Criminal Law 2
Content
BOOK TWO
CRIMES AND PENALTIES
Chapter One
Crimes Against National Security
Title One
CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND
THE LAWS OF NATIONS
Section One - Treason and Espionage
Article 114. Treason - Any Filipino citizen who
levies war against the Philippines or adheres to
her enemies, giving them aid or comfort within the
Philippines or elsewhere, shall be punished by
reclusion perpetua to death and shall pay a fine
not to exceed 100,000 pesos.
No person shall be convicted of treason unless
on the testimony of two witnesses at least to the
same overt act or confession of the accused in
open court.
Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippines,
who commits acts of treason as defined in
paragraph 1 of this Article shall be punished by
reclusion temporal to death and shall pay a fine
not to exceed 100, 000 pesos.
Crimes Against National Security
1. Treason (Art. 114)
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason (Art.
115)
3. Misprision of Treason (Art. 116)
4. Espionage (Art. 117)
Crimes against the law of Nations
1. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisal (Art.
118)
2. Violation of neutrality (Art. 119)
3. Correspondence with Hostile Country (Art. 120)
4. Flight to enemy’s country (Art. 121)
5. Piracy in general and mutiny on the High seas or in
Philippine Waters (Art. 122)
The Crimes under this title can be prosecuted even if
the criminal act or acts were committed outside the
Philippine Territorial Jurisdiction by virtue of the
extra-territorial jurisdiction under Art. 2 (5) of the
Revised Penal Code.
For Crimes against law of nations, the offender may
be prosecuted anywhere in the world because the
crimes are regarded as crimes against the whole
humanity.
All of the crimes against National Security are
committed in times of war, except the following:
A. Espionage, under Article 114 – This is also
covered by Commonwealth Act No. 616 which
punishes conspiracy to commit espionage. This may
be committed both in times of war and in times of
peace.
B. Inciting to War or Giving Motives for Reprisals,
under Article 118 – This can be committed even if the
Philippines is not a participant in the war.
C. Violation of Neutrality, under Article 119 – The
Philippines is not a party to a war but there is a war
going on.
Elements of Treason:
1. The Offender is a Filipino Citizen or an Alien
residing in the Philippines;
2. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved;
3. The offender either a) Levies war against the government, or
b) Adheres to the enemies, giving them aid or
comfort.
-Treason is a breach of allegiance to a government,
committed by a person who owes allegiance to it.
-In treason there is breach of allegiance, whether
permanent or temporary.
-In treason, even a foreigner who sojourns in the
Philippines or resides in the Philippines or if may be
found in the Philippines may be found guilty of
Treason because of the principle that even resident
aliens owe temporary allegiance to the government
because they are under the protection of the
government while sojourning in the Philippines.
-In the second way or mode of committing treason
mere adherence to the enemies is not treason. It must
be coupled with giving aid or comfort to the enemy.
Requirements of levying war:
A) Actual assembling of men;
B) To execute a treasonable design by force;
C) Intent is to deliver the country in whole or in
part to the enemy; and
D) Collaboration with foreign enemy or some
foreign sovereign
Two ways of proving treason
1. Testimony of at least two witnesses to the
same overt act; or
2. Confession of accused in open court.
-Treason cannot be committed in time of peace. But,
the acts which may constitute treason may be
committed in times of peace but there are no traitors
until war has started. (Laurel v Misa)
-With regards to adherence, it need not be proved by
two witnesses. It is the overt acts of giving aid and
comfort which needs the two witnesses to be proven.
-There is no complex crime of treason and murder.
Murder would be the overt act of giving aid or
comfort. It is inseparable from treason itself. Nor, can
it be considered as a separate crime. (People v
Hernandez)
-Treason is a continuous or continuing offense. Its not
possible that another overt act would result to another
charge of treason.
the crime and they decide to commit it
Proposal - a person proposes the commission of the
crime to some other person or persons.
How are the crimes of Conspiracy and Proposal to
commit treason committed?
-Conspiracy to commit treason is committed when in
time of war, two or more persons come to an
agreement to levy war against the Government or to
adhere to the enemies and to give them aid or
comfort, and decide to commit it.
-Proposal to commit treason is committed when in
time of war a person who has decided to levy war
against the government or to adhere to the enemies
and to give them aid or comfort, proposes the
execution to some other person or persons
-In conspiracy to commit, no overt act yet. If actual
acts of treason are then committed, after the
conspiracy or proposal is accepted, the crime
committed is not anymore conspiracy or proposal to
commit treason but Treason itself because there is
already an overt act of treason. In that case, the
conspiracy or proposal will be considered as the
means in the commission of Treason.
Distinguish Treason from Sedition
Treason is the violation by a subject of his allegiance
to his sovereign or liege, lord, or to the supreme
authority of the state. While Sedition is the raising of
commotions or disturbances in the State.
-The two-witness rule does not apply to conspiracy or
proposal to commit treason because this is a separate
and distinct offense from that of treason. (US v
Bautista, et al)
Rebellion distinguished from Treason
(a) The act of levying war against the government
would constitute treason when performed to help the
enemy. It would also constitute to an adherence to the
enemy, giving him aid and comfort.
In treason, the purpose is to deliver the
government to the enemy or to pave a way to the
coming of the enemy.
(b) In rebellion, the purpose is to substitute the
government with its own.
Article 116. Misprision of treason - Every person
owing allegiance to the Government of the
Philippine Islands, without being a foreigner, and
having knowledge of any conspiracy against them,
who conceals or does not disclose and make
known the same, as soon as possible, to the
governor or fiscal of the province, or the mayor or
fiscal of the city in which he resides, as the case
may be, shall be punished as an accessory to the
crime of treason.
Article 115. Conspiracy and proposal to commit
treason - Penalty - The conspiracy and proposal to
commit the crime of treason shall be punished
respectively, by prision mayor and a fine of not
exceeding 10,000 pesos, and by prision
correctional and a fine not exceeding 5,000 pesos
Elements
1. Offender owes allegiance to the government, and
not a foreigner;
Conspiracy - two or more persons agree to commit
3. He conceals or does not disclose and make known
2. He has knowledge of conspiracy to commit treason
against the government;
the same as soon as possible to the governor or fiscal
of the province in which he resides, or the mayor or
fiscal of the city in which he resides.
The offender is punished as an accessory to the
crime of treason.
-Article 116 does not provide for a penalty. Hence,
the penalty for misprision of treason is two degrees
lower than that provided for treason.
-Article 20 does not apply. Since the offender in
misprision of treason is a principal in that crime,
Article 20 does not apply, even if the offender is
related to the persons in conspiracy against the
government. Article 20 applies only to accessory.
Article 117. Espionage - The penalty of prision
correctional shall be inflicted upon any person
who:
1. Without authority therefor, enters a warship,
fort, or naval or military establishment or
reservation to obtain any information, plans,
photographs, or other date of a confidential nature
relative to the defense of the Philippine
Archipelago; or
2. Being in possession, by reason of the public
office he holds, of the articles, data, or information
referred to in the preceding paragraph, discloses
their contents to a representative of a foreign
nation.
The penalty next higher in degree shall be
imposed if the offender be a public officer or
employee.
2 Ways of Committing Espionage
1. By entering, without authority therefore, a warship,
fort or naval or military establishment or reservation
to obtain any information, plans, photograph or other
data of a confidential nature relative to the defense of
the Philippines;
Elements
1. Offender enters any of the places mentioned;
2. He has no authority therefore;
3. His purpose is to obtain information, plans,
photographs or other data of a confidential nature
relative to the defense of the Philippines.
