CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE LAWS OF THE NATIONS

- The crimes under this title can be prosecuted even if committed outside of the Philippines. This constitutes
one of the exceptions to the principle of territoriality.
- Almost all the crimes under this title can only be committed in times of war. Meaning, there must be a war in
which the Philippines is involved. However, the crimes of espionage, inciting to war and violation of
neutraility can be committed even if the Philippines is not at war.
- War under this title means that there is another country or state which was declared as an enemy of the
Philippines. War between the Philippine government and the NPA or Muslim secessionist groups is not
treason but rebellion.
- Piracy may be committed on the high seas or Philippine waters. The essence of this crime is the attack or
taking of a vessel, its cargo, equipment of the personal belongings of its complement or passengers. The
crime of piracy as it now stands has been amended by PD 532 and RA 7659.
- Take note that piracy can only be committed by a person who is not a passenger nor a complement of the
vessel. So that if it is a passenger who commits acts of robbery in the vessel, the crime is ROBBERY not
piracy. If the taking is not accompanied by violence or intimidation, the crime is THEFT.
- Abbeting Piracy is also a crime under PD 532.
- Whenever piracy is attended by murder, homicide, rape or physical injuries, the crime is Qualified Piracy.
Such other crimes cannot be treated separately or complexed with the principal crime of piracy.
- There is also Qualified Piracy if the pirates abandon their victims without means of saving themselves or
whenever it is committed through boarding or firing upon the ship.
- Under this title, there is also what is known as the crime of MUTINY. The essence of this crime is the
unlawful resistance to the authority of the superior officer or the raising of commotions or disturbances
aboard the vessel against the authority of its commander.
- In relation to the crime of piracy is the crime of hijacking under RA 6235. In other countries, this is known as
Aircraft Piracy. In this crime of hijacking, you have to determine first whether the plane is of Philippine or
foreign registry. If the plane is PHILIPPINE registry, NO CRIME of hijacking UNLESS THE PLANE IS IN FLIGHT. If
the plane is not in flight, whatever crimes committed shall be governed by the RPC of any special law. If the
plane is FOREIGN registry, the law does not require that the plane be in flight before the anti-hijacking law
can apply. This is because aircrafts of foreign registry are considered in transit while they are in foreign
countries. Under this law, a plane is said to be in flight – from the moment all exterior doors are closed
following embarkation until such time when the same are opened again for disembarkation.

CRIMES AGAINST FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE STATE

- The crimes under this title refer to violations of the Bill of Rights by PUBLIC OFFICERS against private
individuals, except only for the last crime of offending religious feelings. The counterpart of this title is Title
9, i.e., Crimes against Personal Liberty and Security, whereby the offenders are private persons. However,
private persons may also commit this crime if he or she conspires with a public officer.

ARBITRATY DETENTION

- Committed by a PUBLIC OFFICER who details a person WITHOT LEGAL GROUNDS.

Distinction between AD and Illegal Detention

- In AD, the offender is a public officer. Private persons can only commit AD if he conspires with a public
officer. In ID, the offender is a private person. But a public officer can also commit ID if he is acting in a
private capacity or beyond the scope of his duties or when he becomes an accomplice or accessory to the
private person.
- Note that in AD, not any public officer can commit this crime. Only those public officers whose official duty
carry with it the authority to make an arrest and detain persons can be guilty of AD. So if the public officer
does not possess such authority, the crime committed by him is Illegal Detention.
 - Whether the crime is AD or ID, it is necessary that there be actual restraint of liberty upon the victim. If
there is no actual restraint, even if there had been warnings, there is no AD or ID. The crime can either be
grave or light threats or coercion.

Distinction between AD and Unlawful Arrest

- In AD, the offender is a public officer authorized to make arrests; is UA, the offender is ANY PERSON.
- In AD, the criminal intent is to deprive the victim of liberty; In UA, the criminal intent is to accuse the victim
of a crime he did not commit for the purpose of delivering him to the proper authorities.

