Case Title: People vs. Victoria, GR No: G.R. No. L-369 Date decided: 13 March 1947 Syllabi: Art. 114 – Treason FACTS: 1. Sentenced to the supreme penalty of death and to pay a fine of twenty thousand pesos and costs, Carmelito Victoria comes to us to seek for the reversal of the decision of the People's Court. Below are the facts of the case being appealed: a. b. c. d. e. That on or about October 6, 1944, the accused, a member of the Intelligence Unit attached to the Kempei Tai in Lucena, Tayabas, for the purpose of giving and with the intent to give said enemy aid and comfort, joined an armed enemy patrol composed of about eight spies and a Japanese soldier, which went to the house of Federico Unson in the barrio of Malaking Labak Bocohan, Lucena, Tayabas, and accused Federico Unson of hiding guerrillas; that said patrol was arresting said Federico Unson when some guerrillas appeared and killed one of the spies and the patrol left; that said accused directed several men in the patrol in picking up the dead spy and carrying him away; and that, in the afternoon of the same day, the same party of spies, including the accused and eight members of the Japanese Military Police, went again to the house of Federico Unson and did feloniously, willfully, unlawfully and treasonably arrest him, together with Isaias Perez and Ruben Godoy, who happened to be at the house; that with their hands bound, the three were tortured and then taken along by said patrol after setting fire on the house of Federico Unson and that of Isaias Perez were found lying nearby with numerous bayonet wounds; and that Ruben Godoy was taken to the Japanese garrison in Lucena, Tayabas, and there killed. That on or about December 21, 1944, the accused, accompanied by other Japanese spies, Pedro Raviñera, Jose Bondoc, Jacinto Pineda, Alberto Calawit, Bernardo Santiago, and others who were all armed, for the purpose of giving and with the intent to give said enemy aid and comfort, went to the house of Jose Unson, in Lucena, Tayabas, and arrested said Jose Unson and brought him to the Japanese garrison on the charge that he had a short wave radio; that he was furnishing radio information to the guerrillas and at the same time supporting them; that said Unson was released on the same day, but on the next day he was again arrested and brought to the Japanese garrison at Lucena, Tayabas; that said Jose Unson never returned. That on or about February 10, 1945, the accused, in company with Jacinto Pineda, Leonardo Coronel, Jose Bondoc, Abelardo Calawit, and Pedro Raviñera, all members of the Intelligence Unit of the Kempei Tai, were all armed, for the purpose of giving and with the intent to give said enemy aid and comfort, went to the house of Felixberto Romulo in San Pablo, Laguna, placed him under arrest as a guerrilla suspect, and turned him over to the Japanese Military Police who on that occasion were concealing themselves near the house of Romulo; and that, since the arrest of said Romulo, nothing was heard of him. That on or about December 21, 1944, at about 5 o'clock in the morning, the accused, accompanied by two Japanese Military Police and two undercover operatives, for the purpose of giving and with the intent to give said enemy aid and comfort, went to the house of Hermogenes Calauag in Lucena, Tayabas, and apprehended said Hermogenes Calauag; that said two Japanese Military Police and the accused conducted a search of the house and afterwards brought Calauag to the Japanese garrison where he was subjected to inhuman torture on the charge being pro-American and adviser of the Hunters ROTC Guerrillas. That on or about March 9, 1944, at about 5 o'clock in the morning, the accused then acting as an informer of the Japanese Kempei Tai, with intent to aid said enemy, did wilfully, feloniously and treasonably cause the Japanese Military police to arrest and apprehended Antonio San Agustin, a f. g. h. i. guerrilla officer, who was thereupon brought to Fort Santiago and there torture and unlawfully detained up to September 20, 1944. That on or about June, 1944, the accused accompanied by an armed group of undercover operatives, for the purpose of giving and with intent to give said enemy aid and comfort, went to the house of Melecio Labalan, Sr., and arrested and brought him to the Japanese garrison in Lucena, Tayabas, where he was tortured on the charge of being a guerrilla. That on or about February, 1945, the accused, a member of the Ganap, a pro-Japanese party, wilfully, unlawfully, feloniously and treasonably joined the Makapili organization designed to support the Imperial Japanese Forces in levying war against their enemies; that he took military training from the Japanese and bore arms and joined the enemy forces as a Makapili soldier, taking orders from the Japanese; that he participated in the raid and burning of the barrio of Bautista, San Pablo, Laguna, upon orders of the Japanese; that he carried ammunitions and foodstuffs for the Japanese Army from Bautista to the mountains of Susong Dalaga and Mt. Malipuño, Laguna; that he performed sentry duty for the Japanese Army in Mount Malipuño, where he was stationed with Japanese and other Makapili soldiers. That the commission of the above-mentioned acts was attended by the aggravating circumstances of treachery, the aid of armed persons to insure or afford impunity, and deliberately augmenting the crimes by causing other wrongs not necessary in the commission thereof. The aforementioned facts were upon the testimonies of Mrs. Federico Unson, Jr. and Dolores Kalakasan. 2. Appellant tried to show in his testimony that he was not a spy; that he joined the Japanese in their raids only because he was forced to do so; that in the instances he had to go to the Japanese garrison he did it either in obedience to a summon of his friend Captain Yuki or to intercede in behalf of some prisoners. 