Total Extinction

Marriage between the Offender and the Offended Party | Total Extinction | Extinction of Criminal Liability | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

DISCLAIMER: The following discussion is a general, academic exposition on Philippine criminal law as of this writing. It does not constitute legal advice. For specific cases or legal queries, please consult a qualified attorney.

Marriage Between the Offender and the Offended Party as a Mode of Extinguishing Criminal Liability

Under Philippine law, particularly the Revised Penal Code (RPC), there are specific instances where a subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the offended party can totally extinguish criminal liability. This doctrine historically appears in crimes involving violations of chastity—where the law (in its older formulation) allowed the possibility that the offender’s marriage to the offended woman would “heal the injury” and preserve her honor, thereby rendering criminal liability moot.

However, over the years (especially after the enactment of R.A. No. 8353, the Anti-Rape Law of 1997), the scope and application of this rule have been substantially modified. Below is a meticulous breakdown of what every law student or practitioner should know:

1. Statutory Basis in the Revised Penal Code

  1. Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code (Old Rule)

    • Historically, Article 344 governed the prosecution of crimes of adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape, and acts of lasciviousness.
    • An important (old) provision stated that the subsequent marriage between the offender and the offended party extinguished the criminal action or penalty for specific crimes (traditionally, seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness, and under older rules—rape).
    • This rule extended not only to the principal offender but also to any co-principals, accomplices, or accessories.

  2. Crimes Traditionally Covered by “Marriage Extinguishment”

    • Seduction (e.g., Qualified Seduction under Article 337 and Simple Seduction under Article 338)
    • Abduction (e.g., Forcible Abduction under Article 342 and Consented Abduction under Article 343)
    • Acts of Lasciviousness (Article 336)
    • Rape under the old classification (pre-1997) was also deemed extinguished by a valid subsequent marriage, again based on the text of the older Article 344.

  3. Reasoning Behind the Rule

    • The original rationale was the perceived “reparation” of the damage to the offended party’s honor. The law presumed that once the offended woman chose to marry her offender, the moral and civil injuries were (in the eyes of outdated legal policy) rectified.

2. Modification Under the Anti-Rape Law of 1997 (R.A. No. 8353)

When R.A. No. 8353 took effect, it reclassified rape from being a “crime against chastity” to a “crime against persons.” This change significantly affected how rape cases are prosecuted and the remedies available to the offended party:

  1. Rape as a Public Crime

    • Under the new law, rape ceased to be a private crime purely at the instance of the offended party. Instead, it became a crime prosecutable in a manner more akin to other crimes against persons.
    • This meant that the old rule—where the marriage between the offender and the offended party automatically extinguished the criminal liability for rape—no longer generally applies.

  2. Article 266-C (Effect of Pardon or Forgiveness)

    • After R.A. No. 8353, the text of the law concerning the effect of marriage or pardon in rape cases changed.
    • The law (and subsequent jurisprudence) clarifies that subsequent marriage does not automatically extinguish criminal liability for rape as it did under older versions of the RPC.
    • Where once a marriage could bar or extinguish a rape prosecution outright, now the crime is treated primarily as an offense against the State.

  3. Practical Effect

    • In real terms, a perpetrator cannot evade criminal responsibility for rape solely by marrying the victim after the fact.
    • Courts and prosecutors generally proceed with the case unless there is a separate legal ground (such as the complete recantation of the victim leading to evidentiary issues, or other reasons recognized by law). But the mere fact of marriage is no longer the blanket remedy it once was.

3. Crimes Still Covered by the Extinguishment Rule

Even though the “marriage extinguishment” rule underwent drastic revision concerning rape, it still applies to seduction, abduction, and acts of lasciviousness under the RPC, subject to certain requirements:

  1. Which Specific Offenses?

    • Qualified Seduction (Article 337)
    • Simple Seduction (Article 338)
    • Forcible Abduction (Article 342)
    • Consented Abduction (Article 343)
    • Acts of Lasciviousness (Article 336)

  2. Requirements for a Valid Extinguishment

    • Valid Subsequent Marriage: The marriage must be valid under civil law (i.e., there must be no legal impediments such as minority without parental consent, lack of marriage license, bigamy, etc.).
    • No Vitiation of Consent: The marriage must not be procured by force, intimidation, or fraud. A sham or coerced marriage may be declared void and thus would not produce the legal effect of extinguishing liability.
    • Timing: The marriage must occur after the commission of the crime but can occur before final conviction or even after conviction if an appeal is pending (subject to debates in some jurisprudence).
    • Extends to Co-Accused: Under Article 344’s traditional rule, when the principal offender marries the offended party, the criminal liability of co-principals, accomplices, or accessories is likewise extinguished.

  3. Practical and Policy Considerations

    • The theory that “honor is restored” upon marriage is widely seen as archaic. Nonetheless, unless amended by Congress, the text remains in effect for seduction, abduction, and acts of lasciviousness.
    • In actual practice, courts scrutinize the validity of the marriage to ensure it is not merely a means to evade punishment.

