Day 4 Crim22024

Question 1

Art. 136. Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d’etat,
rebellion or insurrection. Penalty?

Answer 1

Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d’etat, rebellion or insurrection. - The conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d’etat shall be punished by prision mayor in minimum period and a fine which shall not exceed One million pesos (P1,000,000)
XXXXXX
The conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion or
insurrection shall be punished, respectively, by prision
correccional in its maximum period and a fine which shall
not exceed five thousand pesos (P5,000), and by prision
correccional in its medium period, and a fine not exceeding
two thousand pesos (P2,000). (As amended by Rep. Act No.
6968)
“

Question 2

Art. 136. Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d’etat,
rebellion or insurrection. (Two crimes are defined and penalized in this article)

Answer 2

Two crimes are defined and penalized in this article.
Conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion are two different crimes,
namely:
XXXXXX
(1) Conspiracy to commit rebellion, and
(2) Proposal to commit rebellion.
XXXXXX
There is conspiracy to commit rebellion when two or more persons come
to an agreement to rise publicly and take arms against the Government for
any of the purposes of rebellion and decide to commit it.
XXXXXX
There is proposal to commit rebellion when the person who has
decided to rise publicly and take arms against the Government for any of
the purposes of rebellion proposes its execution to some other person or
persons.

Question 3

Merely agreeing and deciding to rise publicly and take arms against
the Government for the purposes of rebellion or merely proposing
the commission of said acts is already subject to punishment?

Answer 3

Yes, Merely agreeing and deciding to rise publicly and take arms against
the Government for the purposes of rebellion or merely proposing
the commission of said acts is already subject to punishment.
Persons merely agreeing and deciding among themselves to rise
publicly and take arms against the Government for the purposes mentioned
in Art. 134, without actually rising publicly and taking arms against the
Government, or those merely proposing the commission of said acts to other
persons without actually performing those overt acts under Art. 134, are
already subject to punishment. (People vs. Geronimo, 100 Phil. 90)

Question 4

A witness, who testified for the prosecution in a charge of conspiracy
to commit rebellion, stated that he heard the accused in their conversation
saying: “What a life this is, full of misery, constantly increasing. When will
our wretchedness end? When will the authorities remedy them? What shall
we do?”
Is there conspiracy?

Answer 4

No, because(1) there was no agreement concerning the commission
of rebellion, and(2) there was no decision to commit it.The facts do not
suffice to sustain a conviction of the crime of conspiracy to overthrow the
Government. (U.S. vs. Figueras, et al., 2 Phil. 491)

Question 5

Conspiracy to commit rebellion v Proposal to commit rebellion

Answer 5

There is conspiracy to commit rebellion when two or more persons come
to an agreement to rise publicly and take arms against the Government for
any of the purposes of rebellion and decide to commit it.
XXXXXX
There is proposal to commit rebellion when the person who has
decided to rise publicly and take arms against the Government for any of
the purposes of rebellion proposes its execution to some other person or
persons.

Question 6

Article 137. Disloyalty of public officers or employees.

The offender must be a public officer or employee.

Answer 6

The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon public officers or employees who have failed to resist a rebellion by all the means in their power, or shall continue to discharge the duties of their offices under the control of the rebels or shall accept appointment to office under them. (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).

Question 7

Article 137. Disloyalty of public officers or employees.- Acts of disloyalty which are punished:

There must be rebellion to be resisted

Answer 7

Acts of disloyalty which are punished:
1. By failing to resist a rebellion by all the means in their power; or
2. By continuing to discharge the duties of their offices under the control
of the rebels; or
3. By accepting appointment to office under them.

Question 8

The offender under Art. 137 must not be in conspiracy with the
rebels.
The public officer or employee who performs any of the acts of
disloyalty should not be in conspiracy with the rebels; otherwise, he will be
guilty of?

Answer 8

rebellion, not merely disloyalty, because in conspiracy, the act of
one is the act of all.

Question 9

Article 138. Inciting a rebellion or insurrection.

Incite others to rise publicly and take arms against the Government

Answer 9

• The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person who, without taking arms or being in open hostility against the Government, shall incite others to the execution of any of the acts specified in article 134 of this Code, by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or other representations tending to the same end. (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).

