.
No. Accused cannot be convicted
separately of the crime of illegal possession of
firearms and direct assault with attempted
homicide.
Under the provisions of RA 8264, if the
accused committed a crime with the use of an
unlicensed firearm, such use shall only be
appreciated as a special aggravating
circumstance.
In the case at bar, the accused can only
be held liable for direct assault with multiple
attempted homicide with the special
aggravating circumstance of use of unlicensed
firearm. (People vs. Ladjalaam, G.R. No.
136149-51, Sept. 19, 2000)
29. Distinctions between public officers, person in
authority and agent of a person in authority
A Public Officer is any person who, by
direct provision of the law, popular election or
appointment by competent authority, shall take
part in the performance of public functions in
the Government of the Philippine Islands, or
shall perform in said Government or in any of its
 branches public duties as an employee, agent or
subordinate official, of any rank or class.
A person in authority is one “directly
vested with jurisdiction” or have the power and
authority to govern and execute laws.
An Agent of a person in authority is one
who is charged with (a) maintenance of peace
and order (b) protection and security of life and
property.
30. Cases on direct assault, qualified direct assault,
and indirect assault
People vs. Recto 129069 17 Oct 2001 – complex
crime of qualified direct assault with frustrated
murder and qualified direct assault with
murder; Tanod – considered an agent of a
person in authority
People vs Beltran 138 SCRA 521 – the
agent/person in authority must be performing
official duty
Clarin vs. Justice of Peace L-7661 30 April 1955
– police officers are persons in authority
People vs Dollantes 151 SCRA 592 30 June
1957 – Barangay Captain is a person of
authority
Indirect Assault
Elements:
1- A person in authority or his agents is the
victim of any of the forms of direct assault
2- A person comes to the aid of such authority
or his agent
3- Offender makes use of force or intimidation
upon such person coming to the aid of the
authority of his agent
Can only be committed when direct assault is
committed
31. Direct Assault vs Resistance
Direct Assault Resistance
Person in authority Person in authority or
or his agent is his agent is in actual
engaged in the performance of duty
performance of
official duty or
assaulted by reason
thereof
Committed in 4 Committed only by
ways: resisting or seriously
1. Attacking disobeying a person in
2. Employing authority or his agent
force
3. Seriously
intimidating
4. Seriously
resisting a
person in
authority or
his agent
Force is used Force is not so serious –
no manifest intention to
defy the law
32. Charivari
Charivari includes a medley of
discordant voices, a mock serenade of
discordant noises made on kettles, tins, horns,
etc., designed to annoy and insult.
33. VG, JG, GG and JG conspired to overthrow the
Philippine government. VG was recognized as
the titular head of the conspiracy. Several
meetings were held and the plan was finalized.
JJ, bothered by his conscience. Confessed to
Father Abraham that he, VG, JG and GG have
conspired to overthrow the government.
Father Abraham did not report this
information to the proper authorities. Did
Father Abraham commit a crime? If so, what
crime was committed?
No. Father Abraham did not commit a
crime because the conspiracy involved is one to
commit rebellion, not a conspiracy to commit
treason which makes a person criminally liable
under Article 116 of the Revised Penal Code.
Even assuming that it will fall as misprision of
treason, Father Abraham is exempted from
criminal liability under Art. 12, par. 7, as his
failure to report can be considered as due to
"insuperable cause", as this involves the
sanctity and inviolability of a confession.
Conspiracy to commit rebellion results
in criminal liability to the co-conspirators, but
not to a person who learned of such and did not
report to the proper authorities (US vs. Vergara,
3 Phil. 432; People vs. Atienza. 56 Phil. 353).
 There is no such crime as misprision of
rebellion.
34. A, a lady professor, was giving an examination.
She noticed B, one of the students, cheating.
She called the student's attention and
confiscated his examination booklet, causing
embarrassment to him. The following day,
while the class was going on, the student, B,
approached A and, without any warning,
slapped her. B would have inflicted further
injuries on A had not C, another student, come
to A's rescue and prevented B from continuing
his attack. B turned his ire on C and punched
the latter. What crime or crimes, if any, did B
commit? Why?
B committed two (2) counts of direct
assault, one for slapping A, the professor, and
one for the violence inflicted on C, the student.
By express provision of Article 152, in
relation to Article 148 of the Revised Penal
Code, teachers and professors of public or duly
recognized private schools, colleges and
universities in the actual performance of their
professional duties or on the occasion of such
performance are deemed persons in authority
for purposes of the crimes of direct assault and
of resistance and disobedience in Articles 148
and 151 of said Code.
Art 152 further provides that any
person who comes to the aid of persons in
authority shall be deemed an agent of a person
in authority. Accordingly, the attack on C is, in
the eyes of the law, an attack on an agent of a
person in authority, not just an attack on a
student.
TITLE IV: CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST
1. Enumerate the Crimes against Public Interest
1- Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of
the Philippines, forging the signature or stamp of the
Chief Executive. (Art. 161)
2- Using forged signature or counterfeit seal or stamp.
(Art. 162)
3- Making and importing and uttering false coins. (Art.
163)
4- Mutilation of coins, importation and uttering of
mutilated coins. (Art. 164)
5- Selling of false or mutilated coins, without
connivance. (Art. 165)
6- Forging treasury or bank notes or other documents
payable to bearer, importing, and uttering of such false
or forged notes and documents. (Art. 166)
7- Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments
not payable to bearer. (Art. 167)
8- Illegal possession and use of forged treasury or bank
notes and other instruments of credit. (Art. 168)
9-Falsification of legislative documents. (Art. 170)
10- Falsification by public officer, employee or notary or
ecclesiastical minister. (Art. 171)
11- Falsification by private individuals and use of
falsified documents. (Art. 172)
12- Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and
telephone messages and use of said falsified messages.
(Art. 173)
13- False medical certificates, false certificates of merit
or service. (Art. 174)
14- Using false certificates. (Art. 175) 15- Manufacturing
and possession of instruments or implements for
falsification. (Art. 176)
16- Usurpation of authority or official functions. (Art.
177)
17- Using fictitious name and concealing true name.
(Art. 178)
18- Illegal use of uniform or insignia. (Art. 179)
19- False testimony against a defendant. (Art. 180)
20- False testimony favorable to the defendant. (Art.
181)
21- False testimony in civil cases. (Art. 182)
22- False testimony in other cases and perjury. (Art.
183)
23- Offering false testimony in evidence. (Art. 184)
24- Machinations in public auction. (Art. 185)
25- Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade.
(Art. 186)
26- Importation and disposition of falsely marked
articles or merchandise made of gold, silver, or other
precious metals or their alloys. (Art. 187)
27- Substituting and altering trade marks and trade
names or service marks. (Art. 188) REPEALED BY
Intellectual Property Code
28- Unfair competition and fraudulent registration of
trade mark or trade name, or service mark; fraudulent
designation of origin, and false description. (Art. 189)
REPEALED by Intellectual Property Code
2. Explain the cycle of laundering under the Anti-
Money Laundering Act (RA No. 9160)
Under the Anti-Money Laundering Act, the cycle
of laundering begins when the money or income gained
from unlawful activities undergoes through (1) the
placement stage, where “dirty” cash or crime proceeds
are put into the legitimate financial system through
cash deposits, currency exchanges, change of
denominations, and/or other similar acts; (2) the
layering stage, where financial transactions are being
layered or disguised to prevent audit trail and to sever
its link with the original crime. This stage is the most
complex because it often involves international
movement of funds to attain the purpose of separating
the illicit money from its source. The last stage is (3) the
integration stage, where the money is returned to the
criminal from what seems to be legitimate sources.
Under this stage, the criminal gains possession of the
money in a manner that does not draw attention from
authorities and appears from legitimate sources.
3. Presumption of falsification
(Under Art 172,) It is presumed that a person,
who has possession of a falsified document and uses
the same, is the author of the falsified document. The
circumstances therefor, that the accused used and
benefitted from the falsified document serve as strong
