Benedicto V CA

Benedicto v CA
Stat con concept:
Saving Clause- a clause in a provision of law which operates to except from the effect
of the law what the clause provides.
-usually used to exempt or save something from the effect of a repeal of a statute.
-the legislature in repealing a statute may preserve in the form of a saving clause, the
right of the state to prosecute and punish offenses committed in violation of the
repealed law.
Case filed: Petition in the consolidated decision rendered by CA which denied the
petitioners motion to quash the informations in 25 criminal cases
Facts:
In 1991 to 1992, petitioners, together with former First Lady Imelda

Marcos, were charged with twenty-ve (25) informations at the RTC for
dollar salting (violation of Central Bank (CB) Circular No. 960). The
complaints alleged that petitioners maintained foreign exchange abroad
without prior authorization from and failed to report earnings or receipts to
the CB.
Meanwhile, CB Circular No. 1318 revised the rules governing non-trade

foreign exchange transactions and Circular No. 1353 deleted the
requirement of prior Central Bank approval for foreign exchange-funded
expenditures obtained from the banking system. Both circulars contained a
saving clause exempting from its coverage pending criminal actions
involving violations of Circular No. 960 and Circular No. 1318, respectively
Petitioners Claim (pinaka stat con focused):
That they are being prosecuted for acts punishable under laws that have
already been repealed. They point to the express repeal of Central Bank
Circular No. 960 by Circular Nos. 1318 and 1353 as well as the express
repeal of Republic Act No. 265 by Republic Act No. 7653. Petitioners,
relying on Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code, contend that repeal has
the effect of extinguishing the right to prosecute or punish the offense
committed under the old laws.
Additional info: Benedicto passed away. (automatic extinguishes crim liability)

Issue: WON, the repeal of Central Bank Circular No. 960 and RA 265 by Circular 1353
and RA 7653,respectively, extinguish criminal liability of petitioners
Held: NO.
Generally, an absolute repeal of a penal law has the effect of depriving a

court of its authority to punish a person charged with violation of the old
law prior to its repeal. This is because an unqualified repeal of a penal
law constitutes a legislative act of rendering legal what had been previously
declared as illegal, such that the offense no longer exists and it is as if
the person who committed it never did so.
Exception:
1. inclusion of a saving clause in the repealing statute that provides that the
repeal shall have no effect on pending actions.
2. repealing act reenacts the former statute and punishes the act previously
penalized under the old law. In such instance, the act committed before the
reenactment continues to be an offense in the statute books and pending cases
are not affected, regardless of whether the new penalty to be imposed is more
favorable to the accused.
Case at bar: it must be noted that despite the repeal of Circular No. 960,
Circular No. 1353 retained the same reportorial requirement for residents
receiving earnings or profits from non-trade foreign exchange transactions.
Circular Nos. 1318 and 1353 shows that both contain a saving clause,
expressly providing that the repeal of Circular No. 960 shall have no
effect on pending actions for violation of the latter Circular.
The respective saving clauses of Circular Nos. 1318 and 1353 clearly
manifest the intent to reserve the right of the State to prosecute and
punish offenses for violations of the repealed Circular No. 960, where the
cases are either pending or under investigation.
(Remember the intent of the statute ratio legis est anima) A comparison of the
old Central Bank Act and the new Bangko Sentral's charter repealing the
former show that in consonance with the general objective of the old law
and the new law " to maintain internal and external monetary stability in
the Philippines and preserve the international value of the peso. " both the
repealed law and the repealing statute contain a penal clause which
sought to penalize in general, violations of the law as well as orders,
instructions, rules, or regulations issued by the Monetary Board.
Bangko Sentral - the scope of the penal clause was expanded to include
violations of "other pertinent banking laws enforced or implemented by the
Bangko Sentral."
Acts of petitioners sought to be penalized are violations of rules and

regulations issued by the Monetary Board. These acts are proscribed and
penalized in the penal clause of the repealed law and this proviso for
proscription and penalty was reenacted in the repealing law.
While Section 34 of Republic Act No. 265 was repealed, it was

nonetheless, simultaneously reenacted in Section 36 of Republic Act No.
7653. Where a clause or provision or a statute for that matter is
simultaneously repealed and reenacted, there is no effect, upon the rights
and liabilities which have accrued under the original statute, since the
reenactment, in effect "neutralizes ' the repeal and continues the law in
force without interruption.
The rule applies to penal laws and statutes with penal provisions. Thus,
the repeal of a penal law or provision, under which a person is charged
with violation thereof and its simultaneous reenactment penalizing the
same act done by him under the old law, will neither preclude the
accused's prosecution nor deprive the court of its jurisdiction to hear and
try his case. As pointed out earlier, the act penalized before the
reenactment continues to remain an offense and pending cases are
unaffected. Therefore, the repeal of Republic Act No. 265 by Republic Act
No. 7653 did not extinguish the criminal liability of petitioners for
transgressions of Circular No. 960 and cannot, under the circumstances of
this case, be made a basis for quashing the indictments against
petitioners.

Benedicto V CA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Benedicto V CA

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Benedicto V CA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Benedicto v CA

Stat con concept:

In 1991 to 1992, petitioners, together with former First Lady Imelda

Meanwhile, CB Circular No. 1318 revised the rules governing non-trade

Petitioners Claim (pinaka stat con focused):

Additional info: Benedicto passed away. (automatic extinguishes crim liability)

Generally, an absolute repeal of a penal law has the effect of depriving a

Acts of petitioners sought to be penalized are violations of rules and

While Section 34 of Republic Act No. 265 was repealed, it was

You might also like