Question 10

Article 138. Inciting(urging or requesting another to commit a crime) a rebellion or insurrection. (Elements)

Incite others to rise publicly and take arms against the Government

Answer 10

Elements:
1. That the offender does not take arms or is not in open hostility against
the Government;
2. That he incites others to the execution of any of the acts of rebellion;
3. That the inciting is done by means of speeches, proclamations,
writings, emblems, banners or other representations tending to the
same end.

Question 11

Inciting((urging or requesting another to commit a crime) to rebellion distinguished fromproposal to commit rebellion.

In proposal by secret means while in inciting done publicly

Answer 11

1. In both crimes, the offender induces another to commit rebellion.
2. In proposal, the person who proposes has decided to commit rebellion;
   in inciting to rebellion, it is not required that the offender has decided
   to commit rebellion.
3. In proposal, the person who proposes the execution of the crime
   uses secret means; in inciting to rebellion, the act of inciting is done
   publicly.

Question 12

Rebellion should not be committed.
In both proposal and inciting to commit rebellion, the crime of rebellion
should not be actually committed by the persons to whom it is proposed or
who are incited. If they commit the rebellion because of the proposal or the
inciting, the proponent or the one inciting becomes a _____ ____ _____________
in the crime of rebellion, provided that the requisites of paragraph No. 2 of
Art. 17 of the Revised Penal Code are present.

Answer 12

principal by inducement

Question 13

Article 139. Sedition; How committed.

disturbances in the State.

the raising of commotions or rise publicly and tumultuously

Answer 13

The crime of sedition is committed by persons who rise publicly and tumultuously (making a loud, confused noise; uproarious) in order to attain by force, intimidation, or by other means outside of legal methods, any of the following objects:
XXXXXX
1. To prevent the promulgation or execution of any law or the holding of any popular election;
XXXXXX
2. To prevent the National Government, or any provincial or municipal government or any public officer thereof from freely exercising its or his functions, or prevent the execution of any administrative order;
XXXXXX
3. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the person or property of any public officer or employee;
XXXXXX
4. To commit, for any political or social end, any act of hate or revenge against private persons or any social class; and
XXXXXX
5. To despoil(the term that means to take property away illegally from its rightful owner), for any political or social end, any person, municipality or province, or the National Government (or the Government of the United States), of all its property or any part thereof.
XXXXXX

The ultimate object of sedition is a violation of the public peace or at
least such a course of measures as evidently engenders it.
* If the purpose of the uprising is not exactly against the Government
and not for the purpose of doing the things defined in Art. 134 of the Revised
Penal Code, but merely to attain by force, intimidation, or by other means
outside of legal methods, one object, to wit, to **inflict an act of hate or revenge
upon the person **or property of a public official, like the town mayor, it is
sedition.

Question 14

Art. 134. Rebellion (overthrow and supersede the existing
government) or insurrection (effect some change of minor importance) - How committed?

Answer 14

The crime of rebellion or insurrection is committed by rising
publicly and taking arms against the Government for the
purpose of removing from the allegiance to said Government
or its laws, the territory of the Republic of the Philippines or
any part thereof, or any body of land, naval, or other armed
forces, or depriving the Chief Executive or the Legislature,
wholly or partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives.
(As amended by RA.. No. 6968, approved October 24,1990

Question 15

Meaning of Allegiance

Answer 15

is meant the obligation of fidelity (faithfulness to something to which one is bound by pledge or duty. and
obedience) which the individuals owe to the government under which they
live or to their sovereign, in return for the protection they receive.

Question 16

Article 140. Penalty for sedition.

Answer 16

The leader of a sedition shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine not exceeding Two million pesos (P2,000,000)
Other persons participating therein shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine not exceeding One million pesos (P1,000,000). (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).

Question 17

What distinguishes sedition from rebellion?

Answer 17

is not the extent of the territory covered by the uprising but rather the object at which the uprising
aims.
* In both rebellion and sedition, there must be public uprising.
While in rebellion there must be taking up of arms against the Government; in sedition, it is sufficient that the public uprising is tumultuous (marked by disturbance and uproar: a tumultuous celebration. raising a great clatter and commotion; disorderly or noisy: a tumultuous crowd of students).
* While in sedition, the purpose of the offenders may be political or
social; in rebellion, it is always political.