2. By disclosing to the representative of a foreign
nation the contents of the articles, data or information
referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 117, which he
had in his possession by reason of the public office he
holds.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He has in his possession the articles, data or
information referred to in paragraph 1 of Article
117, by reason of the public office he holds;
3. He discloses their contents to a
representative of a foreign nation.
Section Two - Provoking war and disloyalty in case
of war
Article 118. Inciting to war or giving motives for
reprisals - The penalty of reclusion temporal shall
be imposed upon any public officer or employee,
and that of prision mayor upon any private
individual, who, by unlawful or unauthorized acts,
provokes or gives occasion for a war involving or
liable to involve the Philippine Islands or exposes
Filipino Citizens to reprisals on their persons or
property.
Elements:
1. That the offender performs unlawful or
unauthorized acts.
2. That such acts provoke or give occasion for a war
involving or liable to involve the Philippines or
expose Filipino citizens to reprisals on their persons
or property.
Examples:
1. The raising, without sufficient authorization, of
troops within the Philippines for the service of a
foreign nation against another nation.
2. The public destruction of the flag or seal of a
foreign state or the public manifestation of hostility
to the head or ambassador of another state.
Article 119. Violation of Neutrality - Te penalty of
prision correccional shall be inflicted upon anyone
who, on the occasion of war in which the
government is not involved, violates any
regulation issued by competent authority for the
purpose of enforcing neutrality.
Elements:
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is not
involved;
2. There is a regulation issued by a competent
authority to enforce neutrality;
3. Offender violates the regulation.
-Without any regulation by competent authority, then
there can be no crime of violation of neutrality. It is
the violation of such regulation which constitutes the
crime.
Article 120. Correspondence with hostile country Any person, who in time of war, shall have
correspondence with an enemy country or
territory occupied by enemy troops shall be
punished:
1. By Prision Correccional, if the correspondence
has been prohibited by the Government;
2. By Prision Mayor, if the correspondence be
carried on in ciphers or conventional signs; and
3. By Reclusion Temporal, if notice or information
be given thereby which might be useful to the
enemy. If the offender intended to aid the enemy
by giving such notice or information, he shall
suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal to death.
Elements:
1. It is in time of war in which the Philippines is
involved;
2. Offender makes correspondence with an enemy
country or territory occupied by enemy troops;
3. The correspondence is either –
a. prohibited by the government;
b. carried on in ciphers or conventional
signs(coded);
or
c. containing notice or information which
might be useful to the enemy.
-If there is no prohibition for such correspondence, it
is not punishable under Article 120 but if there is a
prohibition issued by the government with regards to
correspondence to any person in the enemy country
or territory occupied by enemy troops, that
correspondence is covered under Article 120.
-Prohibition by the government is not essential in
paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 120. Even if there is no
prohibition, so long as the correspondence is carried
on in Ciphers or Conventional signs or if the
correspondence contains notice or information which
might be useful to the enemy, then that is covered
under Article 120.
-The correspondence giving information that might
be useful to the enemy, if intended by the offender to
aid the enemy, the crime amounts to treason. Hence,
the penalty is the same as that for treason.
But in proving the offense under article 120,
even if the contents of the correspondence is
treasonous in nature, the two witness rule will not
apply because what needs to be prove is the
correspondence under article 120 and not treason.
Article 121. Flight to enemy’s country - The
penalty of arresto mayor shall be inflicted upon
any person who, owing allegiance to the
government, attempts to flee or go to an enemy
country when prohibited by competent authority.
Elements:
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved;
2. Offender must be owing allegiance to the
government(which now includes even foreigners);
3. Offender attempts to flee or go to enemy country;
4.Going to the enemy country is prohibited by
competent authority.
-There must be a prohibition issued by competent
authority.
-Mere attempt to flee or go to enemy country, so long
as there is a prohibition, consummates the crime
under article 121. (Even the buying of the ticket)
Section Three - Piracy and mutiny on the high seas or
in Philippine waters
Article 122. Piracy in general and mutiny on the
high seas or in Philippine waters - The penalty of
reclusion perpetua shall be inflicted upon any
person who, on the high seas or in Philippine
waters, shall attack or seize a vessel or, not being a
member of its complement nor a passenger, shall
seize the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel,
is equipment, or personal belongings of its
complement or passengers.
The same penalty shall be inflicted in case of
mutiny on the high seas or in Philippine waters.
(As amended by Sec. 3, R.A. No. 7659)
-There are two laws which are simultaneously
enforced covering piracy.
1. Article 122, RPC; and
2. PD 532.
-PD 532 did not repeal Article 122 of the RPC. It
complements the provisions of the RPC with regards
to Piracy.
-Under the RPC, piracy is committed outside
Philippine territory while under PD 532, it is
committed within Philippine territory.
-In piracy under Article 122, it can only be committed
outside of Philippine territorial waters but including
territorial waters of foreign countries. In Piracy under
Article 122 of the RPC, ONLY strangers to the vessel
may be liable for piracy. Passengers and members of
the complement of the vessel cannot commit this
crime under Art. 122.
-Piracy Under PD 532, it can only be committed
within Philippine territorial waters. Under PD 532, it
is immaterial whether the vessel is moving or not.
Under PD 532, even passengers and members of the
complement of the vessel can commit piracy.
-Whether it is piracy under Article 122 or PD 532, the
essence of this crime is Robbery. Any taking in a
vessel with force upon things or with violence or
intimidation against person is employed will always
be piracy. The essence is robbery. It is just that it is
committed in a vessel.
-If there is taking, either of the cargo or the properties
of personal belonging of the passenger or
complement, if their is no violence or intimidation on
persons of force upon things, the crime of piracy
cannot be committed, but only theft because piracy,
whether covered under Article 122 or PD 532, is in
the nature of robbery.
-For it to be piracy, the elements of robbery must be
present.
-In Piracy under the RPC, the act penalized is an
attack upon the vessel but always with intent to gain.
So there is always that element of animus lucrandi.
The attack on the vessel, under the RPC, must be for
the purpose of seizing any of its cargoes or any of the
personal belongings of the passengers or crew. So
under the RPC, he is not a passenger nor a member of
the crew. In essence therefore, this pirates are not
authorized to be there either as passengers or as
members of the crew. So that even if they are already
inside, so long as their entry therein is not authorized
then they are covered under the Article. They are
considered as pirates.
-There is an amendment introduced by RA 7659.
Article 122, before its amendment provided that
piracy must be committed on the high seas by any
person not a member of its complement nor a
passenger thereof. By the amendment under RA
7659, the coverage of the pertinent provision was
widened to include offenses committed in Philippine
waters. On the other hand, under PD 532 the
coverage on the law on Piracy embraces any person
including passengers or members of the complement
of the vessel. So, passenger or not, under this
amendments, a member of the complement or not,
any person is now covered by the law. (People v
Tulin, GR 111709, Aug 30, 2001)
Elements of mutiny
1. The vessel is on the high seas or Philippine waters;
2. Offenders are either members of its complement,
or passengers of the vessel;
3. Offenders either –
a. attack or seize the vessel; or
b. seize the whole or part of the cargo, its
equipment, or personal belongings of the crew or
passengers.
Mutiny is the unlawful resistance to a superior
officer, or the raising of commotions and disturbances
aboard a ship against the authority of its commander.
Article 123. Qualified Piracy - Th penalty of
reclusion perpetua to death shall be imposed upon
those who commit any of the crimes referred to in
the preceding article, under any of the following
circumstances:
1. Whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding
or firing upon the same;
2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned their
victims without means of saving themselves; or
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder,
homicide, physical injuries, or rape.