3. He was held guilty for the crimes in relations to the crime committed in letter, abcdf and that crimes alleged in letters e&g were not proven. Issues: 1. WoN the appellant guilty of treason as found by the lower court? Ruling: YES. Judgement is affirmed. Any circumstance or testimony presented by the appellant no matter how meritorious they may be, is not, as correctly stated by the Solicitor General, a justifying, exempting, or mitigating circumstance in the commission of wrongs, and although appellant had saved the lives of a thousand and one persons, if he had caused the killing of a single human being to give aid and comfort to the enemy, he is, nonetheless, a traitor. It was already said that: "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10). The court does not find any merit in appellant's allegations that the acts committed by him are not punishable as treason and that the People's Court who tried him had no jurisdiction, they being merely upshots of the wrong theory of suspended allegiance and sovereignty. However, for all the foregoing, there being no unanimity of all the members of this Court in the imposition of the death penalty, the People's Court's decision is modified, and appellant is sentenced to reclusion perpetua and to pay a fine of P15,000 and costs. Case: People vs. Menor, G.R. No. L-2237, 31 January 1950 Doctrine: Art. 114. Treason. — Any person who, owing allegiance to (the United States or) the Government of the Philippine Islands, not being a foreigner, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort within the Philippine Islands or elsewhere, shall be punished by reclusion temporal to death and shall pay a fine not to exceed P20,000 pesos. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses at least to the same overt act or on confession of the accused in open court. Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippine Islands, who commits acts of treason as defined in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be punished by prision mayor to death and shall pay a fine not to exceed P20,000 pesos. (As amended by E.O. No. 44, May 31, 1945). Facts: 1. Amado Menor, a Filipino citizen, was charged before the People's Court with the crime of treason on five counts set forth in the information. 2. The People's Court found Amado guilty of treason with a mitigating circumstance of lack of information, but his counsel assailed correctness of the judgment of the People's Court by alleging that the evidence adduced by the prosecution does not justify the conviction. 3. The prosecution has established the charge made by the prosecution that Amado, not only adhered to the enemy but with positive acts gave the Japanese aid and comfort in carrying out their plans of destroying the underground resistance movement and thus consolidate their occupation of the country. 4. The evidence submitted by the prosecution that Ernesto Buenviaje, then a guerrilla, has been taken away by Amado Menor and his companions, and when Mercedes Mendiola, the wife, was asked by the prosecution to identify and point out this appellant, she pointed her fingers at Amado Menor. 5. Appellant alleged that when the Japanese conducted the zoning in question, he was forced by them to row their banca which took them to the place of the zoning, but evidence says that this appellant not only rowed the banca for the Japanese, but also took active part in establishing the military cordon and in gathering the inhabitants of the barrio of Tipas Taguig, Rizal in front of the Catholic churchyard and stood guard over the persons who were detained at the seashore in. Issue/s: WON Amado Menor is guilty of treason Ruling: The court ruled in the affirmative. In spite of his alleged forced participation in the execution of the crime charged against him, it is very clear that he voluntarily took part in the conduct of the zoning, and irrespective of whether he took active part in all the overt acts described above, he "assumed full responsibility for all that the party did." The active participation of this appellant in the zoning in question and the subsequent arrest of Ernesto Buenviaje and his disappearance and possible death by killing, undoubtedly constitutes the adherence and giving aid and comfort to the enemy, which constitutes the element of treason under article 114 of the Revised Penal Code. The accused had shown sufficient intelligence to be entrusted with the possession of a revolver, indicating a degree of intelligence and instruction beyond that of persons who are entitled to the benefit of said circumstance. In the case at bar, the acts executed by this appellant show that he is in possession of that degree of intelligence as to have capacitated him to act as an able and efficient informer of the Japanese who were bent on disrupting and destroying the guerrilla underground movement which was the main obstacle to the accomplishment of the occupation of these Islands. The subservience of this defendant, and his comembers of the Makapili, and those of his ilk, no doubt greatly enhanced the chances of the Japanese to carry out their plan of domination of the Philippines through the aid and cooperation of Filipinos who played traitors to their country. The trial court did not state the reason for the consideration of the circumstance in question, and we are more inclined to think that in this particular instance the mitigating circumstance of lack of instruction should not be entertained. [Elements of Treason Art 114: 1. The offender is a Filipino Citizen or an alien residing in the Philippines 2. There is war in which the Philippines is involved 3. The offender either levies war against the Government or adheres to the enemies giving them aid or comfort.] Fallo: Judgment is affirmed. Case Title: People vs. Villanueva, GR No: G.R. No. L-9529 Date decided: 30 August 1958 Syllabi: Art. 114 – Treason FACTS: 1. During the Japanese occupation, appellant Pedro T. Villanueva, a Filipino citizen owing allegiance to the United States of America and the Commonwealth of the Philippines, gave the enemy aid and comfort by rendering service with the Japanese Imperial Army as secret agent, informer and spy, of its Detective Force in the province of Iloilo, and that in the performance of such service, he participated actively and directly in the punitive expeditions periodically made by the Japanese forces in the guerilla-infested areas of the province of Iloilo, and committed robberies, arson and mass-murders. 