4. Effect on Civil Liability

  • Total Extinction of Criminal Liability under the rule of subsequent marriage generally carries with it the extinction of the corresponding civil liability arising from the offense.
  • Note, however, that if the offended party has claims based on other civil causes of action (e.g., independent civil action for damages under the Civil Code), those might still be pursued if based on a separate legal ground. But under the usual understanding, the “civil liability ex delicto” (i.e., the liability to indemnify the victim for the crime) is extinguished.

5. Illustrative Jurisprudence and Points of Caution

  1. Validity is Key
    • Courts have invalidated marriages found to be forced or simulated. In such cases, criminal liability is not extinguished.
  2. No Automatic Mechanism in Rape After RA 8353
    • Several Supreme Court decisions emphasize that the old “automatic extinguishment” in rape cases no longer applies. Rape is now public in nature; the State pursues prosecution notwithstanding the personal relationship between the parties post-fact.
  3. Historical vs. Contemporary Approach
    • Practitioners and students must be aware of the shift in the law. Reading older case law or textbooks might be confusing if they predate R.A. 8353. Always verify if the case or commentary discusses the pre-1997 or post-1997 legal regime for rape.

6. Summary of Key Takeaways

  1. Marriage Still Extinguishes Criminal Liability in:

    • Qualified Seduction,
    • Simple Seduction,
    • Forcible Abduction,
    • Consented Abduction,
    • Acts of Lasciviousness.

  2. Marriage Does Not Extinguish Liability for Rape under current law (post-1997).

  3. Validity of the Marriage must be established:

    • Must comply with the Family Code requirements (e.g., legal capacity of parties, presence of a valid marriage license, authority of solemnizing officer, etc.).
    • Must not be procured by intimidation, fraud, or other means vitiating consent.

  4. Old Reasoning / Public Policy:

    • The law originally aimed to “restore honor” to the offended woman. This rationale has been criticized as outdated but persists in the statutory text for certain private crimes.

  5. Extinction is “Total”:

    • Applies to criminal liability and generally to the civil liability ex delicto.
    • Also extends to co-principals, accomplices, and accessories if the principal marries the offended party.

Final Note

This “marriage-extinguishment” concept under the Revised Penal Code is one of the more controversial remnants of the Philippines’ older penal policy on “crimes against chastity.” While significant reforms (especially for rape) have curtailed its applicability, it still stands for specific crimes of seduction, abduction, and acts of lasciviousness. Practitioners must check subsequent statutes, Supreme Court decisions, and the Family Code provisions on marriage validity to fully assess whether criminal liability can indeed be extinguished by the marriage in a given case.

Should you encounter a real-life scenario involving these provisions, consult a competent legal professional to examine the particular facts, verify the validity of the marriage, and determine the up-to-date jurisprudential stance.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Prescription of Penalties | Total Extinction | Extinction of Criminal Liability | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Prescription of Penalties: Extinction of Criminal Liability under the Revised Penal Code (Book One)

Prescription of Penalties is a mode of extinguishing criminal liability by the lapse of the time prescribed by law for the enforcement or service of a penalty. It operates as a bar to the execution of penalties after a specified period. This doctrine is rooted in the principle of justice and equity, recognizing that the passage of time may diminish the necessity or propriety of enforcement.

Legal Basis

  • Articles 92 to 95 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) provide the specific rules governing the prescription of penalties.
  • It is classified under Total Extinction of Criminal Liability (Article 89), which extinguishes the punishment of a convict entirely.

Prescription Periods for Penalties (Article 92, RPC)

The law specifies distinct prescription periods based on the nature and severity of the penalties:

  1. Death and Reclusion Perpetua (Life Imprisonment)

    • Prescription Period: 20 years
    • Explanation: After 20 years from the finality of the judgment, the State loses the right to enforce these penalties.

  2. Other Afflictive Penalties (e.g., Reclusion Temporal, Perpetual or Temporary Absolute Disqualification, Perpetual or Temporary Special Disqualification, and Prision Mayor)

    • Prescription Period: 15 years
    • These penalties are considered serious but less severe than death or reclusion perpetua.

  3. Correctional Penalties (e.g., Prision Correccional, Arresto Mayor, Suspension, and Destierro)

    • Prescription Period: 10 years, except destierro (5 years)
    • Destierro has a shorter prescription period due to its relatively less severe nature.

  4. Light Penalties (e.g., Arresto Menor)

    • Prescription Period: 1 year
    • These penalties involve minor infractions with less serious consequences.

Commencement of Prescription Period

The period for the prescription of penalties begins to run:

  1. From the date of the finality of judgment; or
  2. If the penalty is not imposed immediately, from the date when the convict evades service of the sentence (e.g., escapes custody or fails to surrender).

Interruptions of Prescription Period

Prescription of penalties is interrupted by:

  1. Service of the penalty - The prescription ceases to run while the convict is serving the penalty.
  2. Commission of another crime - If the offender commits a new crime before the period for the first penalty prescribes, the prescription of the earlier penalty is interrupted.

