TITLE FOUR: CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC
In the crime of using, the user is a third
INTEREST
I. Concept: These are crimes which involve deceit,
misrepresentation, or falsity against the public at
large. If the misrepresentation or deceit or falsity
was purposely availed of against a particular person
the same will constitute estafa.
II. The crimes are grouped into three categories:
A. Forgeries: these refer to deceits involving:
1. The seal of the government, the signature and
stamp of the chief executive
2. Coins
3. Treasury or bank notes, obligations and
securities of the government
4. Documents
B. Other Falsities: these are deceits pertaining to :
(1). Authority, rank or title (2) Names (3) Uniforms
and insignias and (4) False Testimonies
C. Frauds or acts involving machinations in public
biddings and (2) Combinations and Monopolies in
Restraint of Trade and Commerc
A. FORGERIES
I. Those involving the seal of the government, the
signature, or stamp of the Chief Executive.
A. The acts punished are: (1). The act of
counterfeiting the seal of the government (2).
Forging the signature of the Chief Executive or his
stamp and (3). Using the forged signature or
counterfeit seal or stamp
B. The act of forging the signature is ordinarily
punished as falsification but it is set apart as a
distinct crime with a muchhigher penalty
(reclusions temporal) to emphasize its gravity
C. The act of couterfeiting or forging the signature
must be on what purports to be an official
document purporting to have been signed by the
Chief Executive in his official capacity, other wise
the offense is ordinary falsification
D. Example: (i). In what purports to be an
appointment paper or grant of a pardon bearing the
heading of the Office of the President (ii). Forging
the signature in a private thank- you- letter is
falsification
E.
person not the forger or counterfeiter
II. Those involving coins: (a) Counterfeit/false or
(ii) mutilated coins
A. Counterfeit/false coins- those not authorized by
the Central bank to be minted for circulation as
legal tender. They include coins which have been
demonetized so as to prevent the accused from
using his skill upon genuine coins
1. The acts punished
a. The act of counterfeiting, minting or making
b. The act of importing
c. The act of uttering- passing of as legal tender
d. Possession with intent to utter. Thus possession
of coins as a collection is not punished
B. Mutilated Coins- these are genuine coins or
coins of legal tender whose intrinsic value has been
diminished due to the diminution of their metallic
contents.
1. The acts punished:
a. The act of mutilating or any act upon the coin
the purpose of which is to accumulate the metallic
contents, such as by chipping off a portion, scraping
its surface or boring a hole
b. The act of selling, importing or uttering
c. Possession with intent to utter
C. Related Laws (1). Pres. Decree No. 247:
(Penalizing the defacing, mutilation, burning or
destruction of central bank notes and coins) has
modified Article 164. (2) R.A. 427: which punishes
the act of amassing coins in excess of P50.00
III. Forgeries committed upon Treasury or Bank
Notes, Obligations and Securities
A. This is related to Banking and Finance. The
subject matter are papers in the form of obligations
and securities issued by the government as its own
obligations which are also sued as legal tender
B. Not included are paper bills as the crime relative
to them is “counterfeiting”
C. They do not include commercial checks
D. The reason is to maintain the integrity of the
currency and to ensure the credit and standing of the
government
E. Examples are:
1. Bonds issued by the Land Bank in connection
with the Land Reform Program
2. Postal Money Orders
3. Treasury Warrants
4.Treasury Certificates
5. Sweepstake Tickets ( Lotto tickets?)
F. The Acts punished are :
1.The act of forging or Forgery consisting of either:
(a). giving to a treasury or banknote or any
document payable to bearer or to order, the
appearance of a true and genuine document. Such as
the act of manufacturing or producing fake treasury
warrants
(b). erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering,
by any means, the letters, figures, words or signs
contained therein.
Note: (i).if the note does not resemble a true and
genuine document in that it can not possibly fool
any person the act is considered as frustrated
forgery
(ii). Where the accused encashed a treasury warrant
by posing and signing as payee, the crime is
falsification
2. The act of importing or utterin
3. The act of possession or use
(a). Possession must be with intent to utter
(b). Possessor must know the notes are forged
IV. Forgeries Upon Documents
A. The proper term is Falsification
B. Document is : (1) any writing, whether paper
based or in any solid surface, which is complete,
creating rights or extinguishing obligations, or
defining the relations between persons. Examples:
deeds and contracts, receipts, promissory notes,
checks (2) a writing used as evidence of the facts
contained in the document such as death/birth
certificates; clearances, medical records, x-rays;
driver’s license
C. General Classification: (In falsification, it is
essential to specify the document falsified)
1. Falsification of Legislative Document punished
under Art. 170- bills, resolutions, ordinances
whether approved or pending approval, by any
legislative body
a). the act of falsification is limited to alterations
of a genuine legislative document
b). if by any other means, such as simulating a
legislative document, the offense is ordinary
falsification.