Question 18

Sedition distinguished from Treason.

Answer 18

Treason, in its more general sense, is the “violation by a subject of
his allegiance to his sovereign or liege, lord, or to the supreme authority of
the State.” (Century Dictionary) Sedition, in its more general sense, is “the
raising of commotions or disturbances in the State.” (U.S. vs. Abad, 1 Phil.
437)

Question 19

Can sedition be committed by one person?

Answer 19

No, note the clause in the opening sentence of Art. 189, which says: “The
crime of sedition is committed by persons who rise publicly and tumultuously.”
In Art. 163, the word “tumultuous” is given a definite meaning. It says that
“the disturbance x x x shall be deemed to be tumultuous if caused by more
than three persons who are armed or provided with means of violence.”
~~~
Ex. A large group of Moros appeared in an aggressive
attitude, being likewise repelled. Datu Tahil and his men committed the crime of
sedition.
~~~
Held: The crime committed is sedition. The object of the uprising was
to inflict an act of hate or revenge upon the persons of the policemen who
were public officers or employees.
~~~

Question 20

Are common crimes absorbed in sedition?

Answer 20

In People vs. Umali, et al., 96 Phil. 185, it was held that the crimes
committed were those of sedition, multiple murder, arson, frustrated murder
and physical injuries. In the cases of People vs. Cabrera, et al., 43 Phil. 64 and 82, the
constabulary men who, to inflict an act of revenge upon the policeman,
murdered six policemen and two private citizens and seriously wounded
three civilians were found guilty of the separate crimes of sedition in one
case, and multiple murder with grave injuries in the other case.

Question 21

Article 140. Penalty for sedition.

Answer 21

• The leader of a sedition shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine not exceeding Two million pesos (P2,000,000)

Other persons participating therein shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine not exceeding One million pesos (P1,000,000). (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).

Question 22

Persons liable for sedition.

Answer 22

The persons liable for sedition are:
(1) The leader of the sedition, and
(2) Other persons participating in the sedition.

Question 23

Article 141. Conspiracy to commit sedition.

Answer 23

• Persons conspiring to commit the crime of sedition shall be punished by prision correccional in its medium period and a fine not exceeding Four hundred thousand pesos (P400,000). (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).

Question 24

There must be an agreement and a decision to rise publicly and
tumultuously to attain any of the objects of sedition.

Answer 24

Thus, an agreement and a decision to attain an object of sedition
without any agreement to rise publicly and tumultuously is not conspiracy
to commit sedition.Such an agreement and decision may constitute a conspiracy to commit direct assault of the first form (Art. 148), which is not
a felony.

Question 25

Is there a proposal to commit sedition?

Answer 25

There is no proposal to commit sedition.
Art. 141 punishes only conspiracy to commit sedition. Hence, proposal
to commit sedition is not punishable.

Question 26

Article 142. Inciting to sedition.

Tending to stir up the people against the lawful

Answer 26

(Tending to stir up the people against the lawful
authorities and to disturb the peace of the community and the order
of the Government) The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine not exceeding Four hundred thousand pesos (P400,000) shall be imposed upon any person who, without taking any direct part in the crime of sedition, should incite others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which constitute sedition, by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, cartoons, banners, or other representations tending to the same end, or upon any person or persons who shall utter seditious words or speeches, write, publish, or circulate scurrilous libels against the Government, or any of the duly constituted authorities thereof, or which tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful officer in executing the functions of his office, or which tend to instigate others to cabal and meet together for unlawful purposes, or which suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies or riots, or which lead or tend to stir up the people against the lawful authorities or to disturb the peace of the community, the safety and order of the Government, or who shall knowingly conceal such evil practices. (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187, amended by Republic Act No. 10951, [August 29, 2017]).
~~~
The law is not aimed merely at actual
disturbance, as its purpose is also to punish utterances which may
endanger public order.
~~~
The act was intended to cause commotion and
disturbance against the preservation of peace and order. It was committed
as an act of hate and revenge against the police force.
It was held that the defendant was guilty of inciting to sedition and
illegal possession of hand grenades.

there is inciting to sedition
when the words uttered or published could easily produce disaffection