evidence that the accused falsified it or caused the
same to be falsified. (for reference, read: People vs.
Sendaydiego)
4. Distinction between perjury and false testimony
False testimony and perjury are both perversions of the
truth.
False testimony is given in the course of a judicial
proceeding, whereas perjury is any wilful and corrupt
assertion of falsehood on a material matter under oath
and not given in judicial proceedings.
False testimony contemplates an actual trial where
judgment of conviction or acquittal is rendered and not
merely a preliminary investigation, whereas perjury
may be committed even during a preliminary
investigation as well as in the making of a false affidavit
under oath on a material matter when required by law.
5. A person falsified a private document and used the
same to obtain fraudulent gain by means of deceit. Is
the charge of estafa through falsification proper?
No, There is no complex crime of estafa through
falsification of a private document. The immediate
effect of falsification of private document is the same as
that of estafa. The falsification of a private document
cannot be said to be a means to commit estafa because
the fraudulent gain obtained through deceit in estafa, in
the commission of which a private document was
falsified, is nothing more or less than the very damage
caused by falsification of such document.
Additional Notes:
If a private document is falsified to obtain from
the offended party the money or other personal
property which the offender later misappropriated, the
crime committed is falsification of private document
only.
If a private document is falsified to conceal the
misappropriation of the money or other personal
property which has been in the possession of the
offender, the crime committed is estafa with abuse of
confidence only.
6. When can malversation be committed by private
individuals? In malversation of public funds, the
offender’s return of the amount malversed has what
effect?
 Private individuals are liable as a co-principal for
malversation when they conspire with a public officer in
committing the crime of malversation. Under Article
222 of the RPC, the provisions on malversation can also
be extended to private individuals who are either (1) in
charge of any national, provincial or municipal funds,
revenue or property; or (2) an administrator or
depository of funds or property attached, seized or
deposited by public authority, even if such property
belongs to a private individual.
The return of the malversed funds has the
effect of a mitigating circumstance, but it does not
exempt the offender from his criminal liability. Similarly,
payment or reimbursement may only be a mitigating
circumstance and not a defense for exemption in
malversation, because damage is not an element to the
crime of malversation.
7. Paolo was charged with homicide before the
Regional Trial Court of Manila. Andrew, a prosecution
witness, testified that he saw Paolo shoot Abby during
their heated argument. While the case is still pending,
the City Hall of Manila burned down and the entire
records of the case were destroyed. Later, the records
were reconstituted. Andrew was again called to the
witness stand. This time he testified that his first
testimony was false and the truth was he was abroad
when the crime took place. The judge immediately
ordered the prosecution of Andrew for giving a false
testimony favorable to the defendant in a criminal
case. Will the case against Andrew prosper?
Yes. For one to be criminally liable under Art
181 of the RPC, it is not necessary that the criminal case
where Andrew testified is terminated first. It is not even
required of the prosecution to prove which of the two
statements of the witness is false and to prove the
statement to be false by evidence other than the
contradictory statements.
8. A falsified official or public document was found in
the possession of the accused. No evidence was
introduced to show that the accused was the author of
the falsification. As a matter of fact, the trial court
convinced the accused of falsification of the official or
public document mainly on the proposition that “the
only person who could have made the erasures and
the superimposition mentioned is the one who will be
benefited by the alterations thus made” and that “he
alone could have the motive for making such
alterations”. Was the conviction of the accused proper
although the conviction was premised merely on the
aforesaid ratiocination? Explain your answer.
Yes, in the absence of evidences, it is an
established rule that when a person has in his
possession a falsified document and makes use of the
same, the presumption or inference is justified that
such person is the forger. Also, the person who stood to
benefit by the falsification of a public document and
was in possession of it is presumed to be the material
author of the falsification. Since such presumption is
not a conclusive one, but a disputable or rebuttable
presumption, it is a species of evidence that may be
accepted and acted on when there is no other evidence
to uphold the contention for which it stands or one
which may be overcome by other evidence.
TITLE V: CRIMES RELATIVE TO OPIUM AND OTHER
PROHIBITED DRUGS
1. RA 9165: The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act
of 2002
Acts Punished:
1. Importation of dangerous drugs and / or
controlled precursors and essential chemicals
2. Sale, trading, administration, dispensation,
delivery, distribution and transportation of
dangerous drugs and / or controlled precursors
and essential chemicals
3. Maintenance of den, dive or resort where
dangerous drugs and / or controlled precursors
and essential chemicals.
4. Being employees of the den, dive or resort:
5. Manufacture of dangerous drugs and / or
controlled precursors and essential chemicals
6. Illegal diversion of any controlled precursor and
essential chemical
7. Manufacture or delivery of equipment,
instrument, apparatus, and other paraphernalia
for dangerous drugs and / or controlled
precursors and essential chemicals
8. Possession of dangerous drug
9. Possession of equipment, instrument,
apparatus and other paraphernalia for
dangerous drugs
 10. Possession of dangerous drugs during parties,
social gatherings or meetings will merit
maximum penalty regardless of quantity and
purity
11. Possession of equipment, instrument,
apparatus for dangerous drugs during parties,
social gatherings, or meetings merit maximum
penalty
12. Use of dangerous drugs
13. Cultivation or culture of plants classified as
dangerous drugs
14. Maintenance and keeping of original records of
transactions on dangerous drugs and / or
controlled precursors and essential chemicals
15. Unnecessary prescription of dangerous drugs
16. Unlawful prescription of dangerous drugs
2. Definition of Trading and Administration, also
Financier and Protector/Coddler
Art 1, section 3 of RA 9165
(a) Administer. – Any act of introducing any
dangerous drug into the body of any person,
with or without his/her knowledge, by injection,
inhalation, ingestion or other means, or of
committing any act of indispensable assistance
to a person in administering a dangerous drug
to himself/herself unless administered by a duly
licensed practitioner for purposes of
medication.
(q) Financier. – Any person who pays for, raises or
supplies money for, or underwrites any of the illegal
activities prescribed under this Act.
(ee) Protector/Coddler. – Any person who
knowingly and willfully consents to the unlawful
acts provided for in this Act and uses his/her
influence, power or position in shielding, harboring,
screening or facilitating the escape of any person
he/she knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe
on or suspects, has violated the provisions of this
Act in order to prevent the arrest, prosecution and
conviction of the violator.
3. Estipona vs. Lobrigo case on plea bargaining with
focus on when a plea to the lesser offense is allowed.
**Plea-Bargaining
➢ Any person charged under any provision of
Plea-Bargaining in RA 9165, regardless of
the imposable penalty shall not be allowed
to avail of the provision on plea-bargaining
➢ Salvador Estipona Jr. v. Hon. Frank E.
Lobrigo
o August 15, 2017 Supreme Court
declared the provision, Section 23
on Plea-Bargaining in RA 9165 as
UNCONSTITUTIONAL for it violates
the rule making power of the
Supreme Court.
4. What must be proven in the prosecution for illegal
sale of dangerous drugs?
To secure a conviction for illegal sale of
dangerous drugs under Section 5, Article II of RA 9165,
the prosecution must establish the following elements:
(1) the identity of the buyer and the seller, the object of
the sale and its consideration; and (2) the delivery of
the thing sold and the payment therefor. What is
important is that the sale transaction of drugs actually
took place and that the object of the transaction is
properly presented as evidence in court and is shown to
be the same drugs seized from the accused.
5. What must be proven in the prosecution for illegal
delivery of dangerous drugs?
It must be proven that: (1) the accused passed
on possession of a dangerous drug to another,
personally or otherwise, and by any means; (2) such
delivery is not authorized by law; and (3) the accused
knowingly made the delivery. Worthy of note is that the
