TITLE II.

CRIMES AGAINST In its counterpart in Title IX

THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF (Crimes Against Personal Liberty
THE STATE and Security), the offenders are
private persons. But private
persons may also be liable under
Crimes against the fundamental this title as when a private person
laws of the State conspires with a public officer.
What is required is that the
1. Arbitrary detention (Art. principal offender must be a public
124); officer. Thus, if a private person
conspires with a public officer, or
2. Delay in the delivery of becomes an accessory or
detained persons to the accomplice, the private person also
proper judicial authorities becomes liable for the same crime.
(Art. 125); But a private person acting alone
cannot commit the crimes under
3. Delaying release (Art. 126); Article 124 to 132 of this title.

4. Expulsion (Art. 127);

Article 124. Arbitrary
5. Violation of domicile (Art. Detention
128);
Elements
6. Search warrants maliciously
obtained and abuse in the 1. Offender is a public officer or
service of those legally employee;
obtained (Art. 129);
2. He detains a person;
7. Searching domicile without
witnesses (Art. 130); 3. The detention is without legal
grounds.
8. Prohibition, interruption, and
dissolution of peaceful
meetings (Art. 131); Meaning of absence of legal
grounds
9. Interruption of religious
worship (Art. 132); and 1. No crime was committed by
the detained;
10. Offending the religious
feelings (Art. 133); 2. There is no violent insanity of
the detained person; and

Crimes under this title are those 3. The person detained has no
which violate the Bill of Rights ailment which requires
accorded to the citizens under the compulsory confinement in a
Constitution. Under this title, the hospital.
offenders are public officers,
except as to the last crime –
offending the religious feelings The crime of arbitrary detention
under Article 133, which refers to assumes several forms:
any person. The public officers
who may be held liable are only (1) Detaining a person without
those acting under supposed legal grounds under;
exercise of official functions, albeit
illegally. (2) Having arrested the offended
party for legal grounds but
 without warrant of arrest,
and the public officer does Note that in the crime of arbitrary
not deliver the arrested detention, although the offender is
person to the proper judicial a public officer, not any public
authority within the period of officer can commit this crime. Only
12, 18, or 36 hours, as the those public officers whose official
case may be; or duties carry with it the authority to
make an arrest and detain persons
(3) Delaying release by can be guilty of this crime. So, if
competent authority with the the offender does not possess such
same period mentioned in authority, the crime committed by
number 2. him is illegal detention. A public
officer who is acting outside the
Distinction between arbitrary scope of his official duties is no
detention and illegal detention better than a private citizen.

1. In arbitrary detention --
Questions & Answers
The principal offender must
be a public officer. Civilians
can commit the crime of 1. A janitor at the Quezon
arbitrary detention except City Hall was assigned in cleaning
when they conspire with a the men’s room. One day, he
public officer committing this noticed a fellow urinating so
crime, or become an carelessly that instead of urinating
accomplice or accessory to at the bowl, he was actually
the crime committed by the urinating partly on the floor. The
public officer; and janitor resented this. He stepped
out of the men’s room and locked
The offender who is a public the same. He left. The fellow was
officer has a duty which able to come out only after several
carries with it the authority hours when people from the
to detain a person. outside forcibly opened the door.
Is the janitor liable for arbitrary
2. In illegal detention -- detention?

The principal offender is a No. Even if he is a public

private person. But a public officer, he is not permitted by his
officer can commit the crime official function to arrest and detain
of illegal detention when he persons. Therefore, he is guilty
is acting in a private capacity only of illegal detention. While the
or beyond the scope of his offender is a public officer, his duty
official duty, or when he does not include the authority to
becomes an accomplice or make arrest; hence, the crime
accessory to the crime committed is illegal detention.
committed by a private
person. 2. A municipal treasurer
has been courting his secretary.
The offender, even if he is a However, the latter always turned
public officer, does not him down. Thereafter, she tried to
include as his function the avoid him. One afternoon, the
power to arrest and detain a municipal treasurer locked the
person, unless he conspires secretary inside their office until
with a public officer she started crying. The treasurer
committing arbitrary opened the door and allowed her to
detention.
go home. What crime was move about. Was arbitrary or
committed? illegal detention committed?

Illegal detention. This is Either arbitrary detention or

because the municipal treasurer illegal detention was committed. If
has no authority to detain a person a person is brought to a safe
although he is a public officer. house, blindfolded, even if he is
free to move as he pleases, but if
he cannot leave the place, arbitrary
In a case decided by the Supreme detention or illegal detention is
Court a Barangay Chairman who committed.
unlawfully detains another was
held to be guilty of the crime of
arbitrary detention. This is Distinction between arbitrary
because he is a person in authority detention and unlawful arrest
vested with the jurisdiction to
maintain peace and order within (1) As to offender
his barangay. In the maintenance
of such peace and order, he may In arbitrary detention, the
cause the arrest and detention of offender is a public officer
troublemakers or those who disturb possessed with authority to
the peace and order within his make arrests.
barangay. But if the legal basis for
the apprehension and detention In unlawful arrest, the
does not exist, then the detention offender may be any person.
becomes arbitrary.
(2) As to criminal intent
Whether the crime is arbitrary
detention or illegal detention, it is In arbitrary detention, the
necessary that there must be an main reason for detaining the
actual restraint of liberty of the offended party is to deny him
offended party. If there is no of his liberty.
actual restraint, as the offended
party may still go to the place In unlawful arrest, the
where he wants to go, even though purpose is to accuse the
there have been warnings, the offended party of a crime he
crime of arbitrary detention or did not commit, to deliver
illegal detention is not committed. the person to the proper
There is either grave or light authority, and to file the
threat. necessary charges in a way
trying to incriminate him.
However, if the victim is under
guard in his movement such that When a person is unlawfully
there is still restraint of liberty, arrested, his subsequent detention
then the crime of either arbitrary is without legal grounds.
or illegal detention is still
committed.
Question & Answer

Question & Answer A had been collecting tong

from drivers. B, a driver, did not
The offended party was want to contribute to the tong.
brought to a place which he could One day, B was apprehended by A,
not leave because he does not telling him that he was driving
know where he is, although free to carelessly. Reckless driving carries
with it a penalty of immediate c. 36 hours for afflictive or
detention and arrest. B was capital penalties.
brought to the Traffic Bureau and
was detained there until the
evening. When A returned, he This is a form of arbitrary
opened the cell and told B to go detention. At the beginning, the
home. Was there a crime of detention is legal since it is in the
arbitrary detention or unlawful pursuance of a lawful arrest.
arrest? However, the detention becomes
arbitrary when the period thereof
Arbitrary detention. The exceeds 12, 18 or 36 hours, as the
arrest of B was only incidental to case may be, depending on
the criminal intent of the offender whether the crime is punished by
to detain him. But if after putting light, correctional or afflictive
B inside the cell, he was turned penalty or their equivalent.
over to the investigating officer
who booked him and filed a charge The period of detention is 12 hours
of reckless imprudence against for light offenses, 18 hours for
him, then the crime would be correctional offences and 36 hours
unlawful arrest. The detention of for afflictive offences, where the
the driver is incidental to the accused may be detained without
supposed crime he did not commit. formal charge. But he must cause
But if there is no supposed crime a formal charge or application to
at all because the driver was not be filed with the proper court
charged at all, he was not given before 12, 18 or 36 hours lapse.
place under booking sheet or Otherwise he has to release the
report arrest, then that means that person arrested.
the only purpose of the offender is
to stop him from driving his Note that the period stated herein
jeepney because he refused to does not include the nighttime. It
contribute to the tong. is to be counted only when the
prosecutor’s office is ready to
receive the complaint or
Article 125. Delay in the information.
Delivery of Detained Persons to
the Proper Judicial Authorities This article does not apply if the
arrest is with a warrant. The
Elements situation contemplated here is an
arrest without a warrant.
1. Offender is a public officer or
employee;
Question & Answer
2. He detains a person for some
legal ground;
Within what period should a
3. He fails to deliver such person police officer who has arrested a
to the proper judicial person under a warrant of arrest
authorities within – turn over the arrested person to
the judicial authority?
a. 12 hour for light
penalties; There is no time limit
specified except that the return
b. 18 hours for correctional must be made within a reasonable
penalties; and time. The period fixed by law
under Article 125 does not apply
because the arrest was made by deprive the arrested person of his
virtue of a warrant of arrest. right to post the bail.