Key Considerations in the Application

  1. Automatic Extinction:

    • Once the prescription period lapses, the penalty is automatically extinguished. There is no need for a judicial declaration to this effect.

  2. Distinct from Prescription of Crimes:

    • The prescription of penalties deals with the enforcement of penalties after conviction.
    • In contrast, the prescription of crimes under Article 90 pertains to the extinguishment of criminal liability before conviction due to the lapse of time.

  3. Application to Subsidiary Penalties:

    • Subsidiary penalties (e.g., subsidiary imprisonment for failure to pay fines) also prescribe after the period corresponding to their principal penalties.

  4. Circumstances Preventing Prescription:

    • If the convict is outside the jurisdiction of the Philippines and beyond the reach of Philippine authorities, the prescription of the penalty does not run.
    • Absence or concealment acts as a tolling mechanism.

Illustrative Examples

  1. Convict Evades Sentence:
    A convict sentenced to reclusion perpetua escapes after final judgment. If he evades recapture for 20 years, the penalty can no longer be enforced.

  2. Light Penalty (Arresto Menor):
    A person sentenced to 30 days of imprisonment fails to serve the penalty. If authorities do not enforce it within 1 year, the penalty prescribes.

  3. Correctional Penalty (Destierro):
    If a person sentenced to destierro fails to comply and remains undetected for 5 years, enforcement is barred.

Rationale for Prescription of Penalties

  • Equity and Leniency: Recognizes that prolonged non-enforcement diminishes the rehabilitative and deterrent effects of penalties.
  • Judicial Economy: Prevents the endless pursuit of convicts, allowing the State to allocate resources efficiently.
  • Certainty and Finality: Encourages closure and legal stability over time.

By following these rules, the principle of prescription ensures that penalties are enforced fairly and promptly while balancing the rights of the convict against the interests of the State.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Prescription of Crimes [See Periods of Prescription for Violations Penalized by Special Acts, R.A. No. 3326] | Total Extinction | Extinction of Criminal Liability | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Total Extinction

Prescription of Crimes

The prescription of crimes under the Revised Penal Code and special laws involves the lapse of a certain period during which no action is taken against the offender. Once the prescriptive period lapses, the criminal liability is extinguished, and no prosecution can be instituted or continued. This doctrine is founded on the principle that the law encourages vigilance and punishes inaction.

1. Legal Basis

  1. Revised Penal Code (RPC)
    Articles 89 and 91 of the Revised Penal Code outline prescription as one of the grounds for the extinction of criminal liability. Specifically:

    • Article 89 states that criminal liability is extinguished by the prescription of the crime and of the penalty.
    • Article 91 explains when prescription begins to run and when it is interrupted.

  2. R.A. No. 3326 (Act to Establish Periods of Prescription for Violations Penalized by Special Acts and Municipal Ordinances)
    This law governs the prescription of offenses penalized by special laws where the prescriptive periods are not expressly provided.

2. Prescription Under the Revised Penal Code

General Principles

  1. Commencement of Prescription

    • The prescriptive period begins to run from the day the crime is committed unless the crime is subject to specific conditions, such as continuing offenses or conspiracy, where the prescription begins at the conclusion of the crime.
    • For crimes not discovered immediately, prescription begins from the day the crime becomes known to authorities or its injured party.

  2. Interruption of Prescription

    • Prescription is interrupted by the filing of a complaint or information in court. Once interrupted, the prescriptive period resets and does not run anew until the case is dismissed or otherwise terminated without conviction.

Periods of Prescription Under the RPC

  • Crimes punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or reclusion temporal: 20 years.
  • Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties: 15 years.
  • Crimes punishable by correctional penalties: 10 years.
  • Crimes punishable by arresto mayor: 5 years.
  • Libel and similar offenses: 1 year.
  • Oral defamation and slander by deed: 6 months.
  • Light offenses: 2 months.

3. Prescription Under R.A. No. 3326

Applicability

  • R.A. No. 3326 governs the prescription of crimes penalized under special laws, municipal ordinances, and administrative regulations unless the specific law provides otherwise.

Periods of Prescription Under R.A. No. 3326

  • Offenses punished by imprisonment of 6 years or more: 12 years.
  • Offenses punished by imprisonment of less than 6 years: 5 years.
  • Offenses punishable by fine only or an equivalent penalty: 1 year.

Commencement and Interruption

  1. Commencement
    • The prescriptive period starts from the day of the commission of the violation or, for continuing offenses, from the day it ceases.
  2. Interruption
    • Similar to the RPC, prescription is interrupted by the filing of a judicial or administrative complaint. Interruption ceases once the case is dismissed without final judgment.

4. Judicial and Doctrinal Guidelines

  1. Crimes Not Subject to Prescription

    • Certain crimes are imprescriptible due to their grave nature or international conventions, such as:
      • Crimes against humanity.
      • War crimes.
      • Genocide.
      • Treason (Article 114, RPC).