delivery may be committed even without consideration.
6. What must be proven in the prosecution for illegal
possession of dangerous drugs?
To prove the illegal possession of dangerous
drugs, it must be ascertained that: (1) the accused is in
possession of the regulated drugs; (2) the accused is
fully and consciously aware of being in possession of the
regulated drugs; and (3) the accused has no legal
authority to possess the regulated drug. The illegal
possession may either be actual or constructive.
Possession of dangerous drugs constitute prima facie
evidence of knowledge or animus possidendi sufficient
to convict an accused in the absence of any satisfactory
explanation of such possession.
7. Review Section 21(a-g) on the Manner of Custody
and Disposition of Confiscated and Seized Drugs. Focus
on:
A. Initial control of the apprehending team
B. Inventory of the items
C. Marking and photographs
SEC. 21.: The PDEA shall take charge and have custody
of all dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous
drugs, controlled precursors and essential chemicals, as
well as instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory
equipment so confiscated, seized and/or surrendered,
for proper disposition in the following manner:
(1) The apprehending team having initial
custody and control of the dangerous drugs, controlled
precursors and essential chemicals,
instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory
equipment shall, immediately after seizure and
confiscation, conduct a physical inventory of the seized
items and photograph the same in the presence of the
accused or the person/s from whom such items were
confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative or
counsel, with an elected public official and a
representative of the National Prosecution Service or
the media who shall be required to sign the copies of
the inventory and be given a copy thereof: Provided,
That the physical inventory and photograph shall be
conducted at the place where the search warrant is
served; or at the nearest police station or at the nearest
office of the apprehending officer/team, whichever is
practicable, in case of warrantless seizures…
(2) Within twenty-four (24) hours upon
confiscation/seizure of dangerous drugs, plant sources
of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential
chemicals, as well as instruments/ paraphernalia and/or
laboratory equipment, the same shall be submitted to
the PDEA Forensic Laboratory for a qualitative and
quantitative examination…
(3) A certification of the forensic laboratory
examination results, which shall be done by the
forensic laboratory examiner, shall be issued
immediately upon the receipt of the subject item/s:
Provided, That when the volume of dangerous drugs,
plant sources of dangerous drugs, and controlled
precursors and essential chemicals does not allow the
completion of testing within the time frame, a partial
laboratory examination report shall be provisionally
issued stating therein the quantities of dangerous drugs
still to be examined by the forensic laboratory:
Provided, however, That a final certification shall be
issued immediately upon completion of the said
examination and certification.
8. Four links in the chain of custody that must be
proven. The function of chain of custody and effect of
non-compliance
Chain of custody is the duly recorded
authorized movements and custody of seized
dangerous drugs from the time of seizure, to receipt in
forensic laboratory, presentation in court, safekeeping
and until destruction of the dangerous drugs. In order
to ensure the identity and integrity of the subject
substance, the following links in the chain of custody
must be followed and established: (1) the seizure and
the marking, if practicable, of the illegal drug recovered
from the accused by the apprehending officer; (2) the
turnover of the illegal drug seized by the apprehending
officer to the investigating officer; (3) the turnover of
the illegal drug by the investigating officer to the
forensic chemist for laboratory examination; and (4) the
turnover and submission of the marked illegal drug by
the forensic chemist to the court. Failure to comply with
the chain of custody seriously casts doubt on the
measures taken and procedure done by police
operatives. It also implies a failure on the part of the
prosecution to establish the identity of the corpus
delicti since it produces doubt on the origins of the
seized evidence.
9. The objective test in buy-bust operations and the
validity thereof
The objective test entails that the details of the
buy-bust operation must be clearly and adequately
shown. This includes the initial contact between the
poseur-buyer and the pusher, the offer to purchase, the
promise or payment of the consideration up until the
delivery of the illegal drug subject of sale. Applying the
objective test in proving the validity of the buy-bust
operation, the following elements must concur: (1) the
identity of the buyer and seller, the object of the sale,
and the consideration; and (2) delivery of the thing sold
and the payment therefor. It is important that there be
proof that the transaction or sale actually took place,
together with the presentation in court of the object
evidence.
10. Effect of non-presentation of the forensic chemist,
buy-bust money and photographs during inventory.
Violation of chain of custody and shall lead to acquittal
due to failure to provide admissible evidence, unless, if
the following elements are proven then the accused is
guilty: (1) that the transaction or sale took place; (2)
that the corpus delicti or the illicit drug was presented
as evidence; and (3) that the buyer and seller were
identified.
11. Validity of “Decoy Solicitations”
A police officers act of soliciting drugs from the accused
during a buy-bust operation, or what is known as a
decoy solicitation, is not prohibited by law and does not
render invalid the buy-bust operations. The sale of
contraband is a kind of offense habitually committed,
and the solicitation simply furnishes evidence of the
criminals course of conduct. A decoy solicitation is not
tantamount to inducement or instigation.
12. Persons liable in the crime of COUNTERFEIT DRUGS
SECTION 5. Parties Liable - The following persons shall
be liable for violation(s) of this Act:
a) the manufacturer, exporter or importer of the
counterfeit drugs and their agents
b) the seller, distributor, trafficker, broker or donor and
their agents, upon proof of actual or constructive
knowledge that the drugs sold, distributed, offered or
donated are counterfeit drugs;
c) the possessor of counterfeit drugs
d) the manager, operator or lessee of the laboratory or
laboratory facilities used in the manufacture of
counterfeit drugs;
e) the owner, proprietor, administrator or manager of
the drugstore, hospital pharmacy or dispensary,
laboratory or other outlets or premises
f) the registered pharmacist of the outlet where the
counterfeit drug is sold or found, who sells or dispenses
such drug to a third party and who has actual or
constructive knowledge that said drug is counterfeit;
and
g) should the offense be committed by a juridical
person the president, general manager, the managing
partner, chief operating officer or the person who
directly induces, causes or knowingly allows the
commission of the offense shall be penalized
13. M was 17 years old when he was charged for
violation of Sec 5 RA 9165 (illegal sale of prohibited
drug). By the time he was convicted and sentenced he
was already 21 years old. The court sentenced him to
suffer an indeterminate penalty of 6 years and 1 day of
prision mayor as minimum to 17 years and four
months of reclusion temporal as maximum and a fine
of 500,000 pesos. M applied for probation but his
application was denied because the probation does
not apply to drug offenders. Michael sought the
suspension of his sentence under RA 9344 or the
Juvenile Justice and Youth Welfare Code. Can M avail
of the suspension provided under this law? Explain
NO. He cannot avail the suspension of his
sentence. Under RA 9165, a suspension of sentence can
only be availed by a first time minor offender who, at
the time of the offense is over 15 years of age and not
over 18 years of age at the time when judgment should
have been promulgated.
M was sentenced to imprisonment at the age of 21
which is over the age of 18 thus he cannot avail the
suspension of sentence for minor offenders.
 VI. TITLE SIX: CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS
1. Classification of acts punishable under the Anti-
trafficking in Persons Act of 2003 (R.A. 9208).
Trafficking, Attempted Trafficking, Acts to Promote
Trafficking, Qualified Trafficking, Violation of
Confidentiality, Use of Trafficked Persons.
The classification of acts punishable under the Anti-
Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003 (RA 9208).
• TRAFFICKING - refers to the recruitment,
transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of
persons with or without the victim's consent or
knowledge, within or across national borders by means
of threat or use of force, or other forms of coercion,
abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of
position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the
person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or