among the people and a state of feeling in them incompatible with a
disposition to remain loyal to the Government and obedient to the
laws.

Question 27

Different acts of inciting to sedition.

Answer 27

1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which
   constitute sedition by means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
   emblems, etc.
2. Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to disturb the public
   peace.
3. Writing, publishing, or circulating scurrilous libels against the
   Government or any of the duly constituted authorities thereof, which
   tend to disturb the public peace.

Question 28

INCITE Definition & Legal Meaning

Answer 28

To arouse; stir up; instigate; sec in motion; as, to “incite” a riot. Also, generally, in criminal law to instigate, persuade,or move another to commit a crime; iu this sense nearly synonymous with”abet.” .See Long v. State, 23 Neb. 33, 30 N. W. 310.

Question 29

Article 142. Inciting to sedition.Inciting to sedition to accomplish any of its objects.
Elements:

Answer 29

1. That the offender does not take direct part in the crime of sedition.
2. That he incites others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which
   constitute sedition.
3. That the inciting is done by means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
   emblems, cartoons, banners, or other representations tending to the
   same end.

Question 30

Illustration:
The accused, municipal secretary, and another person,
happened to meet in the municipal building of the town of Pilar,
Sorsogon, and there they became engaged in a discussion regarding
the administration of Governor General Wood, which resulted in the
accused shouting a number of times: “The Filipinos, like myself, must
use bolos for cutting off Wood’s head for having recommended a bad
thing for the Filipinos, for he has killed our independence.” Held?

Answer 30

The accused uttered seditious words. His conviction must
be sustained. (People vs. Perez, 45 Phil. 599)

Question 31

Meaning of the word “scurrilous.”

Answer 31

means low, vulgar, mean or foul.

Question 32

Uttering seditious words or speeches and writing, publishing or
circulating scurrilous libels are punishable, when —

Answer 32

1. They tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful officer in executing the
   functions of his office; or
2. They tend to instigate others to cabal and meet together for unlawful
   purposes; or
3. They suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies or riots; or
4. They lead or tend to stir up the people against the lawful authorities
   or to disturb the peace of the communi

Question 33

Knowingly concealing such evil practices.
This is one of the ways of violating Article 142.

Answer 33

“Knowingly concealing such evil practices” is ordinarily an act of the
accessory after the fact, but under this provision, the act is treated and
punished as that of the principal.

Question 34

Disturbance or disorder, not necessary in inciting to sedition.

Answer 34

It is not necessary, in order to be seditious, that the words used should
in fact result in a rising of the people against the constituted authorities.
The law is not aimed merely at actual disturbance, as its purpose is also to
punish utterances which may endanger public order. (People vs. Nabong,
57 Phil. 455)

Question 35

There are two rules relative to seditious words:

Answer 35

(a) The clear and present danger rule.
The words must be of such a nature that by uttering them there
is a danger of a public uprising and that such danger should be both
clear and imminent(about to happen).
Under the clear and present danger rule, it is required that there
must be reasonable ground to believe that the danger apprehended is
imminent and that the evil to be prevented is a serious one. There
must be the probability of serious injury to the State.
Present refers to the time element. It used to be identified
with imminent and immediate danger. The danger must not only be
probable but very likely inevitable.
The clear and present danger rule is applied in this case:
A political party applied for a permit to hold a public meeting in
Manila. The Mayor refused to grant permit. The refusal of the Mayor
to grant permit for the holding of a public meeting was predicated
upon fear that in view of the bitterness of the speeches expected from
the minority men who were fresh from a political defeat and were
smarting with charges of fraud against those in power, there might be
breach of the peace and of public order.
Held: The danger apprehended was not imminent and the evil
to be prevented was not a serious one. (Primicias vs. Fugoso 80 Phil
71)The Mayor was ordered by the Supreme Court in mandamus
proceedings to issue a permit.
(b) The dangerous tendency rule.
If the words used tend to create a danger of public uprising, then
those words could properly be the subject of a penal clause. (People vs.
Perez, supra)
Under the dangerous tendency rule, there is inciting to sedition
when the words uttered or published could easily produce disaffection
among the people and a state of feeling in them incompatible with a
disposition to remain loyal to the Government and obedient to the
laws.
~~~

Question 36

Reasons why seditious utterances are prohibited.