2. Falsification of a Non-Legislative Document
a). Document proper under Article 171 and 172
b). Wireless, Telegram, cablegram, telephone
Messages under Article 173
c). Certificates under Article 174
D. Kinds of Documents Proper
1. Public Documents: they consists of the following
a). Those which embody the official acts of a
public officer such as Decisions/Resolutions;
Administrative Orders; Marriage Contract;
Oaths of Office
b). Those issued by a public officer or in which he
participates, virtute officii ( by virtue of his office)
such as clearances; certificates of appearance,
designation of personnel; receipts. These are the so
called “Official Documents”.
Thus all official documents are public
documents but not all public documents are
official documents
c). Those acknowledged before a Notary Public
such as deeds and conveyances
d). Private documents :
(i). which already formed part of the public records
( Public by Incorporation) such as private deeds
submitted to the office of the Register of Deeds;
acknowledgment letter sent to the Local \Civil
Registrar; Protest letters to the Assessor’s Office;
libelous letters offered as exhibits in a trial; letters
formally seeking opinions
(ii). those which are intended to form part of the
public record ( Public by Intention)
Per Monteverde vs. PP ( Aug. 12, 2000) involving
falsification of sales invoices required by the BIR,
it was held: : “ If thdocument is intended by law to
be part of the public or official record, the
preparation of which being in accordance with rules
and regulations issued by the government, the
falsification of that document, although it was a
private document at the time of the falsification ton,
is regarded as falsification of public or official
documents”
 Examples: Falsification of Civil Service or Bar
Exam Booklets; Application letters and personal
data sheets sent to personnel officers.
Query: What about attendance sheets during
seminars or conferences?
Note: In case of falsification of Travel Documents (
Visa, Passport, and any document submitted in
connection therewith) the law applicable is R.A.
8239 or the Philippine Passport Act.
2.Commercial Documents: (a). those used by
merchants or business people to promote trade or
credit transactions or commercial dealings and (b)
those defined and regulated by the Code of
Commerce or other commercial laws.. Examples:
commercial checks; sales receipts and invoices;
trust receipts; deposit and withdrawal slips and
bank passbooks; tickets issued to passengers;
enrollment forms; grades.
3. Private Documents: any other document, deed or
instruments executed by private persons without the
intervention of a notary public or of other
persons legally authorized, by which some
disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced or set
forth. Examples: unnotarized deeds, letters, private
receipts, class cards, timre records in private
employment. Vouchers of business people are
private, not commercial, documents ( Batulanon vs.
PP, 502 SCRA 35)
E. Importance of distinguishing Falsification of
Public from Falsification of Private Documents
1. As to penalty: a higher penalty is imposed for
falsification of public documents
2. As to modes of commission: there are 8 ways of
falsifying a public documents as against 7 as to
private documents
3. As to complexing with Estafa: Estafa cannot be
complexed with Falsification of Private document.
The reason is because both have a common
element which is damage
a). The crime is falsification if the deception
cannot be committed without falsification, i.e. the
falsification is committed as a means to commit
estafa.
b). It is estafa if the estafa can be committed
without the necessity of falsifying a document
4. As to requirement of damage:
In falsification of a
-private document the act of falsification must be
coupled with either (a) actual damage even if
there was no intent to cause damage or (b) an
intent to cause damage even if no actual damage
resulted.
-public document, the gravamen of the offense is
the perversion of truth; the loss of faith and
confidence by the public in the document even if
there is no actual damage t the public
F. Principles Involving Falsification
1. The Falsification maybe complexed with the
crimes of Estafa ( save private documents)
malversation or theft
2. Maybe committed intentionally or through
negligence
a). Examples through negligence: (i) The Register
of Deeds who issued a duplicate title without noting
on its back a notice of the encumbrances (ii) A
Clerk who issues a certified true copy of a birth
certificate but inadvertently copied the wrong
entries (iii) a person who signs a check to
accommodate a payee without verifying the payee’s
identification
b). Thus the accused who is charged with
intentional falsification may be convicted for
falsification thru negligence without amending the
Information because the former includes the latter (
see PP vs Uy 475 SCRA 248)
3. As to the liability of Heads of Offices as final
approving authority if it turns out the document to
which they affixed their signatures contains
falsities:
a). The Arias Principle ( Arias vs. Sandiganbayan,
180 SCRA 315) as reiterated in Magsuce vs.
Sandiganbayan ( Jan. 3, 1995) holds: “ All heads of
offices have a right to rely to a reasonable extent
on their subordinate and on the good faith of
those who prepared the documents, and are not
liable for the falsification
b). Exceptions: (i). Where there is a clear evidence
of conspiracy with the authors (ii) if through their
negligence, they brought about the commission of
the crime. Thus in PP. vs. Rodis the Head of Office
was held liable where the document signed by him
contained anomalies which were glaring in the
document
4. The following are accepted as defenses
a). Good faith and lack of intent to pervert the
truth. As in the case of a co-employee who signed
for another in the payroll because the latter was sick
b). Alterations which are in the nature of
corrections such as changing the civil status from
single to married in a Community Tax Certificate
d). Alterations which do not affect the integrity or
veracity of the document. Example: The
Certification by the treasurer that he paid the salary
on July 10 when in truth it was on July 12
e) Minor inaccuracies as in a deed of sale which
declared the consideration was paid in cash when it
was paid in two installments
5. Presumption of Authorship of the Falsification:
In the absence of satisfactory explanation, one
found in possession of and who used a forged
document is the forger of said document. If a
person had in his possession a falsified document
and he made sue of it, taking advantage of it and
profiting thereby, the clear presumption is that he is
the material author of the falsification. ( Nierva vs.
PP. 503 SCRA 114).
6. GR: falsification of public/commercial
documents have no attempted or frustrated stages
unless the falsification is so imperfect that it may
be considered as frustrated. (Personal Opinion: the
crime should be consumated since what was
frustrated was not the act but the purpose of the
offender)
7. There are as many falsifications as there are
documents falsified; or as there are separate acts of
falsification committed by one person within the
same period of time
a). The falsification of several signatures in one
payroll is only one falsification
b). Several checks falsified at the same time gives
rise to several separate crimes
8. Falsification is not a continuing crime
V. Proof of Falsification.
A. An allegation of forgery and a perfunctory
comparison of the signature/handwritings by
themselves cannot support a claim of forgery, as
forgery cannot be presumed and must be proved
by clear, positive and convincing evidence and
the burden of proof lies on the party alleging
forgery.
B. Criteria to determine forgery or falsification: per
Ladignon vs. CA ( 390 Phil. 1161 as reiterated in
Rivera vs. Turiano ( March 7, 2007)
The process of identification must include not only
the material differences between or among the
signatures/handwritings but a showing of the
following:
(i) the determination of the extent, kind and
significance of the resemblance and variation ( of
the handwriting or signature)
(ii) that the variation is due to the operation of a
different personality and not merely an expected
and inevitable variation found in the genuine
writing of the same writer
(iii) that the resemblance is a result more or less
of a skillful imitation and not merely a habitual
and characteristic resemblance which normally
appears in genuine handwriting
ART. 171. Falsification by public officer,
employee, or notary
or ecclesiastic minister
I. Coverage: this article provides: (1) the penalty of
falsification if committed by a public officer or
employee or a notary or an ecclesiastical minister.
The penalty is higher than if committed by a private
person. The document may be any document. (2)
And the eight acts of falsification.
A. The public officer must take advantage of his
official position or that there was abuse of office.
By this is meant that his functions include
participating in the preparation, recording,
keeping, publishing or sending out to the public
of the falsified document otherwise he will be
punished as a private person. As for instance:
secretaries, the Clerk of Court; the record officers;
those who issue receipts or licenses; the Register of
Deeds; Local Civil Registrar.
B. As for an ecclesiastic, the document he falsified
must affect the civil status of a person, else he will
be considered as a private person. The usual
document involved is a marriage contract
II. The acts of falsification:
A. By counterfeiting, imitating any handwriting,
signature or rubric. To counterfeit a handwriting or
signature is to create one that is so similar to the
genuine as to make it difficult to distinguish and
thus easily fool the public. This act includes
creating or simulating a fictitious handwriting or
signature
B. Causing it to appear that persons have
participated in any act or proceeding when they
did not in fact so participate
1). There is no need to imitate the signature or
handwriting
2). This includes simulating a public document like
a Warrant of Arrest as having been issued by a
judge
3) Examples: impersonating a person in a
document; voting in place of a registered voter,
posing as payee if a negotiable instrument in order
to encash the same
C. Attributing to persons who have participated in
an act or proceeding statements other than those in
fact made by them proceeding when they did not in
fact so participate.
1). This is twisting the statements or putting words
into the mouth of another
2). Substituting a forged will where the accused is
now named as an heir in lieu of the original where
he was not so named
3). Where the accused was instructed to prepare a
Special Power of Attorney over a parcel of land,
with himself as the agent but he instead prepared a
deed of sale with himself as the vendee
D. Making untruthful statements in a narration of
facts
1). This require that (i) the accused knows that what
he imputes is false (ii) the falsity involves a
material fact (iii) there is a legal obligation for
him to disclose the truth and (iv) such untruthful
statements are not contained in an affidavit or a
statement required by law to be sworn to.