-Take note of the circumstances.
A) Whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding
or firing upon the same;
B) Whenever the pirates have abandoned their
victims without means of saving themselves; or
C) Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder,
homicide, physical injuries, or rape.
-In mutiny, the passengers or the members of the
crew would defy the authority.
Republic Act No. 6235 (The Anti Hi-Jacking Law)
Aircraft piracy
-enacted on June 19, 1971
-Committed by any person who compels a change in
the course or destination of an aircraft of Philippine
registry, or to seize or usurp the control thereof, while
it is in flight. An aircraft is in flight from the moment
all its external doors are closed following
embarkation until any such doors is opened for
disembarkation.
Four situations governed by anti hi-jacking law:
(1) usurping or seizing control of an aircraft of
Philippine registry while it is in flight, compelling the
pilots thereof to change the course or destination of
the aircraft;
(2) usurping or seizing control of an aircraft of
foreign registry while within Philippine territory,
compelling the pilots thereof to land in any part of
Philippine territory;
(3) carrying or loading on board an aircraft operating
as a public utility passenger aircraft in the
Philippines, any flammable, corrosive, explosive, or
poisonous substance; and
(4) loading, shipping, or transporting on board a
cargo aircraft operating as a public utility in the
Philippines, any flammable, corrosive, explosive, or
poisonous substance if this was done not in
accordance with the rules and regulations set and
promulgated by the Air Transportation Office on this
matter.
-Between numbers 1 and 2, the point of distinction is
whether the aircraft is of Philippine registry or
foreign registry. The important thing is that before the
anti hi-jacking law can apply, the aircraft must be in
flight. If not in flight, whatever crimes committed
shall be governed by the Revised Penal Code. The
law makes a distinction between aircraft of a foreign
registry and of Philippine registry. If the aircraft
subject of the hi-jack is of Philippine registry, it
should be in flight at the time of the hi-jacking.
-On the other hand, if the aircraft is of foreign
registry, the law does not require that it be in flight
before the anti hi-jacking law can apply. This is
because aircrafts of foreign registry are considered in
transit while they are in foreign countries. Although
they may have been in a foreign country, technically
they are still in flight, because they have to move out
of that foreign country. So even if any of the acts
mentioned were committed while the exterior doors
of the foreign aircraft were still open, the anti hijacking law will already govern.
-Note that under this law, an aircraft is considered in
flight from the moment all exterior doors are closed
following embarkation until such time when the same
doors are again opened for disembarkation. This
means that there are passengers that boarded. So if
the doors are closed to bring the aircraft to the
hangar, the aircraft is not considered as in flight. The
aircraft shall be deemed to be already in flight even if
its engine has not yet been started.
-As to numbers 3 and 4 of Republic Act No. 6235,
the distinction is whether the aircraft is a passenger
aircraft or a cargo aircraft. In both cases, however,
the law applies only to public utility aircraft in the
Philippines. Private aircrafts are not subject to the
anti hi-jacking law, in so far as transporting
prohibited substances are concerned.
-If the aircraft is a passenger aircraft, the prohibition
is absolute. Carrying of any prohibited, flammable,
corrosive, or explosive substance is a crime under
Republic Act No. 6235. But if the aircraft is only a
cargo aircraft, the law is violated only when the
transporting of the prohibited substance was not done
in accordance with the rules and regulations
prescribed by the Air Transportation Office in the
matter of shipment of such things. The Board of
Transportation provides the manner of packing of
such kind of articles, the quantity in which they may
be loaded at any time, etc. Otherwise, the anti hijacking law does not apply.
Title Two
CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS
OF THE STATE
Chapter One
ARBITRARY DETENTION OR EXPULSION,
VIOLATION OF DWELLING, PROHIBITION,
INTERRUPTION, AND DISSOLUTION OF
PEACEFUL MEETINGS AND CRIMES AGAINST
RELIGIOUS WORSHIP
What are the crimes against the fundamental laws
of the State?
1. Arbitrary detention (Art 124)
2. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the
proper judicial authorities. (Art 125)
3. Delaying release (Art 126)
4. Expulsion (Art 127)
5. Violation of Domicile (Art 128)
6. Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in
the service of those legally obtained (Art 129)
7. Searching domicile without witnesses (Art 130)
8. Prohibition, interruption, and dissolution of
peaceful meetings. (Art 131)
9. Interruption of religious worship (Art 132)
10. Offending the Religious feelings (Art 133)
-They are called crimes against the fundamental laws
of the State, because they violate certain provisions
of the Bill of Rights (Article III) of the 1987
Constitution.
-Articles 124, 125 and 126 of the code punish any
public officer or employee in those cases where the
individual is unlawfully deprived of liberty as
guaranteed under Section 1 of Article III of the 1987
Constitution.
-Article 127 of the Code punishes any public officer
or employee who shall unlawfully expel a person
from the Philippines or compel a person to change his
residence. (enforces the liberty of abode)
-Articles 128, 129 and 130 punish any public officer
or employee who violated the right to be secure in
their persons, houses, papers and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures x x x (Section 2)
-Article 131 punishes violations of Right to assemble
(Section 4)
-Article 132 and 133 punish violations of the right to
free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession
and worship. (Section 5)
-The offenders in these crimes are public officers or
employees, EXCEPT for the crime of Offending the
Religious Feelings under Article 133 which may be
committed by a private individual.
Section One - Arbitrary detention and expulsion
Classes of Arbitrary Detention
(1) Arbitrary detention by detaining a person without
legal ground (Article 124)
(2) Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the
proper judicial authorities (Article 125)
(3) Delaying release (Article 126)
-Arbitrary detention is the deprivation by public
officer of the liberty of a person without legal ground.
-If the offender is a private person, the crime is illegal
detention under Article 267 or 268 in Title 9.
-If the offender is not a public officer, he cannot be
made liable under Title Two except if the crime is
offending the Religious feelings.
-A person is detained when he is placed in
confinement or there is a restraint on his person.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He detains a person;
3. The detention is without legal grounds.
“Without legal grounds”
The detention of a person is without legal ground :
(1) when he has not committed a crime or, at least,
there is no reasonable ground for suspicion that he
has committed a crime; or
(2) When he is not suffering from violent insanity or
any other ailment requiring compulsory confinement
in a hospital.
The crime of arbitrary detention assumes several
forms:
(1) Detaining a person without legal grounds under
(Art 124);
(2) Having arrested the offended party for legal
grounds but without warrant of arrest, and the public
officer does not deliver the arrested person to the
proper judicial authority within the period of 12, 18,
or 36 hours, as the case may be(Art 125); or
(3) Delaying release by competent authority with the
same period mentioned in number 2(Art 126).
-Note that in the crime of arbitrary detention,
although the offender is a public officer, not any
public officer can commit this crime. Only those
public officers whose official duties carry with it the
authority to make an arrest and detain persons can be
guilty of this crime. So, if the offender does not
possess such authority, the crime committed by him is
illegal detention. A public officer who is acting
outside the scope of his official duties is no better
than a private citizen.
(2) As to criminal intent
In arbitrary detention, the main reason for
detaining the offended party is to deny him of his
liberty.
In unlawful arrest, the purpose is to accuse the
offended party of a crime he did not commit, to
deliver the person to the proper authority, and to
file the necessary charges in a way trying to
incriminate him.
-Consider Rule 113, Section 5 of the ROC.