Answer 36

Manifestly, the legislature has authority to forbid the advocacy of
a doctrine designed and intended to overthrow the Government without
waiting until there is a present and immediate danger of the success of the
plan advocated. If the State were compelled to wait until the apprehended
danger became certain, then its right to protect itself would come into being
simultaneously with the overthrow of the Government, when there would
be neither prosecuting officers nor courts for the enforcement of the law.
(Gitlow vs. New York, 268 U.S. 652)

Question 37

Enrile v Salazar

Answer 37

• Facts: (1) Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, the spouses Rebecco and Erlinda
  Panlilio and Gregorio Honasan were charged with the crime of rebellion
  with murder and multiple frustrated murder allegedly committed during
  the period of the failed coup attempt from 26 November to 10 December
  1990. (2) The Solicitor General claimed that the petitioners’ case does not fall
  within the Hernandez ruling because the information in Hernandez charged
  murders and other common crimes committed as a necessary means for
  the commission of rebellion, whereas, the information against petitioners
  charged murder and frustrated murder committed on the occasion, but
  not in the furtherance, of rebellion.
  (b) hold Hernandez applicable only to offenses committed in
  furtherance, or as a necessary means for the commission of, rebellion, but
  not to acts committed in the course of a rebellion which also constitute
  “common” crimes of grave or less grave character
• Said return urged that the petitioners’ case does not fall within the Hernandez ruling because-and this is putting it very simply-the information in Hernandez charged murders and other common crimes committed as a necessary means for the commission of rebellion, whereas the information against Sen. Enrile et al. charged murder and frustrated murder committed on the occasion, **but not in furtherance, of rebellion. **
• in other words, in the absence of aggravating circumstances, the extreme penalty could not be imposed upon him. However, under Article 48 said penalty would have to be meted out to him, even in the absence of a single aggravating circumstance. Thus, said provision, if construed in conformity with the theory of the prosecution, would be unfavorable to the movant.
• XXXXXX
  WHEREFORE, the Court reiterates that based on the doctrine enunciated in People vs. Hernandez, the questioned information filed against petitioners Juan Ponce Enrile and the spouses Rebecco and Erlinda Panlilio must be read as charging simple rebellion only, hence said petitioners are entitled to bail, before final conviction, as a matter of right. The Court’s earlier grant of bail to petitioners being merely provisional in character, the proceedings in both cases are ordered REMANDED to the respondent Judge to fix the amount of bail to be posted by the petitioners. Once bail is fixed by said respondent for any of the petitioners, the corresponding bail bond flied with this Court shall become functus oficio. No pronouncement as to costs.
  XXXXXX
  Acts committed in furtherance of rebellion are absorbed in rebellion.
  The crime of rebellion** consists of many acts. It is a vast movement of
  men and a complex net of intrigues and plots. Acts committed in furtherance of rebellion though crimes in themselves are deemed absorbed in one single**
  crime of rebellion. (Enrile vs. Amin, G.R. No. 93335, September 13, 1990)
  The act of killing a police officer, knowing only too well that the victim is a
  person in authority is a mere component or ingredient of rebellion or an act
  done in furtherance of the rebellion. It cannot be made a basis of a separate
  charge. (People vs. Dasig, et al., G.R. No. 100231, April 28, 1993)

Question 38

Amado V. Hernandez

Answer 38

In conclusion, we hold that, under the allegations of the amended information against defendant-appellant Amado V. Hernandez, the murders, arsons and robberies described therein are mere ingredients of the crime of rebellion allegedly committed by said defendants, as means “necessary” (4) for the perpetration of said offense of rebellion; that the crime charged in the aforementioned amended information is, therefore, simple rebellion, not the complex crime of rebellion with multiple murder, arsons and robberies; that the maximum penalty imposable under such charge cannot exceed twelve (12) years of prision mayor and a fine of P2H,HHH; and that, in conformity with the policy of this court in dealing with accused persons amenable to a similar punishment, said defendant may be allowed bail.