Article 125 – Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons to the Proper Judicial Authorities

- In your criminal procedure, you will find there a provision which states that person lawfully arrested without
warrant may ask for a preliminary investigation provided he signs a waiver of Article 125 of the RPC.
- This crime under Article 125 is a form of arbitrary detention, because while the detention is initially lawful
since it is pursuant to a lawful arrest, if the police or public officer fails to deliver the prisoner to the proper
judicial authorities within the prescribed time, the crime of AD is committed.
- Note that the situation contemplated here is a warrantless arrest.

Expulsion viz Coercion

- Expelling a person from the Philippines or compelling him to change residence without authority of law,
constitutes the crime of expulsion, if committed by a public officer. If the same act is committed by a private
individual, the crime is coercion.
- In Villavicencio vs. Lukban (39 Phil 778), the Mayor of the City of Manila ordered certain prostitutes to be
transferred to Davao without observing due process, since they have not been charged of any crime. It was
held the crime of expulsion was committed.

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER

- The crimes under this title refer to crimes that disturb the public peace and order, as well as official
functions and proceedings, or to those crimes that challenges the duly constituted government of
authorities.

REBELLION OR INSURRECTION

- The essence of this crime is a public uprising with the taking up of arms and committed by means of force
and violence, with the aim of overthrowing the duly constituted government. Common crimes committed in
furtherance of rebellion, like murder, robbery, arson, and kidnapping, are absorbed and cannot be treated
separately. Likewise, offenses under special laws like illegal possession of firearms, which are perpetrated in
furtherance of rebellion are also absorbed and cannot be charged as separate crimes.

COUP D’ ETAT

- The essence of this crime is a swift attack accompanied by violence, intimidation, threats, strategy or stealth
committed by military, police or government men against the duly constituted authorities or any military
camp or installation or public utility or facility for the purpose of diminishing or seizing state power.

SEDITION

- The crime of sedition does not involve taking up arms against he government, because the purpose of this
crime is not to overthrow the government but that the offenders rise publicly and tumultuously, thereby
creating commotion and disturbance by way of protest to express dissent and disobedience to the
 government. This is like civil disobedience, except that the means employed, i.e., force and intimidation, is
illegal.
- To determine whether a certain speech or publication constitutes the crime of inciting to sedition, the
seditious tendency rule is applied and not the clear and present danger rule.

DIRECT ASSAULT

- Two forms of Direct Assault under Art. 148:

1. Without a public uprising, by employing force and intimidation for the attainment of any of the purposes
of sedition or rebellion; and
2. Without a public uprising, by attacking or employing force or by seriously intimidation or resisting any
person in authority or any of his agents while engaged in the performance ofofficial duties or on the
occasion or by reason of such performance.
- The crime of direct assault punishes the spirit of lawlessness and the contempt or hatred for the authority
or rule of law.
- If a person in authority is killed while in the performance of his official functions, the crime committed is a
complex crime under Art. 48 of Direct Assault with Murder or Homicide. The material consequence of the
unlawful act is always complexed with direct assault. The only instance that it is not complexed is if the
material consequences is only a light felony like slight physical injuries. In such case, the latter crime is
absorbed. If the public prosecutor incorrectly files separate charges for the direct assault and slight physical
injuries, conviction or acquittal is one is a bar to the prosecution of the other.

INDIRECT ASSAULT

- There is no indirect assault when there is no direct assault.

- The victim in indirect assault should be a private person coming to the aid of the agent of a person in
authority.

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST

- The crimes under this title are in the nature of fraud or falsity to the public in general. The law punishes the
deceit upon the public.
- In the crime of counterfeiting of coins, it does not matter whether the counterfeited coin is still legal tender
or not. What the law punishes is the act of imitating or manufacturing itself, not the fraud upon the public.
This is to prevent people from trying their ingenuity and from acquiring an expertise in the craft of imitation.
Even if the counterfeited coin is vintage, the crime of counterfeiting is committed.
- On the other hand, in the crime of mutilation of coins, the mutilated coin should be legal tender. What is
punished here is the diminution in the intrinsic value of the coin by scraping, scratching or filing the coin by
collecting its precious metal dust.
- In relation to this, take note of PD 247 which punishes the similar mutilation, burning or tearing of coins and
current notes. The purpose behind PD 247 is to punish the act of destruction of bulls and coins of the Central
Bank.