Under the Revised Rules of Court,

When a person is arrested without when the person arrested is
a warrant, it means that there is arrested for a crime which gives
no case filed in court yet. If the him the right to preliminary
arresting officer would hold the investigation and he wants to avail
arrested person there, he is his right to a preliminary
actually depriving the arrested of investigation, he would have to
his right to bail. As long as there is waive in writing his rights under
no charge in the court yet, the Article 125 so that the arresting
arrested person cannot obtain bail officer will not immediately file the
because bail may only be granted case with the court that will
by the court. The spirit of the law exercise jurisdiction over the case.
is to have the arrested person If he does not want to waive this in
delivered to the jurisdiction of the writing, the arresting officer will
court. have to comply with Article 125
and file the case immediately in
If the arrest is by virtue of a court without preliminary
warrant, it means that there is investigation. In such case, the
already a case filed in court. When arrested person, within five days
an information is filed in court, the after learning that the case has
amount of bail recommended is been filed in court without
stated. The accused person is not preliminary investigation, may ask
really denied his right to bail. Even for preliminary investigation. In
if he is interrogated in the police this case, the public officer who
precinct, he can already file bail. made the arrest will no longer be
liable for violation of Article 125.
Note that delivery of the arrested
person to the proper authorities
does not mean physical delivery or Question & Answer
turn over of arrested person to the
court. It simply means putting the
arrested person under the The arrest of the suspect was
jurisdiction of the court. This is done in Baguio City. On the way to
done by filing the necessary Manila, where the crime was
complaint or information against committed, there was a typhoon so
the person arrested in court within the suspect could not be brought to
the period specified in Article 125. Manila until three days later. Was
The purpose of this is for the court there a violation of Article 125?
to determine whether the offense
is bailable or not and if bailable, to There was a violation of
allow him the right to bail. Article 125. The crime committed
was arbitrary detention in the form
Under the Rule 114 of the Revised of delay in the delivery of arrested
Rules of Court, the arrested person person to the proper judicial
can demand from the arresting authority. The typhoon or flood is
officer to bring him to any judge in a matter of defense to be proved
the place where he was arrested by the accused, the arresting
and post the bail here. Thereupon, officer, as to whether he is liable.
the arresting officer may release In this situation, he may be
him. The judge who granted the exempt under paragraph 7 of
bail will just forward the litimus of Article 12.
the case to the court trying his
case. The purpose is in order to
Before Article 125 may be applied, b. the performance of
it is necessary that initially, the such judicial or
detention of the arrested person executive order for the
must be lawful because the arrest release of the prisoner;
is based on legal grounds. If the or
arrest is made without a warrant,
this constitutes an unlawful arrest. c. the proceedings upon a
Article 269, not Article 125, will petition for the release
apply. If the arrest is not based on of such person.
legal grounds, the arrest is pure
and simple arbitrary detention.
Article 125 contemplates a Article 127. Expulsion
situation where the arrest was
made without warrant but based Acts punished
on legal grounds. This is known as
citizen’s arrest. 1. Expelling a person from the
Philippines;

Article 126. Delaying Release 2. Compelling a person to

change his residence.
Acts punished

1. Delaying the performance of Elements

a judicial or executive order
for the release of a prisoner; 1. Offender is a public officer or
employee;
2. Unduly delaying the service
of the notice of such order to 2. He either –
said prisoner;
a. expels any person from
3. Unduly delaying the the Philippines; or
proceedings upon any
petition for the liberation of b. compels a person to
such person. change residence;

3. Offender is not authorized to do

Elements so by law.

1. Offender is a public officer or

employee; The essence of this crime is
coercion but the specific crime is
2. There is a judicial or “expulsion” when committed by a
executive order for the public officer. If committed by a
release of a prisoner or private person, the crime is grave
detention prisoner, or that coercion.
there is a proceeding upon a In Villavicencio v. Lukban, 39
petition for the liberation of Phil 778, the mayor of the City of
such person; Manila wanted to make the city
free from prostitution. He ordered
3. Offender without good certain prostitutes to be
reason delays – transferred to Davao, without
observing due processes since they
a. the service of the have not been charged with any
notice of such order to crime at all. It was held that the
the prisoner; crime committed was expulsion.
 Questions & Answers Circumstances qualifying the
offense

1. Certain aliens were 1. If committed at nighttime; or

arrested and they were just put on
the first aircraft which brought 2. If any papers or effects not
them to the country so that they constituting evidence of a
may be out without due process of crime are not returned
law. Was there a crime immediately after the search
committed? made by offender.

Yes. Expulsion.
Under Title IX (Crimes against
2. If a Filipino citizen is Personal Liberty and Security), the
sent out of the country, what crime corresponding article is qualified
is committed? trespass to dwelling under Article
280. Article 128 is limited to public
Grave coercion, not officers. The public officers who
expulsion, because a Filipino may be liable for crimes against
cannot be deported. This crime the fundamental laws are those
refers only to aliens. who are possessed of the authority
to execute search warrants and
warrants of arrests.
Article 128. Violation of
Domicile Under Rule 113 of the Revised
Rules of Court, when a person to
Acts punished be arrested enters a premise and
closes it thereafter, the public
1. Entering any dwelling against officer, after giving notice of an
the will of the owner thereof; arrest, can break into the premise.
He shall not be liable for violation
2. Searching papers or other of domicile.
effects found therein without
the previous consent of such There are only three recognized
owner; or instances when search without a
warrant is considered valid, and,
3. Refusing to leave the therefore, the seizure of any
premises, after having evidence done is also valid.
surreptitiously entered said Outside of these, search would be
dwelling and after having invalid and the objects seized
been required to leave the would not be admissible in
same evidence.

(1) Search made incidental to a

Common elements valid arrest;

1. Offender is a public officer or (2) Where the search was made

employee; on a moving vehicle or vessel
such that the exigency of he
2. He is not authorized by situation prevents the
judicial order to enter the searching officer from
dwelling or to make a search securing a search warrant;
therein for papers or other
effects. (3) When the article seized is
within plain view of the
 officer making the seizure
without making a search 1. It was raining heavily.
therefore. A policeman took shelter in one
person’s house. The owner obliged
There are three ways of and had his daughter serve the
committing the violation of Article police some coffee. The policeman
128: made a pass at the daughter. The
owner of the house asked him to
(1) By simply entering the leave. Does this fall under Article
dwelling of another if such 128?
entering is done against the
will of the occupant. In the No. It was the owner of the
plain view doctrine, public house who let the policeman in.
officer should be legally The entering is not surreptitious.
entitled to be in the place
where the effects were 2. A person surreptitiously
found. If he entered the enters the dwelling of another.
place illegally and he saw the What crime or crimes were possibly
effects, doctrine inapplicable; committed?
thus, he is liable for violation
of domicile. The crimes committed are
(1) qualified trespass to dwelling
(2) Public officer who enters with under Article 280, if there was an
consent searches for paper express or implied prohibition
and effects without the against entering. This is
consent of the owner. Even tantamount to entering against the
if he is welcome in the will of the owner; and (2) violation
dwelling, it does not mean he of domicile in the third form if he
has permission to search. refuses to leave after being told to.