  2. Continuing Crimes

    • For continuing crimes like kidnapping, prescription begins to run only from the cessation of the unlawful act.

  3. Discovery Rule

    • For certain offenses, particularly those involving fraud or concealment, courts may apply the discovery rule, where prescription begins to run from the time the offense is discovered.

  4. Amendments or Revisions

    • Legislative amendments may alter the prescriptive period, but these typically do not apply retroactively unless they are favorable to the accused (Article 22, RPC).

5. Key Jurisprudence

  1. People v. Tayco

    • The Supreme Court held that the filing of a complaint in the fiscal’s office interrupts the running of the prescriptive period, emphasizing the importance of initiating legal action promptly.

  2. People v. Sandiganbayan

    • Clarified the rules on prescription for offenses penalized under special laws and reiterated the applicability of R.A. No. 3326.

  3. Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan

    • The Court emphasized that prescription serves to penalize inaction, prevent stale claims, and encourage diligence in prosecuting offenses.

  4. Ladlad v. Velasco

    • Discussed the impact of prescription on political crimes and reiterated that no prosecution can be commenced after the prescriptive period lapses.

6. Summary

  • Prescription of crimes extinguishes criminal liability after the lapse of the prescribed period unless interrupted.
  • The prescriptive period is longer for graver offenses and shorter for light offenses.
  • R.A. No. 3326 supplements the RPC by providing prescriptive periods for crimes under special laws.
  • Timeliness in filing complaints is critical to ensuring prosecution and preventing dismissal due to prescription.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Absolute Pardon | Total Extinction | Extinction of Criminal Liability | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Absolute Pardon under Criminal Law

Absolute pardon refers to the complete and unconditional forgiveness granted by the Chief Executive (President in the Philippines) to a person convicted of a crime. It is a sovereign act of mercy that totally extinguishes the criminal liability of the offender. This form of pardon is explicitly provided for under Article VII, Section 19 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which grants the President the exclusive power to grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons, and remit fines and forfeitures, after conviction by final judgment, except in cases of impeachment.

Key Features of Absolute Pardon

  1. Nature and Effect:

    • Absolute pardon erases the effects of the conviction, including the principal penalty and accessory penalties.
    • It restores the individual’s civil and political rights, such as the right to vote and the right to hold public office, unless the pardon explicitly states otherwise.

  2. Scope of Coverage:

    • It applies only after final judgment. An absolute pardon cannot be granted to a person whose case is still pending in court or where judgment is not yet final.
    • It covers the total extinction of criminal liability, including imprisonment and fines.

  3. Conditions:

    • Unlike conditional pardon, absolute pardon is not subject to any conditions. It is unconditional and irrevocable once granted.
    • There are no further obligations imposed on the grantee after its issuance.

  4. Purpose:

    • It serves as a measure of grace to alleviate the harshness of the law when justice, equity, or compassion demands it.
    • It is often granted in cases of wrongful conviction, extraordinary rehabilitation, or acts of exceptional public service by the offender after serving the sentence.

Effects of Absolute Pardon

  1. On Civil Rights:

    • Absolute pardon restores civil rights forfeited as a result of the conviction, such as:
      • The right to vote (disenfranchisement due to conviction is lifted).
      • The right to hold public office.
      • The right to practice a profession (e.g., the practice of law for lawyers).

  2. On Criminal Records:

    • While absolute pardon extinguishes criminal liability, it does not necessarily erase the record of conviction. The pardon does not operate as an acquittal or expunction of criminal records unless explicitly stated by law.

  3. On Pending Civil Liabilities:

    • The pardon does not affect the offender’s civil liabilities arising from the offense (e.g., indemnity, restitution, or damages to the aggrieved party).

  4. On Employment Disqualification:

    • A person who has been absolutely pardoned is no longer disqualified from seeking employment in government or private sectors, unless otherwise specified in the pardon.

Distinction from Conditional Pardon

Absolute Pardon Conditional Pardon
Total extinction of criminal liability. Partial extinction of criminal liability.
No conditions imposed on the grantee. Subject to compliance with conditions.
Irrevocable once granted. Revocable if conditions are violated.
Restores all civil and political rights. May not necessarily restore all rights.

Legal and Practical Considerations

  1. Authority to Grant:

    • The President exercises discretion in granting absolute pardon, subject to procedural guidelines set forth by the Board of Pardons and Parole (BPP).

  2. Application Process:

    • The convicted individual or a representative submits an application for pardon to the BPP.
    • The BPP evaluates the application based on factors such as:
      • Nature and gravity of the offense.
      • Conduct of the offender while serving the sentence.
      • Time served and evidence of rehabilitation.
    • The BPP makes a recommendation to the President, who has the final say.

  3. Impeachment Exception:

    • Absolute pardon cannot be granted in cases of impeachment. Public officials removed by impeachment cannot be pardoned for offenses related to their impeachment.