Distinction between arbitrary detention and illegal
detention
1. In arbitrary detention - The principal offender
must be a public officer. Civilians cannot commit the
crime of arbitrary detention except when they
conspire with a public officer committing this crime,
or become an accomplice or accessory to the crime
committed by the public officer; and
-Under Article 124, the arrest is made without a
warrant. If the arrest is with a warrant, there is no
crime of arbitrary detention because the arrest is
lawful.
The offender who is a public officer has a duty which
carries with it the authority to detain a person.
Article 125. Delay in the delivery of detained
persons to the proper judicial authorities. - The
penalties provided in the next preceding article
shall be imposed upon the public officer or
employee who shall detain any person for some
legal ground and shall fail to deliver such person
to the proper judicial authorities within the period
of twelve (12) hours, for crimes or offenses
punishable by light penalties, or their equivalent;
eighteen (18) hours, for crimes or offenses
punishable by correctional penalties, or their
equivalent; and thirty-six (36) hours, for crimes or
offenses punishable by afflictive or capital
penalties, or their equivalent.
In every case, the person detained shall be
informed of the cause of his detention and shall be
allowed, upon his request, to communicate and
confer at any time with his attorney or counsel.
(As amended by E.O. No. 272)
2. In illegal detention - The principal offender is a
private person. But a public officer can commit the
crime of illegal detention when he is acting in a
private capacity or beyond the scope of his official
duty, or when he becomes an accomplice or accessory
to the crime committed by a private person.
The offender, even if he is a public officer, does not
include as his function the power to arrest and detain
a person, unless he conspires with a public officer
committing arbitrary detention.
Distinction between arbitrary detention and
unlawful arrest (art 269)
(1) As to offender
In arbitrary detention, the offender is a public
officer possessed with authority to make arrests.
In unlawful arrest, the offender may be any
person.
-Unlawful arrest by a public officer should be
punished as arbitrary detention under 124. If the
public officer has the authority to arrest and detain a
person but the arrest is without legal ground then the
crime is arbitrary detention
-In Article 125, there is also no warrant that is why
they have to be delivered to the proper judicial
authority so they can be charged.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He detains a person for some legal ground;
3. He fails to deliver such person to the proper
judicial authorities within –
A. 12 hour for light penalties;
B. 18 hours for correctional penalties; and
C. 36 hours for afflictive or capital penalties.
-This is a form of arbitrary detention. At the
beginning, the detention is legal since it is in the
pursuance of a lawful arrest. However, the detention
becomes arbitrary when the period thereof exceeds
12, 18 or 36 hours, as the case may be, depending on
whether the crime is punished by light, correctional
or afflictive penalty or their equivalent.
-The period of detention is 12 hours for light
offenses, 18 hours for correctional offenses and 36
hours for afflictive offences, where the accused may
be detained without formal charge. But he must
cause a formal charge or application to be filed with
the proper court before 12, 18 or 36 hours lapse.
Otherwise he has to release the person arrested.
-Note that the period stated herein does not include
the nighttime. It is to be counted only when the
prosecutor’s office is ready to receive the complaint
or information.
-This article does not apply if the arrest is with a
warrant. The situation contemplated here is an arrest
without a warrant.
Article 126. Delaying Release - The penalties
provided for in Article 124 shall be imposed upon
any public officer or employee who delays for the
period of time specified therein the performance
of any judicial or executive order for the release of
a prisoner or detention prisoner, or unduly delays
the service of the notice of such order to said
prisoner or the proceedings upon any petition for
the liberation of such person.
Acts punished
1. Delaying the performance of a judicial or
executive order for the release of a prisoner;
2. Unduly delaying the service of the notice of such
order to said prisoner;
3. Unduly delaying the proceedings upon any
petition for the liberation of such person.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. There is a judicial or executive order for the
release of a prisoner or detention prisoner, or that
there is a proceeding upon a petition for the liberation
of such person;
3. Offender without good reason delays –
a. the service of the notice of such order to the
prisoner;
b. the performance of such judicial or executive
order for the release of the prisoner; or
c. the proceedings upon a petition for the
release of such person.
Article 127. Expulsion - The penalty of prision
correccional shall be imposed upon any pubic
officer or employee who, not being thereunto
authorized by law, shall expel any person from the
Philippine Islands or shall compel such person to
change his residence.
-The essence of the crime under Art 127 is coercion
but the specific name is Expulsion when committed
by a public officer or employee. If the act is done by
a private person, the crime is grave coercion under
Art 286.
Acts punished
1. Expelling a person from the Philippines;
2. Compelling a person to change his residence.
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He either –
a. expels any person from the Philippines; or
b. compels a person to change residence;
3. Offender is not authorized to do so by law.
-The chief executive has the power to deport aliens as
an act of the State.
-Example: There is a public officer who owns a land
occupied by informal settlers and he engaged to
compel these informal settlers to leave. The crime is
expulsion and the crime of grave coercion is
absorbed.
-For expulsion of a person from the Philippines, the
offended party can only be an alien. A Filipino citizen
cannot be expelled from the Philippines. With regards
Filipino citizens, the crime will be committed
through the second mode or compelling the person to
change his abode.
Article 128. Violation of Domicile - The penalty of
Prision Correccional in its minimum period shall
be imposed upon any public officer or employee
who, not being authorized by judicial order, shall
enter any dwelling against the will of the owner
thereof, search papers or other effects found
therein without the previous consent of such
owner, or, having surreptitiously entered said
dwelling, and being required to leave the premises,
shall refuse to do so.
If the offense be committed in the nighttime,
or if any papers or effects not constituting
evidence of a crime be not returned immediately
after the search made by the offender, the penalty
shall be prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods.
Common elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He is not authorized by judicial order to enter the
dwelling or to make a search therein for papers or
other effects.
Acts punished
1. Entering any dwelling against the will of the
owner thereof;
2. Searching papers or other effects found therein
without the previous consent of such owner (it may
be possible that the public officer was allowed to
enter the dwelling but when he was already inside he
searched papers or other effects without prior consent
of the owner); or
3. Refusing to leave the premises, after having
surreptitiously entered said dwelling and after
having been required to leave the same.
-Take note of the phrase "Surreptitiously entered"
-Example: Assuming that the house was open, there
was manifestation of any prohibition for somebody to
enter the house, so the public officer entered, so when
the owner discovered him, he was asked to leave
immediately. The crime is not violation of domicile.
It may be unjust vexation
“Having Surreptitiously entered said dwelling”
This is probably an instance where a public officer or
employee may commit violation of domicile even if
the entrance is only without the consent of its owner;
that is, the offender surreptitiously entered the
dwelling. But in this case, what constitutes the crime
is the refusal of the offender to leave the premises
when required to do so - not the entrance into the
dwelling.
“Against the will of the owner”
To constitute a violation of domicile, the entrance by
the public officer or employee must be against the
will of the owner of the dwelling, which presupposes
opposition or Prohibition by said owner, whether
express or implied. If the entrance by the public
officer or employee is ONLY without the consent of
the owner or the dwelling, the crime is not
committed.
Circumstances qualifying the offense
1. If committed at nighttime; or
2. If any papers or effects not constituting evidence
of a crime are not returned immediately after the
search made by offender.
Article 129. Search warrants maliciously obtained,
and abuse in the service of those legally obtained.
In addition to the liability attaching to the
offender for the commission of any other offense,
the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum
period to prision correccional in its minimum
period and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos shall
be imposed upon any public officer or employee
who shall procure a search warrant without just
cause, or, having legally procured the same, shall
exceed his authority or use unnecessary severity in
executing the same.