(3) Refusing to leave premises

after surreptitious entry and Article 129. Search Warrants
being told to leave the same. Maliciously Obtained, and
The act punished is not the Abuse in the Service of Those
entry but the refusal to Legally Obtained
leave. If the offender upon
being directed to eave, Acts punished
followed and left, there is no
crime of violation of domicile. 1. Procuring a search warrant
Entry must be done without just cause;
surreptitiously; without this,
crime may be unjust Elements
vexation. But if entering was
done against the will of the 1. Offender is a public
occupant of the house, officer or employee;
meaning there was express
or implied prohibition from 2. He procures a search
entering the same, even if warrant;
the occupant does not direct
him to leave, the crime of is 3. There is no just cause.
already committed because it
would fall in number 1.
2. Exceeding his authority or by
using unnecessary severity in
Questions & Answers executing a search warrant
legally procured.
 warrant, not refusal to abide
Elements by it. The public officer may
also be prosecuted for
1. Offender is a public perjury, because for him to
officer or employee; succeed in obtaining a search
warrant without a probable
2. He has legally procured cause, he must have
a search warrant; perjured himself or induced
someone to commit perjury
3. He exceeds his to convince the court.
authority or uses
unnecessary severity in (2) The officer exceeded his
executing the same. authority under the warrant
– To illustrate, let us say that
there was a pusher in a
Article 130. Searching Domicile condo unit. The PNP
without Witnesses Narcotics Group obtained a
search warrant but the name
Elements of person in the search
warrant did not tally with the
1. Offender is a public officer or address stated. Eventually,
employee; the person with the same
name was found but in a
2. He is armed with search different address. The
warrant legally procured; occupant resisted but the
public officer insisted on the
3. He searches the domicile, search. Drugs were found
papers or other belongings of and seized and occupant was
any person; prosecuted and convicted by
the trial court. The Supreme
4. The owner, or any members Court acquitted him because
of his family, or two the public officers are
witnesses residing in the required to follow the search
same locality are not warrant to the letter. They
present. have no discretion on the
matter. Plain view doctrine
is inapplicable since it
Crimes under Articles 129 and 130 presupposes that the officer
are referred to as violation of was legally entitled to be in
domicile. In these articles, the the place where the effects
search is made by virtue of a valid where found. Since the
warrant, but the warrant entry was illegal, plain view
notwithstanding, the liability for doctrine does not apply.
the crime is still incurred through
the following situations: (3) When the public officer
employs unnecessary or
(1) Search warrant was excessive severity in the
irregularly obtained – This implementation of the search
means there was no probable warrant. The search warrant
cause determined in is not a license to commit
obtaining the search warrant. destruction.
Although void, the search
warrant is entitled to respect (4) Owner of dwelling or any
because of presumption of member of the family was
regularity. One remedy is a absent, or two witnesses
motion to quash the search residing within the same
 locality were not present inconvenience the public. The
during the search. permit should state the day, time
and the place where the gathering
may be held. This requirement is,
Article 131. Prohibition, therefore, legal as long as it is not
Interruption, and Dissolution of being exercised in as a prohibitory
Peaceful Meetings power.

Elements If the permit is denied arbitrarily,

Article 131 is violated. If the
1. Offender is a public officer or officer would not give the permit
employee; unless the meeting is held in a
particular place which he dictates
2. He performs any of the following defeats the exercise of the right to
acts: peaceably assemble, Article 131 is
violated.
a. prohibiting or by
interrupting, without At the beginning, it may happen
legal ground, the that the assembly is lawful and
holding of a peaceful peaceful. If in the course of the
meeting, or by assembly the participants commit
dissolving the same; illegal acts like oral defamation or
inciting to sedition, a public officer
b. hindering any person or law enforcer can stop or dissolve
from joining any lawful the meeting. The permit given is
association, or not a license to commit a crime.
attending any of its
meetings; There are two criteria to determine
whether Article 131 would be
c. prohibiting or hindering violated:
any person from
addressing, either (1) Dangerous tendency rule –
alone or together with applicable in times of
others, any petition to national unrest such as to
the authorities for the prevent coup d’etat.
correction of abuses or
redress of grievances. (2) Clear and present danger
rule – applied in times of
peace. Stricter rule.
The government has a right to
require a permit before any Distinctions between prohibition,
gathering could be made. Any interruption, or dissolution of
meeting without a permit is a peaceful meetings under Article
proceeding in violation of the law. 131, and tumults and other
That being true, a meeting may be disturbances, under Article 153
prohibited, interrupted, or
dissolved without violating Article (1) As to the participation of the
131 of the Revised Penal Code. public officer

But the requiring of the permit In Article 131, the public

shall be in exercise only of the officer is not a participant.
government’s regulatory powers As far as the gathering is
and not really to prevent peaceful concerned, the public officer
assemblies as the public may is a third party.
desire. Permit is only necessary to
regulate the peace so as not to
 If the public officer is a
participant of the assembly Elements
and he prohibits, interrupts,
or dissolves the same, Article 1. Acts complained of were
153 is violated if the same is performed in a place devoted
conducted in a public place. to religious worship, or
during the celebration of any
(2) As to the essence of the religious ceremony;
crime
2. The acts must be notoriously
In Article 131, the offender offensive to the feelings of
must be a public officer and, the faithful.
without any legal ground, he
prohibits, interrupts, or There must be deliberate intent to
dissolves a peaceful meeting hurt the feelings of the faithful.
or assembly to prevent the
offended party from
exercising his freedom of TITLE III. CRIMES AGAINST
speech and that of the PUBLIC ORDER
assembly to petition a
grievance against the
government. Crimes against public order

In Article 153, the offender 1. Rebellion or insurrection (Art.

need not be a public officer. 134);
The essence of the crime is
that of creating a serious 2. Conspiracy and proposal to
disturbance of any sort in a commit rebellion (Art. 136);
public office, public building
or even a private place where 3. Disloyalty to public officers or
a public function is being employees (Art. 137);
held.
4. Inciting to rebellion (Art.
138);
Article 132. Interruption of
Religious Worship 5. Sedition (Art. 139);

Elements 6. Conspiracy to commit

sedition (Art. 141);
1. Offender is a public officer or
employee; 7. Inciting to sedition (Art.
142);
2. Religious ceremonies or
manifestations of any 8. Acts tending to prevent the
religious are about to take meeting of Congress and
place or are going on; similar bodies (Art. 143);

3. Offender prevents or disturbs 9. Disturbance of proceedings

the same. of Congress or similar bodies
(Art. 144);
Qualified if committed by violence
or threat. 10. Violation of parliamentary
immunity (Art. 145);

Article 133. Offending the 11. Illegal assemblies (Art. 146);

Religious Feelings
12. Illegal associations (Art.
147); 2. The purpose of the uprising
or movement is –
13. Direct assaults (Art. 148);
a. to remove from the
14. Indirect assaults (Art. 149); allegiance to the
government or its laws
15. Disobedience to summons Philippine territory or
issued by Congress, its any part thereof, or
committees, etc., by the any body of land,
constitutional commissions, naval, or other armed
its committees, etc. (Art. forces;
150);
or
16. Resistance and disobedience
to a person in authority or b. to deprive the Chief
the agents of such person Executive or Congress,
(Art. 151); wholly or partially, of
any of their powers or
17. Tumults and other prerogatives.
disturbances of public order
(Art. 153);
The essence of this crime is a
18. Unlawful use of means of public uprising with the taking up
publication and unlawful of arms. It requires a multitude of
utterances (Art. 154); people. It aims to overthrow the
duly constituted government. It
19. Alarms and scandals (Art. does not require the participation
155); of any member of the military or
national police organization or
20. Delivering prisoners from public officers and generally carried
jails (Art. 156); out by civilians. Lastly, the crime
can only be committed through
21. Evasion of service of force and violence.
sentence (Art. 157);