benefits to achieve the consent of a person having
control over another person for the purpose of
exploitation which includes at a minimum, the
exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms
of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery,
servitude or the removal or sale of organs.
The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or
receipt of a child for the purpose of exploitation shall
also be considered as "trafficking in persons" even if it
does not involve any of the means set forth in the
preceding paragraph.
• ATTEMPTED TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS – Where
there are acts to initiate the commission of a trafficking
offense but the offender failed to or did not execute all
the element of the crime, by accident or by reason of
some cause other than voluntary desistance, such overt
acts shall be deemed as an attempt to commit any of
the offenses enumerated in Section 4 of this Act shall
constitute attempted trafficking in persons.
• ACTS THAT PROMOTE TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS
- The following acts which promote or facilitate
trafficking in persons, shall be unlawful:
(a) To knowingly lease or sublease, use or allow to be
used any house, building or establishment for the
purpose of promoting trafficking in persons;
(b) To produce, print and issue or distribute unissued,
tampered or fake counseling certificates, registration
stickers and certificates of any government agency
which issues these certificates and stickers as proof of
compliance with government regulatory and pre-
departure requirements for the purpose of promoting
trafficking in persons;
(c) To advertise, publish, print, broadcast or distribute,
or cause the advertisement, publication, printing,
broadcasting or distribution by any means, including the
use of information technology and the internet, of any
brochure, flyer, or any propaganda material that
promotes trafficking in persons;
(d) To assist in the conduct of misrepresentation or
fraud for purposes of facilitating the acquisition of
clearances and necessary exit documents from
government agencies that are mandated to provide pre-
departure registration and services for departing
persons for the purpose of promoting trafficking in
persons;
(e) To facilitate, assist or help in the exit and entry of
persons from/to the country at international and local
airports, territorial boundaries and seaports who are in
possession of unissued, tampered or fraudulent travel
documents for the purpose of promoting trafficking in
persons;
(f) To confiscate, conceal, or destroy the passport, travel
documents, or personal documents or belongings of
trafficked persons in furtherance of trafficking or to
prevent them from leaving the country or seeking
redress from the government or appropriate agencies;
and
(g) To knowingly benefit from, financial or otherwise, or
make use of, the labor or services of a person held to a
condition of involuntary servitude, forced labor, or
slavery.
(Section 5, RA 9208)
• QUALIFIED TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS - The
following are considered as qualified trafficking:
(a) When the trafficked person is a child;
(b) When the adoption is effected through Republic Act
No. 8043, otherwise known as the "Inter-Country
Adoption Act of 1995" and said adoption is for the
purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude
or debt bondage;
(c) When the crime is committed by a syndicate, or in
large scale. Trafficking is deemed committed by a
syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3) or more
persons conspiring or confederating with one another.
It is deemed committed in large scale if committed
against three (3) or more persons, individually or as a
group;
(d) When the offender is an ascendant, parent, sibling,
guardian or a person who exercises authority over the
trafficked person or when the offense is committed by a
public officer or employee;
(e) When the trafficked person is recruited to engage in
prostitution with any member of the military or law
enforcement agencies;
(f) When the offender is a member of the military or law
enforcement agencies; and
(g) When by reason or on occasion of the act of
trafficking in persons, the offended party dies, becomes
insane, suffers mutilation or is afflicted with Human
Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) or the Acquired Immune
Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS).
(Section 6, RA 9208)
• VIOLATION OF CONFIDENTIALITY - At any stage
of the investigation, prosecution and trial of an offense
under this Act, law enforcement officers, prosecutors,
judges, court personnel and medical practitioners, as
well as parties to the case, shall recognize the right to
privacy of the trafficked person and the accused.
Towards this end, law enforcement officers,
prosecutors and judges to whom the complaint has
been referred may, whenever necessary to ensure a fair
and impartial proceeding, and after considering all
circumstances for the best interest of the parties, order
a closed-door investigation, prosecution or trial. The
name and personal circumstances of the trafficked
person or of the accused, or any other information
tending to establish their identities and such
circumstances or information shall not be disclosed to
the public.
In cases when prosecution or trial is conducted behind
closed-doors, it shall be unlawful for any editor,
publisher, and reporter or columnist in case of printed
materials, announcer or producer in case of television
and radio, producer and director of a film in case of the
movie industry, or any person utilizing tri-media
facilities or information technology to cause publicity of
any case of trafficking in persons.
(Section 6, RA 9208)
• USE OF TRAFFICKED PERSONS - Any person who
buys or engages the services of trafficked persons for
prostitution shall be penalized as follows:
(a) First offense - six (6) months of community service as
may be determined by the court and a fine of Fifty
thousand pesos (P50,000.00); and
(b) Second and subsequent offenses - imprisonment of
one (1) year and a fine of One hundred thousand pesos
(P100,000.00).
(Section 11, RA 9208)
2. What acts are considered as qualified trafficking in
persons and what is the penalty?
An act is considered as "qualified trafficking in persons"
when a) the trafficked person is a child b) the adoption
is effected through RA 8043, otherwise known as the
Inter-country Adoption Act of 1995, and said adoption is
for the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude
or debt bondage c) the crime committed by a syndicate,
or in large scale d) the offender is an ascendant, parent,
sibling, guardian or a person who exercises authority
over the trafficked person or when the offense is
committed by a public officer or employee e) the
trafficked person is recruited to engage in prostitution
with any member of the military or law enforcement
agencies f) the offender is a member of the military or
law enforcement agencies g) by reason or on occasion
of the act of trafficking in persons, the offended party
dies, becomes insane, suffers mutilation or is afflicted
with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) or Acquired
Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS)
3. Definition of illegal numbers game
Illegal numbers game is any form of illegal gambling
activity which uses numbers or combinations thereof as
factors in giving out jackpots.
4. Difference between grave scandal and alarms and
scandal
The difference between grave scandal and alarms and
scandal is that the former pertains to highly scandalous
acts committed publicly, which are offensive to decency
and good customs giving rise to public scandal to
persons who have accidentally witnessed the same,
while the latter refers to acts of disturbance of public
peace which produce or cause a scandal or an alarming
situation within any town or public place.
5. Definition of prostitutes and mendicants
A prostitute is a woman who habitually indulges in
sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct, for money or
profit. A mendicant is any person who has no visible and
legal means of support, or lawful employment and who
is physically able to work but neglects to apply himself
to some lawful calling and instead uses begging as a
means of living.
VII. TITLE SEVEN: CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC
OFFICERS
1. Enumerate crimes committed by public officers
I. Article 204. Knowingly rendering unjust
judgment
II. Article 205. Judgment rendered through
negligence
III. Article 206. Unjust interlocutory order
IV. Article 207. Malicious Delay in the
administration of justice
V. Article 208. Prosecution of offenses;
negligence & tolerance
VI. Article 209. Betrayal of trust by
attorney – revelation of secrets
VII. Article 210. Bribery
VIII. Article 211. Indirect bribery
IX. Article 211-A. Qualified bribery
X. Article 212. Corruption of public
officials
XI. Article 213. Frauds against the public
treasury and similar offenses.
XII. Article 214. Other Frauds
XIII. Article 215. Prohibited Transactions
XIV. Article 216. Possession of prohibited
interest by a public officer
XV. Article 217. Malversation of public
funds
XVI. Article 218. Failure of accountable
officer to render accounts