CRIMES AND PENALTIES
Chapter One
Crimes Against National Security
Title One
CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND
THE LAWS OF NATIONS
Section One - Treason and Espionage
Article 114. Treason - Any Filipino citizen who
levies war against the Philippines or adheres to
her enemies, giving them aid or comfort within the
Philippines or elsewhere, shall be punished by
reclusion perpetua to death and shall pay a fine
not to exceed 100,000 pesos.
No person shall be convicted of treason unless
on the testimony of two witnesses at least to the
same overt act or confession of the accused in
open court.
Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippines,
who commits acts of treason as defined in
paragraph 1 of this Article shall be punished by
reclusion temporal to death and shall pay a fine
not to exceed 100, 000 pesos.
Crimes Against National Security
1. Treason (Art. 114)
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason (Art.
115)
3. Misprision of Treason (Art. 116)
4. Espionage (Art. 117)
Crimes against the law of Nations
1. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisal (Art.
118)
2. Violation of neutrality (Art. 119)
3. Correspondence with Hostile Country (Art. 120)
4. Flight to enemy’s country (Art. 121)
5. Piracy in general and mutiny on the High seas or in
Philippine Waters (Art. 122)
The Crimes under this title can be prosecuted even if
the criminal act or acts were committed outside the
Philippine Territorial Jurisdiction by virtue of the
extra-territorial jurisdiction under Art. 2 (5) of the
Revised Penal Code.
For Crimes against law of nations, the offender may
be prosecuted anywhere in the world because the
crimes are regarded as crimes against the whole
humanity.
All of the crimes against National Security are
committed in times of war, except the following:
A. Espionage, under Article 114 – This is also
covered by Commonwealth Act No. 616 which
punishes conspiracy to commit espionage. This may
be committed both in times of war and in times of
peace.
B. Inciting to War or Giving Motives for Reprisals,
under Article 118 – This can be committed even if the
Philippines is not a participant in the war.
C. Violation of Neutrality, under Article 119 – The
Philippines is not a party to a war but there is a war
going on.
Elements of Treason:
1. The Offender is a Filipino Citizen or an Alien
residing in the Philippines;
2. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved;
3. The offender either a) Levies war against the government, or
b) Adheres to the enemies, giving them aid or
comfort.
-Treason is a breach of allegiance to a government,
committed by a person who owes allegiance to it.
-In treason there is breach of allegiance, whether
permanent or temporary.
-In treason, even a foreigner who sojourns in the
Philippines or resides in the Philippines or if may be
found in the Philippines may be found guilty of
Treason because of the principle that even resident
aliens owe temporary allegiance to the government
because they are under the protection of the
government while sojourning in the Philippines.
-In the second way or mode of committing treason
mere adherence to the enemies is not treason. It must
be coupled with giving aid or comfort to the enemy.
Requirements of levying war:
A) Actual assembling of men;
B) To execute a treasonable design by force;
C) Intent is to deliver the country in whole or in
part to the enemy; and
D) Collaboration with foreign enemy or some
foreign sovereign
Two ways of proving treason
1. Testimony of at least two witnesses to the
same overt act; or
2. Confession of accused in open court.
-Treason cannot be committed in time of peace. But,
the acts which may constitute treason may be
committed in times of peace but there are no traitors
until war has started. (Laurel v Misa)
-With regards to adherence, it need not be proved by
two witnesses. It is the overt acts of giving aid and
comfort which needs the two witnesses to be proven.
-There is no complex crime of treason and murder.
Murder would be the overt act of giving aid or
comfort. It is inseparable from treason itself. Nor, can
it be considered as a separate crime. (People v
Hernandez)
-Treason is a continuous or continuing offense. Its not
possible that another overt act would result to another
charge of treason.
the crime and they decide to commit it
Proposal - a person proposes the commission of the
crime to some other person or persons.
How are the crimes of Conspiracy and Proposal to
commit treason committed?
-Conspiracy to commit treason is committed when in
time of war, two or more persons come to an
agreement to levy war against the Government or to
adhere to the enemies and to give them aid or
comfort, and decide to commit it.
-Proposal to commit treason is committed when in
time of war a person who has decided to levy war
against the government or to adhere to the enemies
and to give them aid or comfort, proposes the
execution to some other person or persons
-In conspiracy to commit, no overt act yet. If actual
acts of treason are then committed, after the
conspiracy or proposal is accepted, the crime
committed is not anymore conspiracy or proposal to
commit treason but Treason itself because there is
already an overt act of treason. In that case, the
conspiracy or proposal will be considered as the
means in the commission of Treason.
Distinguish Treason from Sedition
Treason is the violation by a subject of his allegiance
to his sovereign or liege, lord, or to the supreme
authority of the state. While Sedition is the raising of
commotions or disturbances in the State.
-The two-witness rule does not apply to conspiracy or
proposal to commit treason because this is a separate
and distinct offense from that of treason. (US v
Bautista, et al)
Rebellion distinguished from Treason
(a) The act of levying war against the government
would constitute treason when performed to help the
enemy. It would also constitute to an adherence to the
enemy, giving him aid and comfort.
In treason, the purpose is to deliver the
government to the enemy or to pave a way to the
coming of the enemy.
(b) In rebellion, the purpose is to substitute the
government with its own.
Article 116. Misprision of treason - Every person
owing allegiance to the Government of the
Philippine Islands, without being a foreigner, and
having knowledge of any conspiracy against them,
who conceals or does not disclose and make
known the same, as soon as possible, to the
governor or fiscal of the province, or the mayor or
fiscal of the city in which he resides, as the case
may be, shall be punished as an accessory to the
crime of treason.
Article 115. Conspiracy and proposal to commit
treason - Penalty - The conspiracy and proposal to
commit the crime of treason shall be punished
respectively, by prision mayor and a fine of not
exceeding 10,000 pesos, and by prision
correctional and a fine not exceeding 5,000 pesos
Elements
1. Offender owes allegiance to the government, and
not a foreigner;
Conspiracy - two or more persons agree to commit
3. He conceals or does not disclose and make known
2. He has knowledge of conspiracy to commit treason
against the government;
the same as soon as possible to the governor or fiscal
of the province in which he resides, or the mayor or
fiscal of the city in which he resides.
The offender is punished as an accessory to the
crime of treason.
-Article 116 does not provide for a penalty. Hence,
the penalty for misprision of treason is two degrees
lower than that provided for treason.
-Article 20 does not apply. Since the offender in
misprision of treason is a principal in that crime,
Article 20 does not apply, even if the offender is
related to the persons in conspiracy against the
government. Article 20 applies only to accessory.
Article 117. Espionage - The penalty of prision
correctional shall be inflicted upon any person
who:
1. Without authority therefor, enters a warship,
fort, or naval or military establishment or
reservation to obtain any information, plans,
photographs, or other date of a confidential nature
relative to the defense of the Philippine
Archipelago; or
2. Being in possession, by reason of the public
office he holds, of the articles, data, or information
referred to in the preceding paragraph, discloses
their contents to a representative of a foreign
nation.
The penalty next higher in degree shall be
imposed if the offender be a public officer or
employee.
2 Ways of Committing Espionage
1. By entering, without authority therefore, a warship,
fort or naval or military establishment or reservation
to obtain any information, plans, photograph or other
data of a confidential nature relative to the defense of
the Philippines;
Elements
1. Offender enters any of the places mentioned;
2. He has no authority therefore;
3. His purpose is to obtain information, plans,
photographs or other data of a confidential nature
relative to the defense of the Philippines.