22. Evasion on occasion of Rebellion and insurrection are not

disorders (Art. 158); synonymous. Rebellion is more
frequently used where the object of
23. Violation of conditional the movement is completely to
pardon (Art. 159); and overthrow and supersede the
existing government; while
24. Commission of another crime insurrection is more commonly
during service of penalty employed in reference to a
imposed for another previous movement which seeks merely to
offense (Art. 160). effect some change of minor
importance, or to prevent the
exercise of governmental authority
Article 134. Rebellion or with respect to particular matters
Insurrection of subjects (Reyes, citing 30 Am.
Jr. 1).
Elements

1. There is a public uprising and

taking arms against the
government;
Rebellion can now be complexed crimes when committed on a
with common crimes. Not long different occasion and not in
ago, the Supreme Court, in Enrile furtherance of rebellion. In short,
v. Salazar, 186 SCRA 217, it was because Article 135 then
reiterated and affirmed the rule punished said acts as components
laid down in People v. of the crime of rebellion that
Hernandez, 99 Phil 515, that precludes the application of Article
rebellion may not be complexed 48 of the Revised Penal Code
with common crimes which are thereto. In the eyes of the law
committed in furtherance thereof then, said acts constitute only one
because they are absorbed in crime and that is rebellion. The
rebellion. In view of said Hernandez doctrine was reaffirmed
reaffirmation, some believe that it in Enrile v. Salazar because the
has been a settled doctrine that text of Article 135 has remained
rebellion cannot be complexed with the same as it was when the
common crimes, such as killing and Supreme Court resolved the same
destruction of property, committed issue in the People v. Hernandez.
on the occasion and in furtherance So the Supreme Court invited
thereof. attention to this fact and thus
stated:
This thinking is no longer correct;
there is no legal basis for such rule “There is a an apparent need to
now. restructure the law on rebellion,
either to raise the penalty
The statement in People v. therefore or to clearly define and
Hernandez that common crimes delimit the other offenses to be
committed in furtherance of considered absorbed thereby, so
rebellion are absorbed by the crime that it cannot be conveniently
of rebellion, was dictated by the utilized as the umbrella for every
provision of Article 135 of the sort of illegal activity undertaken in
Revised Penal Code prior to its its name. The court has no power
amendment by the Republic Act to effect such change, for it can
No. 6968 (An Act Punishing the only interpret the law as it stands
Crime of Coup D’etat), which at any given time, and what is
became effective on October 1990. needed lies beyond interpretation.
Prior to its amendment by Republic Hopefully, Congress will perceive
Act No. 6968, Article 135 punished the need for promptly seizing the
those “who while holding any initiative in this matter, which is
public office or employment, take purely within its province.”
part therein” by any of these acts:
engaging in war against the forces Obviously, Congress took notice of
of Government; destroying this pronouncement and, thus, in
property; committing serious enacting Republic Act No. 6968, it
violence; exacting contributions, did not only provide for the crime
diverting funds for the lawful of coup d’etat in the Revised Penal
purpose for which they have been Code but moreover, deleted from
appropriated. the provision of Article 135 that
portion referring to those –
Since a higher penalty is prescribed
for the crime of rebellion when any “…who, while holding any public
of the specified acts are committed office or employment takes part
in furtherance thereof, said acts therein [rebellion or insurrection],
are punished as components of engaging in war against the forces
rebellion and, therefore, are not to of government, destroying
be treated as distinct crimes. The property or committing serious
same acts constitute distinct violence, exacting contributions or
diverting public funds from the element or ingredient of the crime
lawful purpose for which they have of rebellion with which the accused
been appropriated …” was already convicted.

Hence, overt acts which used to be However, in People v. Tiozon,

punished as components of the 198 SCRA 368, it was held that
crime of rebellion have been charging one of illegal possession
severed therefrom by Republic Act of firearms in furtherance of
No. 6968. The legal impediment to rebellion is proper because this is
the application of Article 48 to not a charge of a complex crime.
rebellion has been removed. After A crime under the Revised Penal
the amendment, common crimes Code cannot be absorbed by a
involving killings, and/or statutory offense.
destructions of property, even In People v. de Gracia, it was
though committed by rebels in ruled that illegal possession of
furtherance of rebellion, shall bring firearm in furtherance of rebellion
about complex crimes of rebellion under Presidential Decree No. 1866
with murder/homicide, or rebellion is distinct from the crime of
with robbery, or rebellion with rebellion under the Revised Penal
arson as the case may be. Code and, therefore, Article 135
(2) of the Revised Penal Code
To reiterate, before Article 135 was should not apply. The offense of
amended, a higher penalty is illegal possession of firearm is a
imposed when the offender malum prohibitum, in which case,
engages in war against the good faith and absence of criminal
government. "War" connotes intent are not valid defenses.
anything which may be carried out
in pursuance of war. This implies In People v. Lobedioro, an NPA
that all acts of war or hostilities like cadre killed a policeman and was
serious violence and destruction of convicted for murder. He appealed
property committed on occasion invoking rebellion. The Supreme
and in pursuance of rebellion are Court found that there was no
component crimes of rebellion evidence shown to further the end
which is why Article 48 on complex of the NPA movement. It held that
crimes is inapplicable. In there must be evidence shown that
amending Article135, the acts the act furthered the cause of the
which used to be component NPA; it is not enough to say it.
crimes of rebellion, like serious
acts of violence, have been Rebellion may be committed even
deleted. These are now distinct without a single shot being fired.
crimes. The legal obstacle for the No encounter needed. Mere public
application of Article 48, therefore, uprising with arms enough.
has been removed. Ortega says
legislators want to punish these Article 135, as amended, has two
common crimes independently of penalties: a higher penalty for the
rebellion. Ortega cites no case promoters, heads and maintainers
overturning Enrile v. Salazar. of the rebellion; and a lower
penalty for those who are only
In People v. Rodriguez, 107 followers of the rebellion.
Phil. 569, it was held that an
accused already convicted of Distinctions between rebellion and
rebellion may not be prosecuted sedition
further for illegal possession of
firearm and ammunition, a (1) As to nature
violation of Presidential Decree No.
1866, because this is a necessary
 In rebellion, there must be
taking up or arms against the 4. The purpose of the attack is
government. to seize or diminish state
power.
In sedition, it is sufficient
that the public uprising be
tumultuous. The essence of the crime is a swift
attack upon the facilities of the
(2) As to purpose Philippine government, military
camps and installations,
In rebellion, the purpose is communication networks, public
always political. utilities and facilities essential to
the continued possession of
In sedition, the purpose may governmental powers. It may be
be political or social. committed singly or collectively
Example: the uprising of and does not require a multitude of
squatters against Forbes park people. The objective may not be
residents. The purpose in to overthrow the government but
sedition is to go against only to destabilize or paralyze the
established government, not government through the seizure of
to overthrow it. facilities and utilities essential to
the continued possession and
When any of the objectives of exercise of governmental powers.
rebellion is pursued but there is no It requires as principal offender a
public uprising in the legal sense, member of the AFP or of the PNP
the crime is direct assault of the organization or a public officer with
first form. But if there is rebellion, or without civilian support. Finally,
with public uprising, direct assault it may be carried out not only by
cannot be committed. force or violence but also through
stealth, threat or strategy.