  4. Judicial Review:

    • The grant of absolute pardon is generally not subject to judicial review, being a political question. Courts cannot question the wisdom or propriety of the President’s exercise of this power.

Relevant Jurisprudence

  1. Monsanto v. Factoran Jr. (G.R. No. 78239, February 9, 1989):

    • Absolute pardon obliterates the conviction and restores the grantee to full civil and political rights.
    • However, it does not automatically entitle the pardoned individual to reinstatement to a former position or employment.

  2. In Re: Lontok (43 Phil. 293):

    • Absolute pardon restores the capacity to practice a profession but does not nullify the conviction itself. The record of conviction may still stand.

  3. Garcia v. Chairman, COA (G.R. No. 75050, January 30, 1989):

    • Pardon does not absolve a public officer of administrative liabilities unless explicitly stated in the pardon.

  4. People v. Salle (G.R. No. 103567, May 28, 1993):

    • Pardon granted after conviction does not preclude the court from imposing civil liability related to the crime.

Practical Applications

  • Rehabilitation of Offenders: Absolute pardon provides an opportunity for reformed individuals to reintegrate into society without the stigma of their conviction.
  • Political Implications: It is sometimes used for political reconciliation or to address historical injustices.
  • Presidential Discretion: While its use is subject to abuse, the constitutional mandate ensures the exclusivity of this power to the Executive.

Absolute pardon is a profound expression of mercy and justice, balancing the rigidity of the law with compassion and equity. Its proper exercise reflects the society’s commitment to rehabilitation and the reintegration of individuals into the community.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Amnesty | Total Extinction | Extinction of Criminal Liability | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Amnesty under Criminal Law: Total Extinction of Criminal Liability

Amnesty is a constitutional act of sovereign grace by which the State obliterates the criminal liability of individuals or classes of individuals for specific offenses. It is a mode of total extinction of criminal liability provided under the Revised Penal Code (RPC) of the Philippines.

Legal Basis

  1. Constitutional Provision:

    • Article VII, Section 19 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution empowers the President to grant amnesty with the concurrence of a majority of all members of Congress.

  2. Revised Penal Code:

    • Amnesty is categorized under Article 89 of the RPC, which lists the grounds for the total extinction of criminal liability.

Characteristics of Amnesty

  1. Public Act:

    • Unlike a pardon, which is a private act affecting an individual, amnesty is a public act of the State, typically issued through a proclamation.

  2. Retroactive Application:

    • Amnesty has a retroactive effect, effectively extinguishing the criminal liability for acts committed prior to its issuance.

  3. Political Nature:

    • Amnesty is generally granted for political offenses, such as rebellion, sedition, or treason, often as part of national reconciliation efforts.

  4. Scope and Coverage:

    • It is often granted to classes or groups of individuals (e.g., insurgents) rather than to specific individuals.

  5. Requires Congressional Concurrence:

    • The President cannot unilaterally grant amnesty; it requires the approval of a majority of all members of Congress.

Process of Granting Amnesty

  1. Presidential Proclamation:

    • The President issues a proclamation specifying the terms, conditions, and scope of the amnesty.

  2. Congressional Concurrence:

    • A majority of all members of Congress must approve the proclamation.

  3. Application for Amnesty:

    • Persons covered by the proclamation must file a formal application for amnesty before the designated authority or committee within the specified period.

  4. Determination of Qualification:

    • A designated body, such as the Amnesty Commission, reviews applications to determine whether the applicant qualifies under the terms of the proclamation.

  5. Effect of Grant:

    • Upon approval of the application, the criminal liability for the specified offense is extinguished.

Distinction Between Amnesty and Pardon

Feature Amnesty Pardon
Nature Public act; addresses groups or classes. Private act; addresses individuals.
Concurrence Requires Congressional concurrence. Solely the President's prerogative.
Effect Extinguishes both criminal liability and penalties. Extinguishes penalties but not criminal liability.
Application Retroactive. Prospective.
Scope Generally for political offenses. Covers all types of offenses.

Effects of Amnesty

  1. Total Extinction of Criminal Liability:

    • Both the criminal liability and its associated penalties are extinguished.

  2. Restoration of Civil Rights:

    • Civil rights and political privileges that may have been forfeited due to conviction are restored.

  3. Non-Inclusion in Criminal Records:

    • Acts covered by amnesty are obliterated from the criminal records of the grantee.

Limitations of Amnesty

  1. Scope Defined by Proclamation:

    • Amnesty only covers offenses explicitly enumerated in the proclamation.

  2. No Application to Civil Liability:

    • While criminal liability is extinguished, civil liability (e.g., for damages) remains unless explicitly stated in the proclamation.

  3. No Automatic Coverage:

    • Individuals must apply for amnesty within the prescribed period and comply with the conditions.

Relevant Jurisprudence

  1. People v. Vera (65 Phil. 56):

    • Defined amnesty as an act of oblivion or forgetfulness of past acts, granted by the government for political offenses.