2. By disclosing to the representative of a foreign
nation the contents of the articles, data or information
referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 117, which he
had in his possession by reason of the public office he
holds.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He has in his possession the articles, data or
information referred to in paragraph 1 of Article
117, by reason of the public office he holds;
3. He discloses their contents to a
representative of a foreign nation.
Section Two - Provoking war and disloyalty in case
of war
Article 118. Inciting to war or giving motives for
reprisals - The penalty of reclusion temporal shall
be imposed upon any public officer or employee,
and that of prision mayor upon any private
individual, who, by unlawful or unauthorized acts,
provokes or gives occasion for a war involving or
liable to involve the Philippine Islands or exposes
Filipino Citizens to reprisals on their persons or
property.
Elements:
1. That the offender performs unlawful or
unauthorized acts.
2. That such acts provoke or give occasion for a war
involving or liable to involve the Philippines or
expose Filipino citizens to reprisals on their persons
or property.
Examples:
1. The raising, without sufficient authorization, of
troops within the Philippines for the service of a
foreign nation against another nation.
2. The public destruction of the flag or seal of a
foreign state or the public manifestation of hostility
to the head or ambassador of another state.
Article 119. Violation of Neutrality - Te penalty of
prision correccional shall be inflicted upon anyone
who, on the occasion of war in which the
government is not involved, violates any
regulation issued by competent authority for the
purpose of enforcing neutrality.
Elements:
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is not
involved;
2. There is a regulation issued by a competent
authority to enforce neutrality;
3. Offender violates the regulation.
-Without any regulation by competent authority, then
there can be no crime of violation of neutrality. It is
the violation of such regulation which constitutes the
crime.
Article 120. Correspondence with hostile country Any person, who in time of war, shall have
correspondence with an enemy country or
territory occupied by enemy troops shall be
punished:
1. By Prision Correccional, if the correspondence
has been prohibited by the Government;
2. By Prision Mayor, if the correspondence be
carried on in ciphers or conventional signs; and
3. By Reclusion Temporal, if notice or information
be given thereby which might be useful to the
enemy. If the offender intended to aid the enemy
by giving such notice or information, he shall
suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal to death.
Elements:
1. It is in time of war in which the Philippines is
involved;
2. Offender makes correspondence with an enemy
country or territory occupied by enemy troops;
3. The correspondence is either –
a. prohibited by the government;
b. carried on in ciphers or conventional
signs(coded);
or
c. containing notice or information which
might be useful to the enemy.
-If there is no prohibition for such correspondence, it
is not punishable under Article 120 but if there is a
prohibition issued by the government with regards to
correspondence to any person in the enemy country
or territory occupied by enemy troops, that
correspondence is covered under Article 120.
-Prohibition by the government is not essential in
paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 120. Even if there is no
prohibition, so long as the correspondence is carried
on in Ciphers or Conventional signs or if the
correspondence contains notice or information which
might be useful to the enemy, then that is covered
under Article 120.
-The correspondence giving information that might
be useful to the enemy, if intended by the offender to
aid the enemy, the crime amounts to treason. Hence,
the penalty is the same as that for treason.
But in proving the offense under article 120,
even if the contents of the correspondence is
treasonous in nature, the two witness rule will not
apply because what needs to be prove is the
correspondence under article 120 and not treason.
Article 121. Flight to enemy’s country - The
penalty of arresto mayor shall be inflicted upon
any person who, owing allegiance to the
government, attempts to flee or go to an enemy
country when prohibited by competent authority.
Elements:
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved;
2. Offender must be owing allegiance to the
government(which now includes even foreigners);
3. Offender attempts to flee or go to enemy country;
4.Going to the enemy country is prohibited by
competent authority.
-There must be a prohibition issued by competent
authority.
-Mere attempt to flee or go to enemy country, so long
as there is a prohibition, consummates the crime
under article 121. (Even the buying of the ticket)
Section Three - Piracy and mutiny on the high seas or
in Philippine waters
Article 122. Piracy in general and mutiny on the
high seas or in Philippine waters - The penalty of
reclusion perpetua shall be inflicted upon any
person who, on the high seas or in Philippine
waters, shall attack or seize a vessel or, not being a
member of its complement nor a passenger, shall
seize the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel,
is equipment, or personal belongings of its
complement or passengers.
The same penalty shall be inflicted in case of
mutiny on the high seas or in Philippine waters.
(As amended by Sec. 3, R.A. No. 7659)
-There are two laws which are simultaneously
enforced covering piracy.
1. Article 122, RPC; and
2. PD 532.
-PD 532 did not repeal Article 122 of the RPC. It
complements the provisions of the RPC with regards
to Piracy.
-Under the RPC, piracy is committed outside
Philippine territory while under PD 532, it is
committed within Philippine territory.
-In piracy under Article 122, it can only be committed
outside of Philippine territorial waters but including
territorial waters of foreign countries. In Piracy under
Article 122 of the RPC, ONLY strangers to the vessel
may be liable for piracy. Passengers and members of
the complement of the vessel cannot commit this
crime under Art. 122.
-Piracy Under PD 532, it can only be committed
within Philippine territorial waters. Under PD 532, it
is immaterial whether the vessel is moving or not.
Under PD 532, even passengers and members of the
complement of the vessel can commit piracy.
-Whether it is piracy under Article 122 or PD 532, the
essence of this crime is Robbery. Any taking in a
vessel with force upon things or with violence or
intimidation against person is employed will always
be piracy. The essence is robbery. It is just that it is
committed in a vessel.
-If there is taking, either of the cargo or the properties
of personal belonging of the passenger or
complement, if their is no violence or intimidation on
persons of force upon things, the crime of piracy
cannot be committed, but only theft because piracy,
whether covered under Article 122 or PD 532, is in
the nature of robbery.
-For it to be piracy, the elements of robbery must be
present.
-In Piracy under the RPC, the act penalized is an
attack upon the vessel but always with intent to gain.
So there is always that element of animus lucrandi.
The attack on the vessel, under the RPC, must be for
the purpose of seizing any of its cargoes or any of the
personal belongings of the passengers or crew. So
under the RPC, he is not a passenger nor a member of
the crew. In essence therefore, this pirates are not
authorized to be there either as passengers or as
members of the crew. So that even if they are already
inside, so long as their entry therein is not authorized
then they are covered under the Article. They are
considered as pirates.
-There is an amendment introduced by RA 7659.
Article 122, before its amendment provided that
piracy must be committed on the high seas by any
person not a member of its complement nor a
passenger thereof. By the amendment under RA
7659, the coverage of the pertinent provision was
widened to include offenses committed in Philippine
waters. On the other hand, under PD 532 the
coverage on the law on Piracy embraces any person
including passengers or members of the complement
of the vessel. So, passenger or not, under this
amendments, a member of the complement or not,
any person is now covered by the law. (People v
Tulin, GR 111709, Aug 30, 2001)
Elements of mutiny
1. The vessel is on the high seas or Philippine waters;
2. Offenders are either members of its complement,
or passengers of the vessel;
3. Offenders either –
a. attack or seize the vessel; or
b. seize the whole or part of the cargo, its
equipment, or personal belongings of the crew or
passengers.
Mutiny is the unlawful resistance to a superior
officer, or the raising of commotions and disturbances
aboard a ship against the authority of its commander.
Article 123. Qualified Piracy - Th penalty of
reclusion perpetua to death shall be imposed upon
those who commit any of the crimes referred to in
the preceding article, under any of the following
circumstances:
1. Whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding
or firing upon the same;
2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned their
victims without means of saving themselves; or
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder,
homicide, physical injuries, or rape.