Article 134-A. Coup d' etat

Persons liable for rebellion,
Elements insurrection or coup d' etat under
Article 135
1. Offender is a person or
persons belonging to the 1. The leaders –
military or police or holding
any public office or a. Any person who
employment; promotes, maintains or
heads a rebellion or
2. It is committed by means of insurrection; or
a swift attack accompanied
by violence, intimidation, b. Any person who leads,
threat, strategy or stealth; directs or commands
others to undertake a
3. The attack is directed against coup d' etat;
the duly constituted
authorities of the Republic of 2. The participants –
the Philippines, or any
military camp or installation, a. Any person who
communication networks, participates or
public utilities or other executes the
facilities needed for the commands of others in
exercise and continued rebellion, insurrection
possession of power; or coup d' etat;
 Offender must be a public officer or
b. Any person not in the employee.
government service
who participates,
supports, finances, Article 138. Inciting to
abets or aids in Rebellion or Insurrection
undertaking a coup d'
etat. Elements

Article 136. Conspiracy and 1. Offender does not take arms

Proposal to Commit Coup d' or is not in open hostility
etat, Rebellion or Insurrection against the government;

Conspiracy and proposal to commit 2. He incites others to the

rebellion are two different crimes, execution of any of the acts
namely: of rebellion;
1. Conspiracy to commit
rebellion; and 3. The inciting is done by
means of speeches,
2. Proposal to commit rebellion. proclamations, writings,
emblems, banners or other
There is conspiracy to commit representations tending to
rebellion when two or more the same end.
persons come to an agreement to
rise publicly and take arms against
government for any of the Distinction between inciting to
purposes of rebellion and decide to rebellion and proposal to commit
commit it. rebellion

There is proposal to commit 1. In both crimes, offender

rebellion when the person who has induces another to commit
decided to rise publicly and take rebellion.
arms against the government for
any of the purposes of rebellion 2. In proposal, the person who
proposes its execution to some proposes has decided to
other person or persons. commit rebellion; in inciting
to rebellion, it is not required
that the offender has decided
Article 137. Disloyalty of Public to commit rebellion.
Officers or Employees
3. In proposal, the person who
Acts punished proposes the execution of the
crime uses secret means; in
1. By failing to resist a rebellion inciting to rebellion, the act
by all the means in their of inciting is done publicly.
power;

2. By continuing to discharge Article 139. Sedition

the duties of their offices
under the control of the Elements
rebels; or
1. Offenders rise publicly and
3. By accepting appointment to tumultuously;
office under them.
2. Offenders employ force, obedience to the government or to
intimidation, or other means the authorities concerned. This is
outside of legal methods; like the so-called civil disobedience
except that the means employed,
3. Purpose is to attain any of the which is violence, is illegal.
following objects:

a. To prevent the Persons liable for sedition under

promulgation or Article 140
execution of any law or
the holding of any 1. The leader of the sedition;
popular election; and

b. To prevent the national 2. Other person participating in

government or any the sedition.
provincial or municipal
government, or any
public officer from Article 141. Conspiracy to
exercising its or his Commit Sedition
functions or prevent
the execution of an In this crime, there must be an
administrative order; agreement and a decision to rise
publicly and tumultuously to attain
c. To inflict any act of any of the objects of sedition.
hate or revenge upon
the person or property There is no proposal to commit
of any public officer or sedition.
employee;

d. To commit, for any Article 142. Inciting to

political or social end, Sedition
any act of hate or
revenge against private Acts punished
persons or any social
classes; 1. Inciting others to the
accomplishment of any of the
e. To despoil for any acts which constitute sedition
political or social end, by means of speeches,
any person, proclamations, writings,
municipality or emblems, etc.;
province, or the
national government of 2. Uttering seditious words or
all its property or any speeches which tend to
part thereof. disturb the public peace;

3. Writing, publishing, or
The crime of sedition does not circulating scurrilous libels
contemplate the taking up of arms against the government or
against the government because any of the duly constituted
the purpose of this crime is not the authorities thereof, which
overthrow of the government. tend to disturb the public
Notice from the purpose of the peace.
crime of sedition that the offenders
rise publicly and create commotion
ad disturbance by way of protest to Elements
express their dissent and
1. Offender does not take direct
part in the crime of sedition; 2. Offender, who may be any
person, prevents such
2. He incites others to the meetings by force or fraud.
accomplishment of any of the
acts which constitute
sedition; and Article 144. Disturbance of
Proceedings
3. Inciting is done by means of
speeches, proclamations, Elements
writings, emblems, cartoons,
banners, or other 1. There is a meeting of
representations tending Congress or any of its
towards the same end. committees or
subcommittees,
Only non-participant in sedition constitutional commissions or
may be liable. committees or divisions
thereof, or of any provincial
Considering that the objective of board or city or municipal
sedition is to express protest council or board;
against the government and in the
process creating hate against 2. Offender does any of the
public officers, any act that will following acts:
generate hatred against the
government or a public officer a. He disturbs any of such
concerned or a social class may meetings;
amount to Inciting to sedition.
Article 142 is, therefore, quite b. He behaves while in
broad. the presence of any
such bodies in such a
The mere meeting for the purpose manner as to interrupt
of discussing hatred against the its proceedings or to
government is inciting to sedition. impair the respect due
Lambasting government officials to it.
discredit the government is Inciting
to sedition. But if the objective of
such preparatory actions is the
overthrow of the government, the
crime is inciting to rebellion. Article 145. Violation of
Parliamentary Immunity

Article 143. Acts Tending to Acts punished

Prevent the Meeting of the
Congress of the Philippines and 1. Using force, intimidation,
Similar Bodies threats, or frauds to prevent
any member of Congress
Elements from attending the meetings
of Congress or of any of its
1. There is a projected or actual committees or
meeting of Congress or any subcommittees,
of its committees or constitutional commissions or
subcommittees, committees or divisions
constitutional committees or thereof, or from expressing
divisions thereof, or of any his opinion or casting his
provincial board or city or vote;
municipal council or board;
 Elements
Under Section 11, Article VI of the
1. Offender uses force, Constitution, a public officer who
intimidation, threats or arrests a member of Congress who
fraud; has committed a crime punishable
by prision mayor (six years and
2. The purpose of the one day, to 12 years) is not liable
offender is to prevent Article 145.
any member of
Congress from – According to Reyes, to be
consistent with the Constitution,
a. attending the the phrase "by a penalty higher
meetings of the than prision mayor" in Article 145
Congress or of should be amended to read: "by
any of its the penalty of prision mayor or
committees or higher."
constitutional
commissions,
etc.; Article 146. Illegal Assemblies

b. expressing his Acts punished

opinion; or
1. Any meeting attended by
c. casting his vote. armed persons for the
purpose of committing any of
2. Arresting or searching any the crimes punishable under
member thereof while the Code;
Congress is in regular or
special session, except in Elements
case such member has
committed a crime 1. There is a meeting, a
punishable under the Code gathering or group of
by a penalty higher than persons, whether in
prision mayor. fixed place or moving;

Elements 2. The meeting is

attended by armed
1. Offender is a public persons;
officer of employee;
3. The purpose of the
2. He arrests or searches meeting is to commit
any member of any of the crimes
Congress; punishable under the
Code.
3. Congress, at the time
of arrest or search, is 2. Any meeting in which the
in regular or special audience, whether armed or
session; not, is incited to the
commission of the crime of
4. The member arrested treason, rebellion or
or searched has not insurrection, sedition, or
committed a crime assault upon person in
punishable under the authority or his agents.
Code by a penalty
higher than prision 1. There is a meeting, a
mayor. gathering or group of
 persons, whether in a assault upon a person in
fixed place or moving; authority. When the illegal
purpose of the gathering is to
2. The audience, whether incite people to commit the
armed or not, is incited crimes mentioned above, the
to the commission of presence of armed men is
the crime of treason, unnecessary. The mere
rebellion or gathering for the purpose is
insurrection, sedition or sufficient to bring about the
direct assault. crime already.