  2. Barrioquinto v. Fernandez (82 Phil. 642):

    • Distinguished between pardon and amnesty, emphasizing that amnesty obliterates the offense itself.

  3. Monsanto v. Factoran (G.R. No. 78239, 1989):

    • Held that while amnesty removes the criminal liability, it does not automatically erase civil liability unless explicitly stated.

Practical Applications

Amnesty is often granted in the context of:

  • Peace negotiations with rebel groups (e.g., NPA, MNLF, MILF).
  • Post-conflict reconciliation and reintegration.
  • Transitional justice in the aftermath of political upheavals.

Conclusion

Amnesty is a powerful tool for the State to promote reconciliation, peace, and national unity. Its retroactive effect and broad coverage make it a distinct mechanism for extinguishing criminal liability, subject to clear procedural and constitutional safeguards.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Service of Sentence | Total Extinction | Extinction of Criminal Liability | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

CRIMINAL LAW > II. REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE > G. Extinction of Criminal Liability > 1. Total Extinction > b. Service of Sentence

Under the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, criminal liability is extinguished in various ways, including through the service of sentence. This section provides a comprehensive discussion on the rules, principles, and nuances involved.

1. Legal Basis

The service of sentence as a mode of extinguishing criminal liability is primarily governed by Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code, which lists the causes for the total extinction of criminal liability. The specific provision addressing service of sentence is grounded in the idea that once the offender has fully served the penalty imposed by the court, their criminal liability is considered extinguished.

2. Concept and Nature of Service of Sentence

The service of sentence involves the actual compliance of the convict with the penalty imposed by final judgment. It reflects the fulfillment of the punishment required by the state as retribution for the crime committed.

Key elements include:

  • Finality of Judgment: The judgment of conviction must be final and executory.
  • Actual Compliance: The convict must undergo the penalty in accordance with the law, whether it involves imprisonment, fines, or other forms of penalty.

3. Modes of Service of Sentence

Service of sentence depends on the type of penalty imposed:

A. For Deprivation of Liberty (e.g., Reclusion Perpetua, Reclusion Temporal, Prision Mayor, Prision Correccional, Arresto Mayor, Arresto Menor):

  • The convict serves the sentence in a penal institution designated by the Bureau of Corrections (for penalties exceeding three years) or the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (for penalties three years or below).
  • Service must adhere strictly to the period and conditions imposed by the judgment.
  • Reduction of Penalty: Time served may be reduced by:
    • Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA): Under Republic Act No. 10592, convicts exhibiting good behavior may earn deductions from their sentence.
    • Preventive Imprisonment Deduction: Under Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code, preventive imprisonment is credited toward the service of the sentence.

B. For Pecuniary Penalties (e.g., Fines, Indemnities, Restitution):

  • Criminal liability is extinguished upon full payment of the amount specified in the judgment.
  • If the convict cannot pay the fine, subsidiary imprisonment may be imposed as provided under Article 39 of the Revised Penal Code.

C. For Accessory Penalties (e.g., civil interdiction, suspension of political rights):

  • Accessory penalties are served automatically as a consequence of the principal penalty unless otherwise commuted or pardoned.

D. For Penalties Involving Death:

  • The penalty of death has been abolished under Republic Act No. 9346. Sentences of death were commuted to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole.

4. Effects of Compliance

The full service of a sentence results in the total extinction of criminal liability for the crime committed. The convict is restored to the same status as before the conviction, subject to the following:

  • Restoration of Civil Rights: Political and civil rights forfeited as a result of conviction are automatically restored upon the service of sentence, except for disqualifications expressly imposed by law (e.g., perpetual absolute disqualification under certain penalties).
  • Retention of Criminal Record: Although liability is extinguished, the criminal record remains unless expunged by law, such as through an executive clemency or judicial expungement.

5. Special Considerations

A. Effect of Escapes and Evasion

  • If a convict escapes or evades service of sentence, criminal liability is not extinguished. The computation of service of sentence is suspended during the period of evasion.
  • Article 157 penalizes an escaped convict, while the service of the original penalty resumes upon recapture.

B. Amnesty and Pardon

  • Service of sentence may be shortened by pardon or amnesty.
    • A pardon (executive clemency) does not erase criminal records unless expressly stated.
    • Amnesty extinguishes both the crime and the penalty, retroactively wiping out criminal liability.

C. Application of GCTA and Preventive Imprisonment

  • Deductions from the sentence under GCTA and preventive imprisonment are subject to the convict's good behavior and compliance with prison rules.
  • GCTA reforms (Republic Act No. 10592) emphasize rehabilitation and reintegration but have faced legal scrutiny regarding eligibility for heinous crimes.

6. Jurisprudence

Key Cases:

  • People v. Ducosin (59 Phil. 109): Emphasized that service of sentence extinguishes the criminal liability of the offender completely.
  • Guevarra v. Court of Appeals (211 SCRA 361): Clarified that failure to comply with the specific terms of the penalty may delay the extinction of criminal liability.
  • Baylon v. Fact-Finding Commission (G.R. No. 114732): Highlighted the conditions for crediting preventive imprisonment and good conduct time.