FALSIFICATION

- The crime of falsification must involve a writing that is a document in the legal sense. The writing must be
complete in itself and capable of extinguishing an obligation or creating rights or capable of becoming
evidence of the facts stated therein. Until and unless the writing has attained this quality, the crime of
falsification is not committed.
- But even if the falsified document is totally false of entirely spurious, the crime of falsification may still be
committed. The writing need not be genuine. Even if the writing is spurious if it appears to be genuine, the
crime of falsification is committed. Even totally false documents may be falsified.

FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS

Art. 171. Falsification by public officer, employee or notary or ecclesiastic minister – The penalty of prision
mayor and a fine not to exceed One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon any public offier,
employee, or notary who, taking advantage of his position shall falsify a document by committing any of the
following acts:

1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric;

2. Causing it to appear that person have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not in fact so
participate;
3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other than those in fact
made by them;
4. Making untruthfulness statements in a narration of facts;
5. Altering true dates;
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its meaning;
7. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original document when so such
original exists, or including in such a copy statement contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine
original;
8. Intercalation any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol, registry, or official book.

The same penalty shall be imposed upon any ecclesiastical minister who shall commit any of the offenses
enumerated in the preceding paragraphs of this article, with respect to any record or document of such
character that its falsification may affect the civil status of persons.

ELEMENTS:

1. Offender is a public officer, employee, or notary public;

2. He takes advantage of his official position;
3. He falsifies a document by committing any of the following acts:
a. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric
b. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not in fact so
participate

- Even if the offender is a public officer but the falsification committed by him is upon a document which does
not pertain to his office, it was committed without abuse of his office. Thus, it will not fall under Art. 171 but
Art. 172.
- A private person who cooperates with a public officer in the falsification of public of documents is guilty
under Art. 171 and incurs the same liability and penalty as the public officer as there is conspiracy.

FALSIFICATION OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS

ART. 172. Falsification by private individuals and use of falsified documents. – The penalty of prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine of not more that 1million pesos shall be imposed
upon:

1. Any private individual who shall commit any of the falsifications enumerated in the next preceding article in
any public official document or letter of exchange or any other kind of commercial document; and

ACTS PUNISHED:

1. Falsification of public, official or commercial document by a private individual;

2. Falsification of private document by any person; and
3. Use of falsified document

4 KINDS OF DOCUMENTS:

1. Public document in the execution of which, a person in authority or notary public has taken part;
2. Official document in the execution of which public official takes part;
 3. Commercial document or any document recognized by the Code of Commerce of any Commercial Law; and
4. Private document in the execution of which only private individuals take part.

-Private documents may acquire the character of a public document when it becomes part of an official record
and is certified by a public officer duly authorized by law.

-There is no complex crime of estafa through falsification of private document because the immediate effect of
falsification of a private document is the same as that of estafa.

-The crime falsification of a public document, even if the falsification took place before the private document
becomes part of the public records, if the document is intended by law to be part of the public of official record.

Falsification of a public documents Falsification of a private document

Mere falsification is enough Prejuice/damage to 3rd person or intent to cause it is
enough
Committed by any of the 8 means under Art. 171 Cannot be committed by the ways in par. 7&8 of Art.
171
Principal thing punished is violation of public faith
and destruction of truth as therein solemnly
proclaimed

CRIMES RELATIVE TO OPIUM AND OTHER PROHIBITED DRUGS

- Arts. 190-194 of the RPC have been repealed by the Dangerous Drugs Act (RA 9165)
- Usual Crimes charged under RA 9165:
Section 5 – sale, delivery, distribution of dangerous drugs or CPEC
Section 11 – Possession of DD

4 CRUCIAL LINKS IN THE CHAIN OF CUSTODY:

1. From the accused to the seizing or arresting officer

2. From SO/AO to the police investigator
3. From the PI to the chemist
4. From the chemist to the court

All these links should be established by the prosecution by proof beyond reasonable doubt.

COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT

Plea Bargaining (sec. 23) -Any person charged with a violation of RA 9165 cannot avail of plea bargaining. –
UNCONSTITUTIONAL in Estipona vs. Lobrigo

Probation (sec. 24) – convicted drug traffickers cannot apply for probation

DRUG USE AS A QUALIFYING AGGRAVATING CIRC. (sec. 25) – commission of an offense by a culprit under the
influence of dangerous drugs. There must positive finding of drug use.

PEOPLE VS. LIM (GR. NO. 231989, Sept. 4, 2018): The following should henceforth be enforced as mandatory policy:
1. In the sworn statements/affidavits, the apprehending/seizing officers must state their compliance with the
requirements of Sect. 21 (1) of RA 9165, as amended, and its IRR.
2. In case of non-observance of the provision, the apprehending/SO must state justification or explanation
therefor as well as the steps they have taken in order to preserve the integrity and evidentiary value of the
seized, confiscated items.
3. If there is no justification or explanation expressly declared in the sworn statements or affidavits, the
investigating fiscal must not immediately file the case before the court. Instead, he or she must refer the
case for further preliminary investigation in order to determine the (non) existence of probable cause.
4. If the investigating fiscal filed the case despite such absence, the court may exercise its discretion to either
refuse to issue a commitment order (or warrant of arrest) or dismiss the case outright for lack of probable
cause in accordance with Sec. 5, Rule 112, of the ROC.
RECENT JURISPRUDENCE:

- The links in the COC that must be established are (1) the seizure and marking if practicable, of the illegal drug
recovered from the accused by the Apprehending officer; (2) the turnover of the seized illegal drug by the AP
to the Investigating Officer; (3) the turnover of illegal drug by the IO to the forensic chemist for Lab
examination; and (4) the turnover and submission of the illegal drug from the forensic chemist to the court.
- The marking of the evidence serves to separate the marked evidence from the corpus of all other similar or
related evidence from the time they are seized from the accused until they are disposed of at the end of the
criminal proceedings, thus, preventing switching, planting or contamination of evidence.
- In both illegal sale and illegal possession of prohibited drugs, conviction cannot be sustained if there is a
persistent doubt on the identity of the drug. The identity of the PD must be established with moral
certainty. Apart from showing that the elements of possession or sale are present, the fact that the
substance illegally possessed and sold in the first pace is the same substance offered with the same degree
of certitude as that needed to sustain a guilty verdict.
- In People vs. Macapundag (GR no. 225965, 13 March 2017): the court recognized that under varied field
conditions, strict compliance with the requirements of Sec. 21 of RA 9165 as amended, may not always be
possible, and ruled that under the implementing guidelines of the said section, “non-compliance with these
requirements under justifiable grounds, as long as the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items
are properly preserved by the AO/team, shall not render void and invalid such seizures of and custody over
said items.” However, the court added that the prosecution bears the burden of proving justifiable cause.

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS

- Arts. 195-199 of the RPC involving gambling has been repealed by DPD 1602
- While the acts punished under the RPC are still punished, the concept of gambling has been changed under
the new law.
- Before, the skill of the player is material in classifying whether a game is gambling or not. Under the RPC,
betting in sports contest is not gambling if the skill of the player outweights the change or hazard involved in
winning the game. This is not true anymore in PD 1602.
- Gambling is legal, of course, if authorized by law.

GRAVE SCANDAL

- The crime punishes an act or acts that are committed in public of within public knowledge or view and are
highly scandalous as offending decency or good customs.
- Distinction should be made as to the place where the offensive act was committed:
o Public place – criminal liability arises whether the immoral act is open to public view
o Private - public view or knowledge is required.