(2) Armed men attending the

Persons liable for illegal assembly gathering – If the illegal
purpose is other than those
1. The organizer or leaders of mentioned above, the
the meeting; presence of armed men
during the gathering brings
2. Persons merely present at about the crime of illegal
the meeting, who must have assembly.
a common intent to commit
the felony of illegal Example: Persons conspiring
assembly. to rob a bank were arrested.
Some were with firearms.
If any person present at the Liable for illegal assembly,
meeting carries an unlicensed not for conspiracy, but for
firearm, it is presumed that the gathering with armed men.
purpose of the meeting insofar as
he is concerned is to commit acts Distinction between illegal
punishable under the Revised Penal assembly and illegal association
Code, and he is considered a
leader or organizer of the meeting. In illegal assembly, the basis of
liability is the gathering for an
illegal purpose which constitutes a
The gravamen of the offense is crime under the Revised Penal
mere assembly of or gathering of Code.
people for illegal purpose
punishable by the Revised Penal In illegal association, the basis is
Code. Without gathering, there is the formation of or organization of
no illegal assembly. If unlawful an association to engage in an
purpose is a crime under a special unlawful purpose which is not
law, there is no illegal assembly. limited to a violation of the Revised
For example, the gathering of drug Penal Code. It includes a violation
pushers to facilitate drug trafficking of a special law or those against
is not illegal assembly because the public morals. Meaning of public
purpose is not violative of the morals: inimical to public welfare;
Revised Penal Code but of The it has nothing to do with decency.,
Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, as not acts of obscenity.
amended, which is a special law.

Two forms of illegal assembly Article 147. Illegal

Associations
(1) No attendance of armed
men, but persons in the Illegal associations
meeting are incited to
commit treason, rebellion or 1. Associations totally or
insurrection, sedition or partially organized for the
 purpose of committing any of president; and (2) the
the crimes punishable under members.
the Code;
In illegal assembly, the
2. Associations totally or persons liable are (1) the
partially organized for some organizers or leaders of the
purpose contrary to public meeting and (2) the persons
morals. present at meeting.

Persons liable Article 148. Direct Assault

1. Founders, Acts punished

directors and president of the
association; 1. Without public uprising, by
employing force or
2. Mere members of the intimidation for the
association. attainment of any of the
purposes enumerated in
defining the crimes of
Distinction between illegal rebellion and sedition;
association and illegal assembly
Elements
1. In illegal association, it is not
necessary that there be an 1. Offender employs force
actual meeting. or intimidation;

In illegal assembly, it is 2. The aim of the offender

necessary that there is an is to attain any of the
actual meeting or assembly purposes of the crime
or armed persons for the of rebellion or any of
purpose of committing any of the objects of the
the crimes punishable under crime of sedition;
the Code, or of individuals
who, although not armed, 3. There is no public
are incited to the commission uprising.
of treason, rebellion,
sedition, or assault upon a 2. Without public uprising, by
person in authority or his attacking, by employing force
agent. or by seriously intimidating
or by seriously resisting any
2. In illegal association, it is the person in authority or any of
act of forming or organizing his agents, while engaged in
and membership in the the performance of official
association that are duties, or on occasion of such
punished. performance.

In illegal assembly, it is the Elements

meeting and attendance at
such meeting that are 1. Offender makes an
punished. attack, employs force,
makes a serious
3. In illegal association, the intimidation, or makes
persons liable are (1) the a serious resistance;
founders, directors and
 2. The person assaulted is
a person in authority or The only time when it is not
his agent; complexed is when material
consequence is a light felony, that
3. At the time of the is, slight physical injury. Direct
assault, the person in assault absorbs the lighter felony;
authority or his agent the crime of direct assault can not
is engaged in the be separated from the material
actual performance of result of the act. So, if an offender
official duties, or that who is charged with direct assault
he is assaulted by and in another court for the slight
reason of the past physical Injury which is part of the
performance of official act, acquittal or conviction in one is
duties; a bar to the prosecution in the
other.
4. Offender knows that
the one he is assaulting Example of the first form of direct
is a person in authority assault:
or his agent in the
exercise of his duties. Three men broke into a National
Food Authority warehouse and
5. There is no public lamented sufferings of the people.
uprising. They called on people to help
themselves to all the rice. They
did not even help themselves to a
The crime is not based on the single grain.
material consequence of the
unlawful act. The crime of direct The crime committed was direct
assault punishes the spirit of assault. There was no robbery for
lawlessness and the contempt or there was no intent to gain. The
hatred for the authority or the rule crime is direct assault by
of law. committing acts of sedition under
Article 139 (5), that is, spoiling of
To be specific, if a judge was killed the property, for any political or
while he was holding a session, the social end, of any person
killing is not the direct assault, but municipality or province or the
murder. There could be direct national government of all or any
assault if the offender killed the its property, but there is no public
judge simply because the judge is uprising.
so strict in the fulfillment of his
duty. It is the spirit of hate which Person in authority is any person
is the essence of direct assault. directly vested with jurisdiction,
whether as an individual or as a
So, where the spirit is present, it is member of some court or
always complexed with the government corporation, board, or
material consequence of the commission. A barangay chairman
unlawful act. If the unlawful act is deemed a person in authority.
was murder or homicide committed
under circumstance of lawlessness
or contempt of authority, the crime
would be direct assault with
murder or homicide, as the case
may be. In the example of the
judge who was killed, the crime is
direct assault with murder or
homicide.
Agent of a person in authority is becomes important in this respect.
any person who by direct provision Example, if a judge was killed while
of law or by election or by resisting the taking of his watch,
appointment by competent there is no direct assault.
authority, is charged with the
maintenance of public order and In the second form of direct
the protection and security of life assault, it is also important that
and property, such as a barangay the offended party knew that the
councilman, barrio policeman, person he is attacking is a person
barangay leader and any person in authority or an agent of a person
who comes to the aid of a person in authority, performing his official
in authority. functions. No knowledge, no
lawlessness or contempt.
In applying the provisions of For example, if two persons were
Articles 148 and 151, teachers, quarreling and a policeman in
professors, and persons charged civilian clothes comes and stops
with the supervision of public or them, but one of the protagonists
duly recognized private schools, stabs the policeman, there would
colleges and universities and be no direct assault unless the
lawyers in the actual performance offender knew that he is a
of their duties or on the occasion of policeman.
such performance, shall be deemed
a person in authority. In this respect it is enough that the
offender should know that the
In direct assault of the first form, offended party was exercising
the stature of the offended person some form of authority. It is not
is immaterial. The crime is necessary that the offender knows
manifested by the spirit of what is meant by person in
lawlessness. authority or an agent of one
because ignorantia legis non
In the second form, you have to excusat.
distinguish a situation where a
person in authority or his agent
was attacked while performing Article 149. Indirect Assault
official functions, from a situation
when he is not performing such Elements
functions. If attack was done
during the exercise of official 1. A person in authority or his
functions, the crime is always agent is the victim of any of
direct assault. It is enough that the forms of direct assault
the offender knew that the person defined in Article 148;
in authority was performing an
official function whatever may be 2. A person comes to the aid of
the reason for the attack, although such authority or his agent;
what may have happened was a
purely private affair. 3. Offender makes use of force
or intimidation upon such
On the other hand, if the person in person coming to the aid of
authority or the agent was killed the authority or his agent.
when no longer performing official
functions, the crime may simply be
the material consequence of he The victim in indirect assault
unlawful act: murder or homicide. should be a private person who
For the crime to be direct assault, comes in aid of an agent of a
the attack must be by reason of his person in authority. The assault is
official function in the past. Motive upon a person who comes in aid of
the person in authority. The victim
cannot be the person in authority 3. By refusing to answer any
or his agent. legal inquiry or to produce
any books, papers,
There is no indirect assault when documents, or records in his
there is no direct assault. possession, when required by
them to do so in the exercise
Take note that under Article 152, of their functions;
as amended, when any person
comes in aid of a person in 4. By restraining another from
authority, said person at that attending as a witness in
moment is no longer a civilian – he such legislative or
is constituted as an agent of the constitutional body;
person in authority. If such person
were the one attacked, the crime 5. By inducing disobedience to a
would be direct assault. summons or refusal to be
sworn by any such body or
Due to the amendment of Article official.
152, without the corresponding
amendment in Article 150, the
crime of indirect assault can only Article 151. Resistance and
be committed when assault is upon Disobedience to A Person in
a civilian giving aid to an agent of Authority or the Agents of Such
the person in authority. He does Person
not become another agent of the
person in authority. Elements of resistance and serious
disobedience under the first
paragraph
Article 150. Disobedience to
Summons Issued by Congress, 1. A person in authority or his
Its Committees or agent is engaged in the
Subcommittees, by the performance of official duty
Constitutional Commissions, Its or gives a lawful order to the
Committees, Subcommittees or offender;
Divisions
2. Offender resists or seriously
Acts punished disobeys such person in
authority or his agent;
1. By refusing, without legal
excuse, to obey summons of 3. The act of the offender is not
Congress, its special or included in the provision of
standing committees and Articles 148, 149 and 150.
subcommittees, the
Constitutional Commissions
and its committees, Elements of simple disobedience
subcommittees or divisions, under the second paragraph
or by any commission or
committee chairman or 1. An agent of a person in
member authorized to authority is engaged in the
summon witnesses; performance of official duty
or gives a lawful order to the
2. By refusing to be sworn or offender;
placed under affirmation
while being before such 2. Offender disobeys such agent
legislative or constitutional of a person in authority;
body or official;
3. Such disobedience is not of a assault and the lesser
serious nature. offense of resistance or
disobedience in Article 151
would entirely disappear.
Distinction between resistance or
serious disobedience and direct But when the one resisted is
assault a person I authority, the use
of any kind or degree of force
1. In resistance, the person in will give rise to direct
authority or his agent must assault.
be in actual performance of
his duties. If no force is employed by
the offender in resisting or
In direct assault, the person disobeying a person in
in authority or his agent authority, the crime
must be engaged in the committed is resistance or
performance of official duties serious disobedience under
or that he is assaulted by the first paragraph of Article
reason thereof. 151.