7. Conclusion

Service of sentence remains a critical mode of extinguishing criminal liability under Philippine criminal law. It serves as the state's mechanism for ensuring justice, rehabilitation, and accountability. The full execution of the penalty ensures the restoration of social order, while mechanisms like GCTA and pardon reflect the law's recognition of reformative justice.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Death of Convict | Total Extinction | Extinction of Criminal Liability | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Extinction of Criminal Liability: Death of the Convict

The death of a convict leads to the total extinction of criminal liability as provided under Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) of the Philippines. Below is a meticulous and detailed explanation of the principles, legal consequences, and exceptions related to this provision.

I. Legal Basis: Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code

Under Article 89, criminal liability is totally extinguished by:

  1. The death of the convict, as to personal penalties and pecuniary penalties (except civil liabilities).

II. Effects of Death on Criminal Liability

  1. Personal Penalties

    • All personal penalties are extinguished upon the death of the convict.
    • Examples include:
      • Imprisonment.
      • Destierro (banishment).
      • Death penalty (if not yet executed before abolition).

  2. Pecuniary Penalties

    • Pecuniary penalties such as fines are also extinguished, except when they form part of a civil liability.

  3. Civil Liabilities

    • The death of the convict does not extinguish civil liability unless:
      • The obligation is purely personal and cannot survive the person.
      • Specific laws provide otherwise.

III. Civil Liabilities After Death

  1. General Rule

    • Civil liabilities survive the death of the convict and may be pursued against the convict's estate.
    • Example: Payment for damages to the victim of the crime.

  2. Exceptions

    • If the action is personal in nature (e.g., obligations that arise from contracts involving personal skill or confidence), the liability is extinguished.
    • If the civil action is deemed to abate due to the nature of the claim.

IV. Death During Appeal

The rules regarding the effect of a convict’s death during the pendency of an appeal are particularly nuanced.

  1. General Rule: Abatement of Criminal Action

    • If the convict dies while the appeal of their conviction is pending, both the criminal and civil actions are extinguished. This is based on the doctrine that death deprives the court of jurisdiction over the person of the accused.

  2. Effect on Civil Liability

    • The independent civil action based on sources other than the act constituting the offense may survive. These include:
      • Quasi-delicts under Article 2176 of the Civil Code.
      • Contractual obligations.

V. Death After Final Judgment

  1. Criminal Liability

    • If the convict dies after the judgment becomes final, the penalty imposed is extinguished.

  2. Civil Liability

    • Civil liability adjudicated in the final judgment survives and may be enforced against the estate.

VI. Relevant Jurisprudence

  1. People v. Bayotas (G.R. No. 102007, September 2, 1994)

    • The Supreme Court clarified the rule that the death of the accused extinguishes both the criminal liability and civil liability based solely on the crime, provided the appeal is pending. Independent civil actions remain unaffected.

  2. People v. Saligan (G.R. No. 237761, July 27, 2021)

    • The Court reiterated that death of the convict during appeal renders the judgment ineffectual as if no charge was ever filed.

VII. Summary of Effects

Scenario Criminal Liability Civil Liability
Death before filing of charges No liability arises No liability arises
Death during trial Extinguished May survive if independent
Death during appeal Extinguished Extinguished (if based on crime)
Death after final judgment Extinguished Survives against estate

VIII. Procedural Implications

  1. For Pending Cases

    • The court must order the dismissal of the criminal case due to the death of the accused.
    • The public prosecutor may pursue independent civil actions, if any.

  2. For Final Judgments

    • Execution of civil liability must be filed against the estate in the proper probate court.

IX. Exceptions in Special Penal Laws

Some special penal laws may include provisions altering the general rule under Article 89. However, these must be specifically provided by the statute and are strictly construed.

X. Practical Considerations

  1. Notification

    • The death of the convict must be properly notified to the court to facilitate the extinction of liability.

  2. Estate Proceedings

    • Civil actions posthumously pursued must adhere to the procedural rules for claims against an estate under the Rules of Court.

  3. Claims Hierarchy

    • Claims arising from civil liability based on the crime are subordinate to statutory priorities in estate distribution (e.g., funeral expenses, debts).

This comprehensive treatment encapsulates all significant aspects of the extinction of criminal liability due to the death of the convict under Philippine criminal law.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Total Extinction | Extinction of Criminal Liability | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Extinction of Criminal Liability under the Revised Penal Code – Book One

Total Extinction of Criminal Liability

The extinction of criminal liability refers to the cessation of a person's responsibility to serve penalties or undergo punishment prescribed by law due to certain legal causes. Total extinction of criminal liability completely absolves the offender from the legal effects of their crime, including any criminal penalties and, in some cases, civil liability arising from the offense.