-Take note of the circumstances.
A) Whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding
or firing upon the same;
B) Whenever the pirates have abandoned their
victims without means of saving themselves; or
C) Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder,
homicide, physical injuries, or rape.
-In mutiny, the passengers or the members of the
crew would defy the authority.
Republic Act No. 6235 (The Anti Hi-Jacking Law)
Aircraft piracy
-enacted on June 19, 1971
-Committed by any person who compels a change in
the course or destination of an aircraft of Philippine
registry, or to seize or usurp the control thereof, while
it is in flight. An aircraft is in flight from the moment
all its external doors are closed following
embarkation until any such doors is opened for
disembarkation.
Four situations governed by anti hi-jacking law:
(1) usurping or seizing control of an aircraft of
Philippine registry while it is in flight, compelling the
pilots thereof to change the course or destination of
the aircraft;
(2) usurping or seizing control of an aircraft of
foreign registry while within Philippine territory,
compelling the pilots thereof to land in any part of
Philippine territory;
(3) carrying or loading on board an aircraft operating
as a public utility passenger aircraft in the
Philippines, any flammable, corrosive, explosive, or
poisonous substance; and
(4) loading, shipping, or transporting on board a
cargo aircraft operating as a public utility in the
Philippines, any flammable, corrosive, explosive, or
poisonous substance if this was done not in
accordance with the rules and regulations set and
promulgated by the Air Transportation Office on this
matter.
-Between numbers 1 and 2, the point of distinction is
whether the aircraft is of Philippine registry or
foreign registry. The important thing is that before the
anti hi-jacking law can apply, the aircraft must be in
flight. If not in flight, whatever crimes committed
shall be governed by the Revised Penal Code. The
law makes a distinction between aircraft of a foreign
registry and of Philippine registry. If the aircraft
subject of the hi-jack is of Philippine registry, it
should be in flight at the time of the hi-jacking.
-On the other hand, if the aircraft is of foreign
registry, the law does not require that it be in flight
before the anti hi-jacking law can apply. This is
because aircrafts of foreign registry are considered in
transit while they are in foreign countries. Although
they may have been in a foreign country, technically
they are still in flight, because they have to move out
of that foreign country. So even if any of the acts
mentioned were committed while the exterior doors
of the foreign aircraft were still open, the anti hijacking law will already govern.
-Note that under this law, an aircraft is considered in
flight from the moment all exterior doors are closed
following embarkation until such time when the same
doors are again opened for disembarkation. This
means that there are passengers that boarded. So if
the doors are closed to bring the aircraft to the
hangar, the aircraft is not considered as in flight. The
aircraft shall be deemed to be already in flight even if
its engine has not yet been started.
-As to numbers 3 and 4 of Republic Act No. 6235,
the distinction is whether the aircraft is a passenger
aircraft or a cargo aircraft. In both cases, however,
the law applies only to public utility aircraft in the
Philippines. Private aircrafts are not subject to the
anti hi-jacking law, in so far as transporting
prohibited substances are concerned.
-If the aircraft is a passenger aircraft, the prohibition
is absolute. Carrying of any prohibited, flammable,
corrosive, or explosive substance is a crime under
Republic Act No. 6235. But if the aircraft is only a
cargo aircraft, the law is violated only when the
transporting of the prohibited substance was not done
in accordance with the rules and regulations
prescribed by the Air Transportation Office in the
matter of shipment of such things. The Board of
Transportation provides the manner of packing of
such kind of articles, the quantity in which they may
be loaded at any time, etc. Otherwise, the anti hijacking law does not apply.
Title Two
CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS
OF THE STATE
Chapter One
ARBITRARY DETENTION OR EXPULSION,
VIOLATION OF DWELLING, PROHIBITION,
INTERRUPTION, AND DISSOLUTION OF
PEACEFUL MEETINGS AND CRIMES AGAINST
RELIGIOUS WORSHIP
What are the crimes against the fundamental laws
of the State?
1. Arbitrary detention (Art 124)
2. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the
proper judicial authorities. (Art 125)
3. Delaying release (Art 126)
4. Expulsion (Art 127)
5. Violation of Domicile (Art 128)
6. Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in
the service of those legally obtained (Art 129)
7. Searching domicile without witnesses (Art 130)
8. Prohibition, interruption, and dissolution of
peaceful meetings. (Art 131)
9. Interruption of religious worship (Art 132)
10. Offending the Religious feelings (Art 133)
-They are called crimes against the fundamental laws
of the State, because they violate certain provisions
of the Bill of Rights (Article III) of the 1987
Constitution.
-Articles 124, 125 and 126 of the code punish any
public officer or employee in those cases where the
individual is unlawfully deprived of liberty as
guaranteed under Section 1 of Article III of the 1987
Constitution.
-Article 127 of the Code punishes any public officer
or employee who shall unlawfully expel a person
from the Philippines or compel a person to change his
residence. (enforces the liberty of abode)
-Articles 128, 129 and 130 punish any public officer
or employee who violated the right to be secure in
their persons, houses, papers and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures x x x (Section 2)
-Article 131 punishes violations of Right to assemble
(Section 4)
-Article 132 and 133 punish violations of the right to
free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession
and worship. (Section 5)
-The offenders in these crimes are public officers or
employees, EXCEPT for the crime of Offending the
Religious Feelings under Article 133 which may be
committed by a private individual.
Section One - Arbitrary detention and expulsion
Classes of Arbitrary Detention
(1) Arbitrary detention by detaining a person without
legal ground (Article 124)
(2) Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the
proper judicial authorities (Article 125)
(3) Delaying release (Article 126)
-Arbitrary detention is the deprivation by public
officer of the liberty of a person without legal ground.
-If the offender is a private person, the crime is illegal
detention under Article 267 or 268 in Title 9.
-If the offender is not a public officer, he cannot be
made liable under Title Two except if the crime is
offending the Religious feelings.
-A person is detained when he is placed in
confinement or there is a restraint on his person.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He detains a person;
3. The detention is without legal grounds.
“Without legal grounds”
The detention of a person is without legal ground :
(1) when he has not committed a crime or, at least,
there is no reasonable ground for suspicion that he
has committed a crime; or
(2) When he is not suffering from violent insanity or
any other ailment requiring compulsory confinement
in a hospital.
The crime of arbitrary detention assumes several
forms:
(1) Detaining a person without legal grounds under
(Art 124);
(2) Having arrested the offended party for legal
grounds but without warrant of arrest, and the public
officer does not deliver the arrested person to the
proper judicial authority within the period of 12, 18,
or 36 hours, as the case may be(Art 125); or
(3) Delaying release by competent authority with the
same period mentioned in number 2(Art 126).
-Note that in the crime of arbitrary detention,
although the offender is a public officer, not any
public officer can commit this crime. Only those
public officers whose official duties carry with it the
authority to make an arrest and detain persons can be
guilty of this crime. So, if the offender does not
possess such authority, the crime committed by him is
illegal detention. A public officer who is acting
outside the scope of his official duties is no better
than a private citizen.
(2) As to criminal intent
In arbitrary detention, the main reason for
detaining the offended party is to deny him of his
liberty.
In unlawful arrest, the purpose is to accuse the
offended party of a crime he did not commit, to
deliver the person to the proper authority, and to
file the necessary charges in a way trying to
incriminate him.
-Consider Rule 113, Section 5 of the ROC.