2. Resistance or serious
disobedience is committed
only by resisting or seriously Who are deemed persons in
disobeying a person in authority and agents of persons in
authority or his agent. authority under Article 152

Direct assault (the second A person in authority is one directly

form) is committed in four vested with jurisdiction, that is, the
ways, that is, (1) by power and authority to govern and
attacking, (2) by employing execute the laws.
force, (3) by seriously
intimidating, and (4) by An agent of a person in authority is
seriously resisting a persons one charged with (1) the
in authority or his agent. maintenance of public order and
(2) the protection and security of
3. In both resistance against an life and property.
agent of a person in
authority and direct assault
by resisting an agent of a Examples of persons in authority
person in authority, there is
force employed, but the use 1. Municipal mayor;
of force in resistance is not
so serious, as there is no 2. Division superintendent of
manifest intention to defy the schools;
law and the officers enforcing
it. 3. Public and private school
teachers;
The attack or employment of
force which gives rise to the 4. Teacher-nurse;
crime of direct assault must
be serious and deliberate; 5. President of sanitary division;
otherwise, even a case of
simple resistance to an 6. Provincial fiscal;
arrest, which always requires
the use of force of some 7. Justice of the Peace;
kind, would constitute direct
8. Municipal councilor; In the act of making outcry during
speech tending to incite rebellion
9. Barrio captain and barangay or sedition, the situation must be
chairman. distinguished from inciting to
sedition or rebellion. If the
speaker, even before he delivered
Article 153. Tumults and Other his speech, already had the
Disturbances of Public Order criminal intent to incite the
listeners to rise to sedition, the
Acts punished crime would be inciting to sedition.
However, if the offender had no
1. Causing any serious such criminal intent, but in the
disturbance in a public place, course of his speech, tempers went
office or establishment; high and so the speaker started
inciting the audience to rise in
2. Interrupting or disturbing sedition against the government,
performances, functions or the crime is disturbance of the
gatherings, or peaceful public order.
meetings, if the act is not
included in Articles 131 and The disturbance of the pubic order
132; is tumultuous and the penalty is
increased if it is brought about by
3. Making any outcry tending to armed men. The term “armed”
incite rebellion or sedition in does not refer to firearms but
any meeting, association or includes even big stones capable of
public place; causing grave injury.

4. Displaying placards or It is also disturbance of the public

emblems which provoke a order if a convict legally put to
disturbance of public order in death is buried with pomp. He
such place; should not be made out as a
martyr; it might incite others to
5. Burying with pomp the body hatred.
of a person who has been
legally executed.
Article 154. Unlawful Use of
Means of Publication and
The essence is creating public Unlawful Utterances
disorder. This crime is brought
about by creating serious Acts punished
disturbances in public places,
public buildings, and even in 1. Publishing or causing to be
private places where public published, by means of
functions or performances are printing, lithography or any
being held. other means of publication,
as news any false news
For a crime to be under this article, which may endanger the
it must not fall under Articles 131 public order; or cause
(prohibition, interruption, and damage to the interest or
dissolution of peaceful meetings) credit of the State;
and 132 (interruption of religious
worship). 2. Encouraging disobedience to
the law or to the constituted
authorities or praising,
justifying or extolling any act
punished by law, by the
 same means or by words, intoxicated or otherwise,
utterances or speeches; provided Article 153 in not
applicable.
3. Maliciously publishing or
causing to be published any
official resolution or When a person discharges a
document without proper firearm in public, the act may
authority, or before they constitute any of the possible
have been published crimes under the Revised Penal
officially; Code:

4. Printing, publishing or (1) Alarms

distributing (or causing the and scandals if the firearm
same) books, pamphlets, when discharged was not
periodicals, or leaflets which directed to any particular
do not bear the real printer’s person;
name, or which are classified
as anonymous. (2) Illegal discharge of firearm
under Article 254 if the
Actual public disorder or actual firearm is directed or pointed
damage to the credit of the State is to a particular person when
not necessary. discharged but intent to kill is
absent;
Republic Act No. 248 prohibits
the reprinting, reproduction or (3) Attempted homicide, murder,
republication of government or parricide if the firearm
publications and official documents when discharged is directed
without previous authority. against a person and intent
to kill is present.

Article 155. Alarms and In this connection, understand that

Scandals it is not necessary that the
offended party be wounded or hit.
Acts punished Mere discharge of firearm towards
another with intent to kill already
1. Discharging any firearm, amounts to attempted homicide or
rocket, firecracker, or other attempted murder or attempted
explosive within any town or parricide. It can not be frustrated
public place, calculated to because the offended party is not
cause (which produces) mortally wounded.
alarm of danger;
In Araneta v. Court of Appeals,
2. Instigating or taking an it was held that if a person is shot
active part in any charivari or at and is wounded, the crime is
other disorderly meeting automatically attempted homicide.
offensive to another or Intent to kill is inherent in the use
prejudicial to public of the deadly weapon.
tranquility;
The crime alarms and scandal is
3. Disturbing the public peace only one crime. Do not think that
while wandering about at alarms and scandals are two
night or while engaged in any crimes.
other nocturnal amusements;
Scandal here does not refer to
4. Causing any disturbance or moral scandal; that one is grave
scandal in public places while scandal in Article 200. The
essence of the crime is disturbance establishments by taking the
of public tranquility and public guards by surprise.
peace. So, any kind of disturbance
of public order where the
circumstance at the time renders In relation to infidelity in the
the act offensive to the tranquility custody of prisoners, correlate the
prevailing, the crime is committed. crime of delivering person from jail
with infidelity in the custody of
Charivari is a mock serenade prisoners punished under Articles
wherein the supposed serenaders 223, 224 and 225 of the Revised
use broken cans, broken pots, Penal Code. In both acts, the
bottles or other utensils thereby offender may be a public officer or
creating discordant notes. a private citizen. Do not think that
Actually, it is producing noise, not infidelity in the custody of
music and so it also disturbs public prisoners can only be committed
tranquility. Understand the nature by a public officer and delivering
of the crime of alarms and scandals persons from jail can only be
as one that disturbs public committed by private person. Both
tranquility or public peace. If the crimes may be committed by public
annoyance is intended for a officers as well as private persons.
particular person, the crime is
unjust vexation. In both crimes, the person involved
may be a convict or a mere
Even if the persons involved are detention prisoner.
engaged in nocturnal activity like
those playing patintero at night, or The only point of distinction
selling balut, if they conduct their between the two crimes lies on
activity in such a way that disturbs whether the offender is the
public peace, they may commit the custodian of the prisoner or not at
crime of alarms and scandals. the time the prisoner was made to
escape. If the offender is the
custodian at that time, the crime is
Article 156. Delivering infidelity in the custody of
Prisoners from Jail prisoners. But if the offender is
not the custodian of the prisoner at
Elements that time, even though he is a
public officer, the crime he
1. There is a person confined in committed is delivering prisoners
a jail or penal establishment; from jail.