Below are the key provisions and principles governing total extinction of criminal liability under the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines:

I. Legal Grounds for Total Extinction of Criminal Liability

1. Death of the Offender

  • Article 89, Paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code explicitly provides that the death of the offender extinguishes criminal liability.
  • Rationale: The state loses its authority to impose punishment upon the offender because penalties are personal in nature.
  • Effects:
    • Criminal liability is completely extinguished.
    • Civil liability arising from criminal offenses is extinguished if it is solely based on the crime (ex delicto). However, civil liabilities arising from other legal sources (e.g., quasi-delict or contract) may still be pursued.

2. Service of Sentence

  • Article 89, Paragraph 2 states that the completion of a penalty imposed extinguishes criminal liability.
  • Rationale: Once the offender has served the penalty imposed by the court, no further punishment can be imposed.
  • Note: The proper execution of the sentence includes compliance with all conditions (e.g., parole or probation terms).

3. Amnesty

  • Article 89, Paragraph 3 provides that amnesty, as an act of the sovereign state, extinguishes criminal liability for offenses to which it applies.
  • Scope and Nature:
    • Amnesty is a public act generally granted to classes of persons guilty of political or related crimes (e.g., rebellion, sedition, treason).
    • It requires a proclamation by the President and concurrence by Congress (Article VII, Section 19, 1987 Constitution).
    • Amnesty erases the criminal act itself, as if the offense was never committed.

4. Absolute Pardon

  • Article 89, Paragraph 4 provides that a pardon granted by the President extinguishes criminal liability, but only if it is absolute.
  • Key Features:
    • Absolute Pardon: A complete remission of the penalty imposed by the court.
    • Conditional Pardon: If the pardon is conditional, the liability is not fully extinguished unless the conditions are fulfilled.
  • Limitations:
    • Pardon does not absolve civil liability unless expressly stated.
    • It does not restore public office, the right to suffrage, or other rights lost due to conviction unless specifically included in the pardon.

5. Prescription of Crime

  • Article 89, Paragraph 5 states that the prescription of the crime extinguishes criminal liability.
  • Definition: The lapse of the statutory period within which a criminal case may be filed results in the loss of the state’s right to prosecute.
  • Prescriptive Periods:
    • Crimes punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or reclusion temporal: 20 years.
    • Afflictive penalties: 15 years.
    • Correctional penalties: 10 years.
    • Light offenses: 2 months.
  • Commencement of Prescription: The period begins from the day the crime was committed unless otherwise provided by law.
  • Interruption: The filing of a complaint or information interrupts the prescriptive period.

6. Prescription of Penalty

  • Article 89, Paragraph 6 provides that the prescription of penalties extinguishes criminal liability.
  • Definition: The lapse of the statutory period within which a penalty may be enforced results in the loss of the right to execute judgment.
  • Prescriptive Periods:
    • Death and reclusion perpetua: 20 years.
    • Afflictive penalties: 15 years.
    • Correctional penalties: 10 years.
    • Light penalties: 1 year.
  • Commencement: The prescription starts from the date the judgment of conviction becomes final.

7. Marriage of the Offended Party (in Certain Cases)

  • Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code provides that the marriage of the offended party in crimes against chastity (e.g., adultery, concubinage, acts of lasciviousness, seduction, abduction, or rape) extinguishes criminal liability.
  • Effect:
    • The offender’s criminal liability is extinguished because the law considers marriage as an act that repairs the damage caused by the crime.

II. Effects of Total Extinction of Criminal Liability

  1. Criminal Penalty

    • Completely extinguished, whether the penalty has been partially or fully served.

  2. Civil Liability

    • Extinguished only if the civil liability arises solely from the offense (ex delicto).
    • Civil liabilities based on other legal grounds (e.g., contract, quasi-delict) remain enforceable.

  3. Ancillary Penalties

    • Removal of accessory penalties (e.g., disqualification from public office) depends on whether explicitly restored by an amnesty or pardon.

III. Judicial Interpretation and Key Jurisprudence

  1. Death Extinguishes Criminal Liability:

    • People v. Bayotas (G.R. No. 102007): The Supreme Court ruled that the death of the accused extinguishes both the criminal and civil liability ex delicto, but not the civil liability based on other sources of obligation.

  2. Pardon Does Not Extinguish Civil Liability:

    • Monsanto v. Factoran (G.R. No. 78239): A presidential pardon does not automatically restore rights or extinguish civil liability unless explicitly stated.

  3. Amnesty Erases the Crime:

    • Barrioquinto v. Fernandez (G.R. No. L-1278): Amnesty not only extinguishes criminal liability but treats the crime as if it never occurred.

IV. Conclusion

Total extinction of criminal liability under the Revised Penal Code involves mechanisms designed to balance justice and clemency. It is primarily grounded on the idea that certain circumstances, whether natural (e.g., death) or legal (e.g., amnesty, pardon), render further punishment unnecessary or impossible. While criminal liability is extinguished in totality, the effect on civil liability varies depending on the nature of the obligation, ensuring the preservation of private rights.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login