Distinction between arbitrary detention and illegal
detention
1. In arbitrary detention - The principal offender
must be a public officer. Civilians cannot commit the
crime of arbitrary detention except when they
conspire with a public officer committing this crime,
or become an accomplice or accessory to the crime
committed by the public officer; and
-Under Article 124, the arrest is made without a
warrant. If the arrest is with a warrant, there is no
crime of arbitrary detention because the arrest is
lawful.
The offender who is a public officer has a duty which
carries with it the authority to detain a person.
Article 125. Delay in the delivery of detained
persons to the proper judicial authorities. - The
penalties provided in the next preceding article
shall be imposed upon the public officer or
employee who shall detain any person for some
legal ground and shall fail to deliver such person
to the proper judicial authorities within the period
of twelve (12) hours, for crimes or offenses
punishable by light penalties, or their equivalent;
eighteen (18) hours, for crimes or offenses
punishable by correctional penalties, or their
equivalent; and thirty-six (36) hours, for crimes or
offenses punishable by afflictive or capital
penalties, or their equivalent.
In every case, the person detained shall be
informed of the cause of his detention and shall be
allowed, upon his request, to communicate and
confer at any time with his attorney or counsel.
(As amended by E.O. No. 272)
2. In illegal detention - The principal offender is a
private person. But a public officer can commit the
crime of illegal detention when he is acting in a
private capacity or beyond the scope of his official
duty, or when he becomes an accomplice or accessory
to the crime committed by a private person.
The offender, even if he is a public officer, does not
include as his function the power to arrest and detain
a person, unless he conspires with a public officer
committing arbitrary detention.
Distinction between arbitrary detention and
unlawful arrest (art 269)
(1) As to offender
In arbitrary detention, the offender is a public
officer possessed with authority to make arrests.
In unlawful arrest, the offender may be any
person.
-Unlawful arrest by a public officer should be
punished as arbitrary detention under 124. If the
public officer has the authority to arrest and detain a
person but the arrest is without legal ground then the
crime is arbitrary detention
-In Article 125, there is also no warrant that is why
they have to be delivered to the proper judicial
authority so they can be charged.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He detains a person for some legal ground;
3. He fails to deliver such person to the proper
judicial authorities within –
A. 12 hour for light penalties;
B. 18 hours for correctional penalties; and
C. 36 hours for afflictive or capital penalties.
-This is a form of arbitrary detention. At the
beginning, the detention is legal since it is in the
pursuance of a lawful arrest. However, the detention
becomes arbitrary when the period thereof exceeds
12, 18 or 36 hours, as the case may be, depending on
whether the crime is punished by light, correctional
or afflictive penalty or their equivalent.
-The period of detention is 12 hours for light
offenses, 18 hours for correctional offenses and 36
hours for afflictive offences, where the accused may
be detained without formal charge. But he must
cause a formal charge or application to be filed with
the proper court before 12, 18 or 36 hours lapse.
Otherwise he has to release the person arrested.
-Note that the period stated herein does not include
the nighttime. It is to be counted only when the
prosecutor’s office is ready to receive the complaint
or information.
-This article does not apply if the arrest is with a
warrant. The situation contemplated here is an arrest
without a warrant.
Article 126. Delaying Release - The penalties
provided for in Article 124 shall be imposed upon
any public officer or employee who delays for the
period of time specified therein the performance
of any judicial or executive order for the release of
a prisoner or detention prisoner, or unduly delays
the service of the notice of such order to said
prisoner or the proceedings upon any petition for
the liberation of such person.
Acts punished
1. Delaying the performance of a judicial or
executive order for the release of a prisoner;
2. Unduly delaying the service of the notice of such
order to said prisoner;
3. Unduly delaying the proceedings upon any
petition for the liberation of such person.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. There is a judicial or executive order for the
release of a prisoner or detention prisoner, or that
there is a proceeding upon a petition for the liberation
of such person;
3. Offender without good reason delays –
a. the service of the notice of such order to the
prisoner;
b. the performance of such judicial or executive
order for the release of the prisoner; or
c. the proceedings upon a petition for the
release of such person.
Article 127. Expulsion - The penalty of prision
correccional shall be imposed upon any pubic
officer or employee who, not being thereunto
authorized by law, shall expel any person from the
Philippine Islands or shall compel such person to
change his residence.
-The essence of the crime under Art 127 is coercion
but the specific name is Expulsion when committed
by a public officer or employee. If the act is done by
a private person, the crime is grave coercion under
Art 286.
Acts punished
1. Expelling a person from the Philippines;
2. Compelling a person to change his residence.
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He either –
a. expels any person from the Philippines; or
b. compels a person to change residence;
3. Offender is not authorized to do so by law.
-The chief executive has the power to deport aliens as
an act of the State.
-Example: There is a public officer who owns a land
occupied by informal settlers and he engaged to
compel these informal settlers to leave. The crime is
expulsion and the crime of grave coercion is
absorbed.
-For expulsion of a person from the Philippines, the
offended party can only be an alien. A Filipino citizen
cannot be expelled from the Philippines. With regards
Filipino citizens, the crime will be committed
through the second mode or compelling the person to
change his abode.
Article 128. Violation of Domicile - The penalty of
Prision Correccional in its minimum period shall
be imposed upon any public officer or employee
who, not being authorized by judicial order, shall
enter any dwelling against the will of the owner
thereof, search papers or other effects found
therein without the previous consent of such
owner, or, having surreptitiously entered said
dwelling, and being required to leave the premises,
shall refuse to do so.
If the offense be committed in the nighttime,
or if any papers or effects not constituting
evidence of a crime be not returned immediately
after the search made by the offender, the penalty
shall be prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods.
Common elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He is not authorized by judicial order to enter the
dwelling or to make a search therein for papers or
other effects.
Acts punished
1. Entering any dwelling against the will of the
owner thereof;
2. Searching papers or other effects found therein
without the previous consent of such owner (it may
be possible that the public officer was allowed to
enter the dwelling but when he was already inside he
searched papers or other effects without prior consent
of the owner); or
3. Refusing to leave the premises, after having
surreptitiously entered said dwelling and after
having been required to leave the same.
-Take note of the phrase "Surreptitiously entered"
-Example: Assuming that the house was open, there
was manifestation of any prohibition for somebody to
enter the house, so the public officer entered, so when
the owner discovered him, he was asked to leave
immediately. The crime is not violation of domicile.
It may be unjust vexation
“Having Surreptitiously entered said dwelling”
This is probably an instance where a public officer or
employee may commit violation of domicile even if
the entrance is only without the consent of its owner;
that is, the offender surreptitiously entered the
dwelling. But in this case, what constitutes the crime
is the refusal of the offender to leave the premises
when required to do so - not the entrance into the
dwelling.
“Against the will of the owner”
To constitute a violation of domicile, the entrance by
the public officer or employee must be against the
will of the owner of the dwelling, which presupposes
opposition or Prohibition by said owner, whether
express or implied. If the entrance by the public
officer or employee is ONLY without the consent of
the owner or the dwelling, the crime is not
committed.
Circumstances qualifying the offense
1. If committed at nighttime; or
2. If any papers or effects not constituting evidence
of a crime are not returned immediately after the
search made by offender.
Article 129. Search warrants maliciously obtained,
and abuse in the service of those legally obtained.
In addition to the liability attaching to the
offender for the commission of any other offense,
the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum
period to prision correccional in its minimum
period and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos shall
be imposed upon any public officer or employee
who shall procure a search warrant without just
cause, or, having legally procured the same, shall
exceed his authority or use unnecessary severity in
executing the same.