2. Offender removes therefrom Liability of the prisoner or detainee

such person, or helps the who escaped – When these crimes
escape of such person. are committed, whether infidelity
in the custody of prisoners or
Penalty of arresto mayor in its delivering prisoners from jail, the
maximum period to prision prisoner so escaping may also have
correccional in its minimum period criminal liability and this is so if the
is imposed if violence, intimidation prisoner is a convict serving
or bribery is used. sentence by final judgment. The
crime of evasion of service of
Penalty of arresto mayor if other sentence is committed by the
means are used. prisoner who escapes if such
prisoner is a convict serving
Penalty decreased to the minimum sentence by final judgment.
period if the escape of the prisoner
shall take place outside of said
If the prisoner who escapes is only 2. By breaking doors, windows,
a detention prisoner, he does not gates, walls, roofs or floors;
incur liability from escaping if he
does not know of the plan to 3. By using picklock, false keys,
remove him from jail. But if such disguise, deceit, violence or
prisoner knows of the plot to intimidation; or
remove him from jail and
cooperates therein by escaping, he 4. Through connivance with
himself becomes liable for other convicts or employees
delivering prisoners from jail as a of the penal institution.
principal by indispensable
cooperation.
Evasion of service of sentence has
If three persons are involved – a three forms:
stranger, the custodian and the
prisoner – three crimes are (1) By simply leaving or escaping
committed: from the penal establishment
under Article 157;
(1) Infidelity in the custody of
prisoners; (2) Failure to return within 48
hours after having left the
(2) Delivery of the prisoner from penal establishment because
jail; and of a calamity, conflagration
or mutiny and such calamity,
(3) Evasion of service of conflagration or mutiny has
sentence. been announced as already
passed under Article 158;

Article 157. Evasion of Service (3) Violating the condition of

of Sentence conditional pardon under
Article 159.
Elements
In leaving or escaping from jail or
1. Offender is a convict by final prison, that the prisoner
judgment; immediately returned is
immaterial. It is enough that he
2. He is serving sentence which left the penal establishment by
consists in the deprivation of escaping therefrom. His voluntary
liberty; return may only be mitigating,
being analogous to voluntary
3. He evades service of his surrender. But the same will not
sentence by escaping during absolve his criminal liability.
the term of his
imprisonment.
Article 158. Evasion of Service
of Sentence on the Occasion of
Qualifying circumstances as to Disorders, Conflagrations,
penalty imposed Earthquakes, or Other
Calamities
If such evasion or escape takes
place – Elements

1. By means of unlawful entry 1. Offender is a convict by final

(this should be “by scaling” - judgment, who is confined in
Reyes); a penal institution;
2. There is disorder, resulting
from – The mutiny referred to in the
second form of evasion of service
a. conflagration; of sentence does not include riot.
The mutiny referred to here
b. earthquake; involves subordinate personnel
rising against the supervisor within
c. explosion; or the penal establishment. One who
escapes during a riot will be
d. similar catastrophe; or subject to Article 157, that is,
simply leaving or escaping the
e. mutiny in which he has penal establishment.
not participated;
Mutiny is one of the causes which
3. He evades the service of his may authorize a convict serving
sentence by leaving the sentence in the penitentiary to
penal institution where he is leave the jail provided he has not
confined, on the occasion of taken part in the mutiny.
such disorder or during the
mutiny; The crime of evasion of service of
sentence may be committed even
4. He fails to give himself up to if the sentence is destierro, and
the authorities within 48 this is committed if the convict
hours following the issuance sentenced to destierro will enter
of a proclamation by the the prohibited places or come
Chief Executive announcing within the prohibited radius of 25
the passing away of such kilometers to such places as stated
calamity. in the judgment.

If the sentence violated is

The leaving from the penal destierro, the penalty upon the
establishment is not the basis of convict is to be served by way of
criminal liability. It is the failure to destierro also, not imprisonment.
return within 48 hours after the This is so because the penalty for
passing of the calamity, the evasion can not be more
conflagration or mutiny had been severe than the penalty evaded.
announced. Under Article 158,
those who return within 48 hours
are given credit or deduction from Article 159. Other Cases of
the remaining period of their Evasion of Service of Sentence
sentence equivalent to 1/5 of the
original term of the sentence. But Elements of violation of conditional
if the prisoner fails to return within pardon
said 48 hours, an added penalty,
also 1/5, shall be imposed but the 1. Offender was a convict;
1/5 penalty is based on the
remaining period of the sentence, 2. He was granted pardon by
not on the original sentence. In no the Chief Executive;
case shall that penalty exceed six
months. 3. He violated any of the
conditions of such pardon.
Those who did not leave the penal
establishment are not entitled to
the 1/5 credit. Only those who left
and returned within the 48-hour
period.
In violation of conditional pardon, Is the violation of conditional
as a rule, the violation will amount pardon a substantive offense?
to this crime only if the condition is
violated during the remaining Under Article 159, there are
period of the sentence. As a rule, two situations provided:
if the condition of the pardon is
violated when the remaining (1) There is a penalty of prision
unserved portion of the sentence correccional minimum for the
has already lapsed, there will be no violation of the conditional
more criminal liability for the pardon;
violation. However, the convict
maybe required to serve the (2) There is no new penalty
unserved portion of the sentence, imposed for the violation of
that is, continue serving original the conditional pardon.
penalty. Instead, the convict will be
required to serve the
The administrative liability of the unserved portion of the
convict under the conditional sentence.
pardon is different and has nothing
to do with his criminal liability for If the remitted portion of the
the evasion of service of sentence sentence is less than six years or
in the event that the condition of up to six years, there is an added
the pardon has been violated. penalty of prision correccional
Exception: where the violation of minimum for the violation of the
the condition of the pardon will conditional pardon; hence, the
constitute evasion of service of violation is a substantive offense if
sentence, even though committed the remitted portion of the
beyond the remaining period of the sentence does not exceed six years
sentence. This is when the because in this case a new penalty
conditional pardon expressly so is imposed for the violation of the
provides or the language of the conditional pardon.
conditional pardon clearly shows
the intention to make the condition But if the remitted portion of
perpetual even beyond the the sentence exceeds six years,
unserved portion of the sentence. the violation of the conditional
In such case, the convict may be pardon is not a substantive offense
required to serve the unserved because no new penalty is imposed
portion of the sentence even for the violation.
though the violation has taken
place when the sentence has In other words, you have to
already lapsed. qualify your answer.

In order that the conditional The Supreme Court,

pardon may be violated, it is however, has ruled in the case of
conditional that the pardonee Angeles v. Jose that this is not a
received the conditional pardon. If substantive offense. This has been
he is released without conformity highly criticized.
to the conditional pardon, he will
not be liable for the crime of
evasion of service of sentence. Article 160. Commission of
Another Crime During Service
of Penalty Imposed for Another
Question & Answer Previous Offense

Elements
1. Offender was already
convicted by final judgment
of one offense;

2. He committed a new felony

before beginning to serve
such sentence or while
serving the same.