2. Witnesses, who themselves were victims of the maltreatment and torture of the Japanese and others who were able to escape the raids made by the Japanese forces with the aid of Villanueva, testified with corroborated statements against the defendant. 3. The defendant denied the overt acts imputed upon him, and avers that if he ever served in the detective force of the Japanese Army, it was because he was made to accept the position under duress, and that his acceptance of such position was for the good of the people, he having saved many Filipino lives from Japanese atrocities. 4. Villanueva was sentenced to death by the People's Court for the crime of treason. The case was elevated to the Tribunal for mandatory review, for judgments of the lower courts imposing death penalties. ISSUE: 1. Whether or not his denials and defense of duress exerted by the Japanese Imperial Army upon him will suffice to exempt him from the crime of treason? RULING: The Court ruled that mere denial by appellant cannot prevail upon the positive assertion and corroboration of the statements of witnesses for the government establishing incriminating facts. It is a well settled rule of evidence that as between positive and negative testimony, the former deserves more weight and credit. With regards to his defense of duress allegedly exerted by the Japanese upon him for which he had to serve in the Detective Force of the Japanese Army, the defendant was not able to present sufficient proof that he was indeed coerced or compelled by the Japanese but merely stated selfserving testimonies. Duress, force, fear or intimidation to be available as a defense, the fear must be well-founded, an immediate and actual danger of death or great bodily harm must be present and the compulsion must be of such a character as to leave no opportunity to accused for escape or self-defense in equal combat. A threat of future injury is not enough. Hence, the decision of the lower court was affirmed with modifications on the indemnities imposed and that the penalty of death be commuted to reclusion perpetua due to lack of sufficient votes to impose the justifiable penalty of death. Case Title: People vs Lol-lo GR No: GR No. 17958 Date decided: February 27, 1922 Syllabi: Art. 122 Piracy Facts: 1. On or about June 30, 1920, two boats left matuta, a Dutch possession, for Peta, another Dutch possession. In one of the boats was one individual, a Dutch subject, and in the other boat eleven men, women, and children, likewise subjects of Holland. After a number of days of navigation, at about 7 o'clock in the evening, the second boat arrived between the Islands of Buang and Bukid in the Dutch East Indies. There the boat was surrounded by six vintas manned by twenty-four Moros all armed. 2. The Moros first asked for food, but once on the Dutch boat, too for themselves all of the cargo, attacked some of the men, and brutally violated two of the women by methods too horrible to the described. All of the persons on the Dutch boat, with the exception of the two young women, were again placed on it and holes were made in it, the idea that it would submerge, although as a matter of fact, these people, after eleven days of hardship and privation, were succored violating them, the Moros finally arrived at Maruro, a Dutch possession. Two of the Moro marauders were Lol-lo, who also raped one of the women, and Saraw. At Maruro the two women were able to escape. Issue: 1. W/N the appellants are guilty of piracy, 2. W/N the Philippine courts has jurisdiction over the case. Held: 1. Yes. The proven facts are not disputed. All of the elements of the crime of piracy are present. Piracy is robbery or forcible depredation on the high seas, without lawful authority and done animo furandi, and in the spirit and intention of universal hostility. 2. Yes. It cannot be contended with any degree of force as was done in the lower court and as is again done in this court, that the Court of First Instance was without jurisdiction of the case. Pirates are in law hostes humani generis. Piracy is a crime not against any particular state but against all mankind. It may be punished in the competent tribunal of any country where the offender may be found or into which he may be carried. The jurisdiction of piracy unlike all other crimes has no territorial limits. As it is against all so may it be punished by all. Nor does it matter that the crime was committed within the jurisdictional 3-mile limit of a foreign state, "for those limits, though neutral to war, are not neutral to crimes. Case Title: Southern Hemisphere vs Anti-terrorism Council GR No: 178552 Date decided: October 5, 2010 Syllabi: FACTS: Six petitions were filed challenging the constitutionality of RA 9372, otherwise known as the Human Security Act of 2007 for being intrinsically vague and impermissibly broad. They argue that the definition of the crime of terrorism under RA 9372 in that terms like “widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace” and “coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand” are nebulous, leaving law enforcement agencies with no standard to measure the prohibited acts. ISSUE: Whether or not the doctrines of void-for-vagueness and overbreadth finds application in RA9372? RULING: No, it does not. A facial invalidation of a statute is allowed only in free speech cases, wherein certain rules of constitutional litigation are rightly excepted. RA 9372 regulates conduct, not speech. Criminal statutes have general in terrorem effect resulting from their very existence, and, if facial challenge is allowed for this reason alone, the State may well be prevented from enacting laws against socially harmful conduct. In the area of criminal law, the law cannot take chances as in the area of free speech. The overbreadth and vagueness doctrines then have special application only to free speech cases. They are inapt for testing the validity of penal statutes.