XVII. Article 219. Failure of accountable
officer to render accounts before
leaving the country Article 220. Illegal
use of public funds or property
XVIII. Article 221. Failure to make delivery of
public funds or property
XIX. Article 223. Conniving with or
consenting to evasion
XX. Article 224. Evasion through negligence
XXI. Article 225. Escape of prisoner under
the custody of a person not a public
officer
XXII. Article 226. Removal, concealment, or
destruction of documents
XXIII. Article 227. Officer breaking seal
XXIV. Article 228. Opening of closed
documents
XXV. Article 229. Revelation of secrets by an
officer
XXVI. Article 230. Public officer revealing
secrets of private individual
XXVII. Article 231. Open disobedience
XXVIII. Article 232. Disobedience to order of
superior officer, when said order was
suspended by inferior officer
XXIX. Article 233. Refusal of assistance ‘
XXX. Article 234. Refusal to discharge
elective office
XXXI. Article 235. Maltreatment of prisoners
XXXII. Article 236. Anticipation of duties of a
public office
XXXIII. Article 237. Prolonging the performance
of duties and Powers
XXXIV. Article 238. Abandonment of office or
position
XXXV. Article 239. Usurpation of legislative
powers
XXXVI. Article 240. Usurpation of executive
functions
XXXVII. Article 241. Usurpation of judicial
functions
XXXVIII. Article 242. Disobeying request for
disqualification
XXXIX. Article 243. Orders or requests by
executive officers to any judicial
authority
XL. Article 244. Unlawful appointments
XLI. Article 245. Abuses against chastity
2. Enumerate the acts punished as corrupt practices of
public officers in the context of sec 8 RA 3019
The following are the acts punished under RA 3019
(a) Persuading, inducing or influencing another public
officer to perform an act constituting a violation of rules
and regulations duly promulgated by competent
authority or an offense in connection with the official
duties of the latter, or allowing himself to be
persuaded, induced, or influenced to commit such
violation or offense.
(b) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,
present, share, percentage, or benefit, for himself or for
any other person, in connection with any contract or
transaction between the Government and any other
part, wherein the public officer in his official capacity
has to intervene under the law.
(c) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,
present or other pecuniary or material benefit, for
himself or for another, from any person for whom the
public officer, in any manner or capacity, has secured or
obtained, or will secure or obtain, any Government
permit or license, in consideration for the help given or
to be given, without prejudice to Section thirteen of this
Act.
(d) Accepting or having any member of his family accept
employment in a private enterprise which has pending
official business with him during the pendency thereof
or within one year after its termination.
(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including the
Government, or giving any private party any
unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the
discharge of his official administrative or judicial
functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith
or gross inexcusable negligence. This provision shall
apply to officers and employees of offices or
government corporations charged with the grant of
licenses or permits or other concessions.
(f) Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request,
without sufficient justification, to act within a
reasonable time on any matter pending before him for
the purpose of obtaining, directly or indirectly, from any
person interested in the matter some pecuniary or
material benefit or advantage, or for the purpose of
favoring his own interest or giving undue advantage in
favor of or discriminating against any other interested
party.
(g) Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any
contract or transaction manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the public
officer profited or will profit thereby.
(h) Director or indirectly having financing or pecuniary
interest in any business, contract or transaction in
connection with which he intervenes or takes part in his
official capacity, or in which he is prohibited by the
Constitution or by any law from having any interest.
(i) Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for
personal gain, or having a material interest in any
transaction or act requiring the approval of a board,
panel or group of which he is a member, and which
exercises discretion in such approval, even if he votes
against the same or does not participate in the action of
the board, committee, panel or group.
Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against
those public officers responsible for the approval of
manifestly unlawful, inequitable, or irregular
transaction or acts by the board, panel or group to
which they belong.
(j) Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit,
privilege or benefit in favor of any person not qualified
for or not legally entitled to such license, permit,
privilege or advantage, or of a mere representative or
dummy of one who is not so qualified or entitled.
(k) Divulging valuable information of a confidential
character, acquired by his office or by him on account of
his official position to unauthorized persons, or
releasing such information in advance of its authorized
release date.
3. Acts considered as betrayal of trust by an attorney
or solicitor.
1. By causing damage to his client, either by any
malicious breach of professional duty, or by inexcusable
negligence or ignorance.
2. By revealing any of the secrets of his client learned by
him in his professional capacity. 3. By undertaking the
defense of the opposing party in the same case, without
the consent of his first client, after having undertaken
the defense of said first client or after having received
confidential information from said client.
4. Bribery and Corruption of Public Official
Elements:
1. That the offender makes offers or promises
or gives gifts or presents to a public officer.
2. That the offers or promises are made or the
gifts or presents given to a public officer,
under circumstances that will make the
public officer liable for direct bribery or
indirect bribery.
*The offender in corruption of public officer is the giver
of gift or offeror of promise.
*The public officer sought to be bribed is not criminally
liable, unless he accepts the gift or consents to the offer
of the offender.
Article 212 punishes the person who made the offer or
promise or gave the gift, even if the gift was demanded
by the public officer and the offer was not made
voluntarily prior to the said demand by the public
officer.
Reference: Criminal Law Book 2, Reyes Page 415.
5. Distinctions between Direct Bribery and Indirect
Bribery
In both crimes, the public officer receives gift.
Direct Bribery Indirect Bribery
1. There is an 1. Usually no such
agreement agreement exist
between the public
officer and the
giver of the gift or
 present. 7. Offenses under the Anti Money Laundering Act (R.A.
2. Offender agrees or 2. Not necessary No. 9160). Memorize the cycle of laundering.
performs an act or that the officer
refrains from doing should do any Money Laundering Offenses and their Corresponding
something, particular act or Penalties. – Money laundering is a crime whereby the
because of the gift even promise to proceeds of an unlawful activity are transacted,
or promise; do an act, as it is thereby making them appear to have originated from
enough that he legitimate sources. It is a process comprising of three
accepts gifts (3) stages, namely,
offered to him by 1. Placement or the physical disposal of the criminal
reason of his proceeds,
office. 2. Layering or the separation of the criminal proceeds
from their source by creating layers of financial
6. Memorize Elements of Bribery transactions to disguise the audit trail, and
Direct Bribery Elements: 3. Integration or the provision of apparent legitimacy to
a. That the offender be a public officer within the the criminal proceeds. Any transaction involving such
scope of Article 203. criminal proceeds or attempt to transact the same
b. That the offender accepts and offer or a during the placement, layering or integration stage
promise or receives a gift or present by himself shall constitute the crime of money laundering.
or through another.
c. That such offer or promise be accepted, or gift 8. Direct Bribery, Indirect Bribery and Corruption of
or present received by the public officer- Public Officials. Effect if a public officer immediately
1. With a view to committing some crime; or returns the bribe money handed over to him.
2. In consideration of the execution of an act
which does not constitute a crime, but the A public officer who immediately returns the
act must be unjust; or bribe money handed over to him commits NO CRIME.
3. To refrain from doing something which it is
his official duty to do. One of the elements of Direct Bribery and
d. That the act which the offender agrees to Indirect Bribery is that the public officer must accept
perform or which he executes be connected the gift, therefore the refusal or the immediate return
with the performance of his official duties. will not constitute a crime.