2). by legal obligation is meant that the law
requires a full disclosure of facts such as in a
public official’s Statements of Assets and
Liabilities; the Personal Data Sheet submitted to
the NBI; the contents of an Application for
Marriage; the Community Tax Certificate
3). Narration of facts means an assertion of a fact
and does not include statements of opinion or
conclusions of law. Thus when the accused placed
himself as “eligible” in his statement of candidacy
when in truth he is disqualified, this is not a
narration of fact but a conclusion of law. Similarly,
the accused as claimant to a land stated in his
application that he entitled to the ownership when
under the law he is disqualified, is not liable
4). There is no falsification if there is some
colorable truth in the statement of facts by the
accused
5). False statements in an application form of the
Civil Service, which was under oath, for police
examination is perjury not falsification
6). But when a third person, not the Affiant, alters a
prepared Affidavit, the crime committed by him is
falsification under mode number 6
E. Altering true dates. This requires that the date
must be material as in the date of birth or
marriage; date of arrest; date when a search
warrant was issued; date of taking the oath of
office
F. Making alterations or intercalations in a
genuine document which changes its meaning. The
change must affect the integrity of the document. It
must make the document speak something false so
that alterations to make it speak the truth cannot be
falsification.
1. Changing the grades in one’s Transcript of
Records
2. Changing one’s time of arrival in the DTR
3. Changing the stated consideration a deed of sale
4. Deleting a condition in a contract of lease
G. Issuing in an authenticated form a document
purporting to be an original when no such original
exist, or including in such copy a statement contrary
to, or different from, that of the genuine original.
1. This can only be committed by the Official
Custodian of documents
2. Example: Issuing a Certified True Copy of a
birth certificate of a person when no such
certificate exists or
3. Issuing a true copy of a title and indicating
therein the land is mortgaged when no such
encumbrance exist on the original on file with the
office
H. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to
the issuance thereof in a protocol, registry or
official book
1. Example: Inserting a Birth Certificate in the
recorded of the Civil Registrar to make it appear the
birth was recordeD
ART. 172. Falsification by a private individual and
Use of falsified documents
I. Punishes these acts: (1) If the falsification is by a
private person and the document falsified is a
public or commercial document (2) Falsification
by any person of a private document and (3)
Introducing in any judicial proceeding a falsified
document or (4) Using a falsified document in
any transaction
II. There are only seven acts of falsification of a
private person. In the falsification of a private
document the damage includes damage to honor.
III. In introducing a falsified document in a judicial
proceeding, damage is not required. Example: The
act of the defendant in introducing a falsified receipt
to show that the debt was paid.
IV. In The crime use of a falsified document, the
user is not the falsifier but a third person, who
must know the falsity of the document.
ART. 173. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegram
and telephone messages
1. Acts punished: (1) The act of falsifying said
messages (2) Uttering of said falsified messages
and (3) Using such falsified damages with intent to
cause damage or to the damage of third person
II. The acts of falsifying and uttering:
1). The offender must be officers or employees of
the government or of a private entity engaged in
the business of sending or receiving such messages
2) Examples: making up a false “break-up”
telegram or decreasing the number of the words in a
message even if the contents are not changed
III. The crime of using may be committed by any
person
Crimes Affecting Medical Certificate, Certificates
of Merit and the Like
A. Acts punished:
1. Issuing a false medical certificate by a physician
or surgeon
a). The contents are not true in that the person was
never examined; or that he actually had no illness;
or that the illness is not as serious as stated in the
certificate; or that the period of confinement or rest
is not as stated therein.
2. Issuing a false certificate of merit or service,
good conduct or similar circumstances by a public
officer
a). as in the case of a barangay captain who issues a
Certificate of Good Moral Character to a bully ,
or a head of office who issues a Certificate of
Exemplary Conduct to an employee with several
disciplinary penalties
3). The act of falsifying by a private person of
medical certificate or certificate of merit
a). The name of the crime is Falsification of a
Medical Certificate or Certificate of Merit to
distinguish it from ordinary falsification
b). Example: the patient who altered the period
of days of confinement
4. The act of knowingly using said false certificates
Art. 175. Manufacturing and Possession of
instruments
or implements for falsification
Acts punished:
1. Making any instrument or implements
intended to be used in the crime of counterfeiting or
falsification.
a). Examples: false seals, false branding
instruments
b). The tools need not be a complete set
2. Introducing into the Philippines of said
instruments or implements
3. Possession of said implements WITH intent
to use
OTHER FALSITIES
Note: the subject of these falsities are not papers,
instruments or document but: (1) official authority
or functions; (2) rank, title, names, (3) uniforms
and insignias and (4) testimonies under oath. These
are also capable of being falsified or subjected to
acts of deception