Article 124 Arbitrary Detention

Question 1

What are the requisites of ARBITRARY DETENTION

under Article 124?

Answer 1

1) Offender is a public officer or 
employee; 
2) He detains a person; 
3) The detention is without legal 
grounds

Question 2

What does ‘without legal grounds’ mean?

Answer 2

i. No crime was committed by the 
detained; 
ii. Detainee is not violently insane; 
iii. The person detained has no 
ailment which requires 
compulsory confinement in a 
hospital.

Question 3

Who are the public officers/employee who might be liable under Art 124?

Answer 3

Those vested with jurisdiction to order the detention of another who is accused of committing a crime.
Otherwise the crime is Illegal Detention. They Include:
a. Local Executive Officials
b. Punong Barangay
c. Judges
d. Prosecutors
e. Law Enforcement Agents
f. Commissioner on Immigration
g. Private Person in conspiracy with the public
officials or who participated as accomplices or
accessories

Question 4

What are the valid grounds for detaining a person under Art 124?

Answer 4

Legal Grounds for the Arrest and Detention of A 
Person
a. Commission of crime
b. Violent insanity
c. Ailment which requires compulsory 
confinement in a hospital

Question 5

If the offended party may still go to the place where he

wants to go, even though there have been warnings, what crime was committed?

Answer 5

The crime committed is only grave or light threat if the offended party may still go to the place where he wants to go, even though there have been warnings.

Question 6

If the offender falsely imputes a crime against a person to be able to arrest him and appear not determined to file a charge against him, what crime is committed?

Answer 6

If the offender falsely imputes a crime against a person to be able to arrest him and appear not determined to file a charge against him, the crime is arbitrary detention through unlawful arrest.

Question 7

What are Periods of Detention Penalized?

Answer 7

1. Detention has not exceeded 3 days
2. Detention has continued for more than 3 days
   but not more than 15 days
3. Detention has continued for more than 15
   days but not more than 6 months
4. Detention exceeded 6 months

Question 8

What penalties are applicable to Arbitrary detention under Article 124?

Answer 8

1. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period, if the
   detention has not exceeded three days;
2. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
   maximum periods, if the detention has continued more
   than three but not more than fifteen days;
3. The penalty of prision mayor, if the detention has
   continued for more than fifteen days but not more than
   six months; and
4. That of reclusion temporal, if the detention shall have
   exceeded six months.

Question 9

When an officer is acting in a private capacity or
beyond the scope of his official duty, or when he
becomes an accomplice or accessory to the crime
committed by a private person, what crime is committed?

Answer 9

Illegal Detention

Question 10

Problem:
A had been collecting tong from drivers. B, a
driver, did not want to contribute to the tong. One
day, B was apprehended by A, telling him that he was
driving carelessly. Reckless driving carries with it a
penalty of immediate detention and arrest. B was
brought to the Traffic Bureau and was detained there
until the evening. When A returned, he opened the cell
and told B to go home. What crime was committed?

Answer 10

The crime committed was Arbitrary detention. The arrest of B was only incidental to the criminal intent of the offender to detain him. But if after putting B inside the cell, he was turned over to the investigating officer who booked him and filed a charge of reckless imprudence against him, then the crime would be unlawful arrest.

The detention of the driver is incidental to the
supposed crime he did not commit. But if there is no
supposed crime at all because the driver was not
charged at all, he was not given place under booking
sheet or report arrest, then that means that the only
purpose of the offender is to stop him from driving his
jeepney because he refused to contribute to the tong.

Question 11

Problem:

The chief of police rearrested a woman who had been released by means of a verbal order of the justice of the peace. The accused acted without malice, but he should have verified the order of release before proceeding to make the re-arrest. Is the COP liable for arbitrary detention?

Answer 11

Yes. The crime committed by the chief of police is arbitrary detention through simple imprudence provided for and punished in connection with Article 124, par. 1, of the Revised Penal Code.

Question 12

Is there a minimum period for Detention?

Answer 12

No. The law does not provide a minimum period for arbitrary detention .

In the case of U.S. vs. Braganza, 10 Phil. 79, a councilor and a barrio lieutenant were convicted of arbitrary detention, even if the offended party was detained for less than half an hour; and in the case of U.S. vs. Agravante, 10 Phil. 46, the detention was only for one hour.