Indirect Bribery Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer.
2. That he accepts gifts.
3. That the said gifts are offered to him by reason
of his office.
Qualified Bribery Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer entrusted
with a law enforcement;
2. That the offender refrains from arresting or
prosecuting an offender who has committed a
crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or
death;
3. That the offender refrains from arresting or
prosecuting the offender in consideration of
any promise, gift or present.
9. Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019)
Definition of Gross Negligence and ill-gotten wealth.
Gross negligence is define to be the want of even slight
care and diligence. (Mobile and M. R. Co. vs. Aschcraft
[1872] 48 Ala., 15.)
By gross negligence is meant "such entire want of care
as to raise a presumption that the person in fault is
conscious of the probable consequences of
carelessness, and is indifferent, or worse, to the danger
of injury to person or property of others." ... The
negligence must amount to a reckless disregard of the
safety of person or property."
RA 7080 sec. 1 (d) Ill-gotten wealth means any asset,
property, business enterprise or material possession of
any person within the purview of Section Two (2)
hereof, acquired by him directly or indirectly through
dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or
business associates by any combination or series of the
following means or similar schemes:
1) Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or
malversation of public funds or raids on the public
treasury;
2) By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission,
gift, share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of
pecuniary benefit from any person and/or entity in
connection with any government contract or project or
by reason of the office or position of the public officer
concerned;
3) By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition
of assets belonging to the National Government or any
of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or
government-owned or -controlled corporations and
their subsidiaries;
4) By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or
indirectly any shares of stock, equity or any other form
of interest or participation including promise of future
employment in any business enterprise or undertaking;
5) By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial
monopolies or other combinations and/or
implementation of decrees and orders intended to
benefit particular persons or special interests; or
6) By taking undue advantage of official position,
authority, relationship, connection or influence to
unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the expense
and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people
and the Republic of the Philippines.
10.Granting immunity from prosecution to givers of
bribers and other gifts and to their accomplices in
bribery and other graft cases again public officers.
Who may be granted immunity under the act?
1. Any person who voluntarily gives information about
any violation of:
- RPC 210 (Direct Bribery), 211 (Indirect Bribery),
and 212 (Corruption of public officials);
- RA 3019
- Sec 345 of the NIRC
- Sec 3604 of the Tariff and Customs Code
- other provisions of the said Codes penalizing
abuse or dishonesty on the part of the public officials
concerned; and other laws, rules and regulations
punishing acts of graft, corruption and other forms of
official abuse;
2. AND who willingly testifies against any public official
or employee for such violation
…shall be exempt from prosecution or punishment for
the offense with reference to which his information and
testimony were given, and may plead or prove the
giving of such information and testimony in bar of such
prosecution.
EVEN IF –
- the case where the information and testimony
are given is against a person who is not a public official
but who is a principal, or accomplice, or accessory in the
commission of any of the above-mentioned violations;
or
- it is the informant who offered or gave the
bribe or gift to the public official or his accomplice for
such gift or bribe-giving.
What are the conditions for immunity?
1. The information must refer to consummated
violations of any of the above-mentioned provisions of
law, rules and regulations;
2. The information and testimony are necessary for the
conviction of the accused public officer;
3. Such information and testimony are not yet in the
possession of the State;
4. Such information and testimony can be corroborated
on its material points; and
5. The informant or witness has not been previously
convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude.
When will immunity NOT attach?
- If it should turn out subsequently that the information
and/or testimony (1) is false and malicious or (2) made
only for the purpose of harassing, molesting or in any
way prejudicing the public officer denounced
11.Anti-plunder act RA 7080. Punishable acts under
plunder law. Case of SERAPIO vs SANDIGANBAYAN
Punishable Acts of RA 7080
1.) Through misappropriation: conversion, misuse, or
malversation of public funds or raids on the public
treasury;
2) By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission,
gift, share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of
pecuniary benefit from any person and/or entity in
connection with any government contract or project or
by reason of the office or position of the public officer
concerned;
3) By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition
of assets belonging to the National Government or any
of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or
government-owned or -controlled corporations and
their subsidiaries;
4) By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or
indirectly any shares of stock, equity or any other form
of interest or participation including promise of future
employment in any business enterprise or undertaking;
5) By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial
monopolies or other combinations and/or
implementation of decrees and orders intended to
benefit particular persons or special interests; or
6) By taking undue advantage of official position,
authority, relationship, connection or influence to
unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the expense
and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people
and the Republic of the Philippines.
12. What is meant by combination and series of overt
or criminal acts under plunder law? ESTRADA VS
SANDIGANBAYAN
When the Plunder Law speaks of "combination" or
"series"; a combination it is refers to at least two acts
falling under different categories of enumeration
provided in Sec. 1, par. (d) while a series refers to two
or more overt or criminal acts falling under the same
category of enumeration found in the aforementioned
provision
13. Is the crime of plunder malum in se or malum
prohibitum?
JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA VS SB
In Estrada vs Sandiganbayan, Estrada contends that RA
7080 is unconstitutional because it abolishes the
element of mens rea in crimes already punishable under
The Revised Penal Code, all of which are purportedly
clear violations of the fundamental rights of the accused
to due process and to be informed of the nature and
cause of the accusation against him. In support of his
contention he cites the following remarks of Senator
Tanada made during the deliberation on S.B. No. 733:
SENATOR TAADA . . . And the evidence that will be
required to convict him would not be evidence for each
and every individual criminal act but only evidence
sufficient to establish the conspiracy or scheme to
commit this crime of plunder.
Senator Tanada was only saying that where the charge
is conspiracy to commit plunder, the prosecution need
not prove each and every criminal act done to further
the scheme or conspiracy, it being enough if it proves
beyond reasonable doubt a pattern of overt or criminal
acts indicative of the overall unlawful scheme or
conspiracy. As far as the acts [the predicates of plunder
as enumerated in Section 1(d)] constituting the pattern
are concerned, however, the elements of the crime
must be proved and the requisite mens rea must be
shown.
The application of mitigating and extenuating
circumstances in the Revised Penal Code to
prosecutions under the Anti-Plunder Law indicates quite
clearly that mens rea is an element of plunder since the
degree of responsibility of the offender is determined
by his criminal intent. This applies to the public officer
as principal in the crime of plunder but not to persons
who participates with the said public officer in the
commission of an offense contributing to the crime of
plunder through conspiracy.
Finally, any doubt as to whether the crime of
plunder is a malum in se must be deemed to have been
resolved in the affirmative. The legislative declaration in
R.A. No. 7659 that plunder is a heinous offense implies
that it is a malum in se. For when the acts punished are
inherently immoral or inherently wrong, they are mala
in se and it does not matter that such acts are punished
in a special law, especially since in the case of plunder
the predicate crimes are mainly mala in se. Indeed, it
would be absurd to treat prosecutions for plunder as
though they are mere prosecutions for violations of the
Bouncing Check Law (B.P. Blg. 22) or of an ordinance
against jaywalking, without regard to the inherent
wrongness of the acts.
Summary: Since the crime plunder is malum in
se, mens rea of the principal offender must be proven in
all the predicate acts constituting the crime of plunder.
However, in the involvement of conspirators, only the
pattern must be proven for a speedier and faster
process of attending to this kind of plunder cases.
14. Malversation of public funds or property. When
can malversation be committed by private individuals
A private person conspiring with an accountable public
official may commit malversation under Art. 222.
Art. 222. Officers included in the preceding provisions.
— The provisions of this chapter shall apply to private
individuals who in any capacity whatever, have charge
of any insular, provincial or municipal funds, revenues,
or property and to any administrator or depository of
funds or property attached, seized or deposited by
public authority, even if such property belongs to a
private individual.
15. Definition of Technical malversation; distinction of
malversation from technical malversation
Technical malversation is a crime committed by any
public officer who shall apply any public funds or
property under his administration to any PUBLIC USE
OTHER THAN THAT FOR WHICH SUCH FUNDS OR
PROPERTY ARE APPROPRIATED by law or ordinance.
This is also referred to as Illegal use of public funds or
property.
The difference between malversation and technical
malversation is that in the former, the offender
misappropriates public funds or property for his own
PERSONAL use, or allows any other person to take
such funds or property for the latter’s own personal
use. In the latter, the public officer applies the public
funds or property under his administration to another
PUBLIC use different from that for which the public
fund was appropriated by law or ordinance.
Furthermore, the elements of Malversation
consist of the following: (1) offender is a PUBLIC
officer; (2) he had the CUSTODY or CONTROL of funds
or property for which he was accountable; (3) those
funds or property were public funds or property to
which he was ACCOUNTABLE; and (4) he
APPROPRIATED, TOOK, MISAPPROPRIATED or
CONSENTED, or through abandonment or negligence,
permitted ANOTHER PERSON to take them.
On the other hand, the elements of Technical
Malversation are the following: (1) offender is a
PUBLIC officer; (2) there are public funds or property
UNDER HIS ADMINISTRATION; (3) such fund or
property were appropriated by LAW or ORDINANCE;
and (4) he applies such public fund or property to any
public use OTHER THAN THAT WHICH IT WAS
APPROPRIATED FOR.
16. I malversation of public funds, the offender’s
return of the amount malversed has what effect?
The return of the funds malversed is merely a mitigating
circumstance. It cannot exempt the offender from
criminal liability.
17. May the crime of malversation be committed by a
private individual?
Yes. The crime of malversation may be committed by a
1) private individual who, in any capacity whatsoever,
have charge of national, provincial, or municipal funds,
revenues, or property; and by 2) any administrator or
depository of funds or property attached, seized, or
deposited by public authority.
18. May private property be the subject matter of the
crime of malversation?
Yes, private property may be the subject matter of the
crime of malversation, provided it is (1) attached, (2)
seized, or (3) deposited by public authority. The
provisions of Article 222 of the RPC allow the private
property to be the subject matter of malversation.
Furthermore, the case of People vs De la Serna states
that private funds or property may be involved, as long
as such funds or property are placed in the custody of
accountable public officers.
19. A detention prisoner…
A’s followers committed the crime of Delivering
Prisoners from Jail as punished under Article 156 of the
RPC. The elements of the aforementioned crime are (1)
That there is a person confined in a jail or penal
establishment, and (2) That the offender removes
therefrom such person, or helps the escape of such
person. Hospital or asylum is considered as an
extension of the penal institution. (Albert)
20. Randy, an NBI agent was issued by the NBI an
armalite rifle (M16) and a Smith and Wesson Revolver.
Cal.38. After a year, the NBI Director made an
inspection of all the firearms issued. Randy, who
reported for work that morning, did not show up
during the inspection. He went on absence without
leave (AWOL). After two years, he surrendered to the
NBI the two firearms issued to him. He was charged
with malversation of government property before the
Sandiganbayan. Randy put up the defense that he had
not appropriated the armalite rifle and the revolver for
his own use, that the delay in accounting for them
does not constitute conversion and that actually the
firearms were stolen by his friend, Santiago. Decide
the case.
Randy is liable for malversation. The law provides that
the failure of a public officer to have duly forthcoming
any public property with which he is chargeable upon
demand shall be prima facie evidence that he has put
such property to personal use. Moreover, the
contention of Randy that his failure to return such
firearms was because the same were stolen is
immaterial in malversation because delay is not a
defense. Thus, Randy’s failure or inability to return the
firearms on the date it was supposed to be inspected by
NBI gives rise to the presumption that there was
conversion.
21.Petitioner, a BIR official tasked to examine the
Books of Accounts for Income and Business Tax and
other accounting records of professionals, one day
appeared in the complainant’s office and told the later
that his tax deficiencies would amount to P500,00.00.
Because his books were not examined, complainant
entertained the idea that it was the start of an
extortion, and he tried to negotiate for a smaller
amount. He requested the assistance of the NBI for an
entrapment operation. On the set payoff date,
petitioner appeared in the complainant’s office. The
meeting ensued and the complainant handed an
envelope with the planted money. PetitIoner accepted
the envelope, opened it, looked inside and saw the
money. He then closed the envelope and placed it in
front of him. After that, the NBI apprehended him. Is
demand, coming from the accused public officer,
necessary to convict him under Section 3(b) of RA
3019?
In the case at bar, demand is not material for convicting
the petitioner for RA 3019. This is because section 3(b)
of said law provides that the public officer may be liable
not just for requesting or demanding but also for
directly or indirectly receiving any gift, present, share,
percentage or benefit. Hence, the petitioner act of
merely accepting the envelope constitutes sufficient
proof necessary for conviction under RA 3019.
BONUS: 10 POINTS
Republic Act No. 3019
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
Sec. 3. Corrupt practices of public officers.
- In addition to acts or omissions of public officers
already penalized by existing law, the following shall
constitute corrupt practices of any public officer and are
hereby declared to be unlawful:
(a) Persuading, inducing or influencing another
public officer to perform an act constituting a violation
of rules and regulations duly promulgated by
competent authority or an offense in connection with
the official duties of the latter, or allowing himself to be
persuaded, induced, or influenced to commit such
violation or offense.
(b) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any
gift, present, share, percentage, or benefit, for himself
or for any other person, in connection with any contract
or transaction between the Government and any other
part, wherein the public officer in his official capacity
has to intervene under the law.
(c) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any
gift, present or other pecuniary or material benefit, for
himself or for another, from any person for whom the
public officer, in any manner or capacity, has secured or
obtained, or will secure or obtain, any Government
permit or license, in consideration for the help given or
to be given, without prejudice to Section thirteen of this
Act.
(d) Accepting or having any member of his family
accept employment in a private enterprise which has
pending official business with him during the pendency
thereof or within one year after its termination.
(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including
the Government, or giving any private party any
unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the
discharge of his official administrative or judicial
functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith
or gross inexcusable negligence. This provision shall
apply to officers and employees of offices or
government corporations charged with the grant of
licenses or permits or other concessions.

(f) Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or
request, without sufficient justification, to act within a
reasonable time on any matter pending before him for
the purpose of obtaining, directly or indirectly, from any
person interested in the matter some pecuniary or
material benefit or advantage, or for the purpose of
favoring his own interest or giving undue advantage in
favor of or discriminating against any other interested
party.
mentioned in subparagraph (d); or urging the divulging
or untimely release of the confidential information
referred to in subparagraph (k) of this section shall,
together with the offending public officer, be punished
under Section nine of this Act and shall be permanently
or temporarily disqualified in the discretion of the
Court, from transacting business in any form with the
Government.

(g) Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any

contract or transaction manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the public
officer profited or will profit thereby.

(h) Director or indirectly having financing or

pecuniary interest in any business, contract or
transaction in connection with which he intervenes or
takes part in his official capacity, or in which he is
prohibited by the Constitution or by any law from
having any interest.

(i) Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for

personal gain, or having a material interest in any
transaction or act requiring the approval of a board,
panel or group of which he is a member, and which
exercises discretion in such approval, even if he votes
against the same or does not participate in the action of
the board, committee, panel or group.

1. Interest for personal gain shall be presumed

against those public officers responsible for the
approval of manifestly unlawful, inequitable, or
irregular transaction or acts by the board, panel
or group to which they belong.

(j) Knowingly approving or granting any license,

permit, privilege or benefit in favor of any person not
qualified for or not legally entitled to such license,
permit, privilege or advantage, or of a mere
representative or dummy of one who is not so qualified
or entitled.

(k) Divulging valuable information of a confidential

character, acquired by his office or by him on account of
his official position to unauthorized persons, or
releasing such information in advance of its authorized
release date.

The person giving the gift, present, share, percentage or

benefit referred to in subparagraphs (b) and (c); or
offering or giving to the public officer the employment