Commutation of Sentence | Partial Extinction | Extinction of Criminal Liability | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Criminal Law: Partial Extinction of Criminal Liability – Commutation of Sentence

---

Commutation of Sentence refers to the reduction of the penalty imposed on a convicted individual by the Chief Executive (President of the Philippines). It is a form of executive clemency provided under the Constitution and pertinent laws.

Legal Basis

1. 1987 Constitution of the Philippines

   • Article VII, Section 19: "Except in cases of impeachment, or as otherwise provided in this Constitution, the President may grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons, and remit fines and forfeitures, after conviction by final judgment."

2. Revised Penal Code (RPC)

   • Article 94: Commutation of the sentence is one of the recognized modes of extinguishing criminal liability partially.

3. Rules of Court

   • Rule 120, Section 17: Once the judgment of conviction becomes final, it can only be modified by specific legal mechanisms, including commutation.

4. Revised Administrative Code of 1987

   • Book III, Title I, Chapter 5, Section 17: Provides for the powers of the President, including granting clemency.

5. Administrative and Executive Issuances

   • Guidelines and procedures for commutation are further detailed in executive orders, Department of Justice (DOJ) circulars, and related issuances.

---

Nature and Purpose

1. Definition:

   • Commutation of sentence refers to the reduction of a sentence imposed by the court, either in terms of duration or severity, through the exercise of executive clemency.

2. Purpose:

   • It seeks to alleviate the harshness of the penalty for reasons of justice, equity, or humanitarian considerations.
   • Provides a second chance to deserving individuals based on good behavior, rehabilitation, or other exceptional circumstances.

---

Process of Commutation

1. Initiation:

   • The application for commutation is typically initiated by the convicted person, their family, or legal counsel. It may also be recommended by concerned agencies, such as:
     • Board of Pardons and Parole (BPP)
     • Department of Justice (DOJ)

2. Preliminary Steps:

   • Submission of Application: The convicted individual must submit a formal application to the BPP.
   • Documentation Requirements: Includes the court decision, proof of good behavior, and certifications of rehabilitation.
   • Recommendation Process: The BPP evaluates the application and submits its recommendation to the President.

3. Evaluation Factors:

   • Nature and gravity of the offense.
   • Behavior of the convicted individual while serving the sentence.
   • Time already served.
   • Circumstances surrounding the commission of the offense.
   • Public interest and the impact on victims.

4. Presidential Action:

   • The President exercises discretion in granting commutation and is not bound by the BPP's recommendation.
   • The commutation order, once issued, modifies the sentence as prescribed.

---

Limitations and Conditions

1. Discretionary Power of the President:

   • The President's power to commute sentences is plenary and cannot be compelled or questioned.

2. Final Judgment Requirement:

   • Commutation applies only after the conviction has become final and executory.

3. Exclusions:

   • Impeachment cases and electoral offenses under specific laws may not be subject to commutation.
   • Sentences for crimes considered heinous may undergo stricter scrutiny.

4. Conditions for Commutation:

   • May include parole eligibility after serving a reduced portion of the sentence.
   • Conditions imposed must be reasonable and within the scope of the law.

---

Distinctions from Other Forms of Clemency

1. Pardon:

   • Absolute pardon completely extinguishes the criminal liability, while commutation only reduces the penalty.
   • Commutation does not restore civil rights unless explicitly stated.

2. Parole:

   • Parole is conditional release before the full sentence is served, whereas commutation modifies the penalty itself.

3. Amnesty:

   • Amnesty applies to a class of persons for political offenses and obliterates the offense itself, unlike commutation, which applies only to an individual's penalty.

---

Effects of Commutation

1. Partial Extinction of Criminal Liability:

   • The original sentence is replaced or reduced in accordance with the commutation order.
   • Civil liability arising from the crime remains enforceable unless explicitly remitted.

2. No Automatic Restoration of Civil Rights:

   • The commuted individual may still need to undergo separate processes for the restoration of civil rights.

3. Finality:

   • The commutation order, once granted, is irrevocable and binding.

---

Relevant Jurisprudence

1. People v. Vera (G.R. No. L-45685)

   • Emphasized the discretionary nature of executive clemency, including commutation.

2. Garcia v. Commission on Audit (G.R. No. 178777)

   • Clarified that commutation does not extinguish civil liability unless explicitly provided.

3. People v. Valleno (G.R. No. L-35210)

   • Discussed the limits of judicial review in matters of commutation and clemency.

---

Conclusion

Commutation of sentence is a vital mechanism for the humane administration of justice. It acknowledges the rehabilitative potential of individuals while balancing the interests of society and the justice system. However, its exercise remains an exclusive and discretionary prerogative of the President, subject to established legal and procedural safeguards.

Conditional Pardon [Act No. 1524] | Partial Extinction | Extinction of Criminal Liability | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Conditional Pardon under Philippine Law (Act No. 1524)

Legal Framework

A conditional pardon is an act of clemency granted by the President of the Philippines, which extinguishes criminal liability partially by imposing certain conditions that the grantee must fulfill. This is a mechanism recognized under Act No. 1524 and Article VII, Section 19 of the 1987 Constitution, where the President has the exclusive power to grant pardons, subject to conditions deemed appropriate.

This clemency is subject to the rules laid out in Book One of the Revised Penal Code and further elaborated upon in jurisprudence and executive issuances. Conditional pardons aim to balance clemency with public safety and the rehabilitation of offenders.

---

Key Elements of Conditional Pardon

1. Nature:

   • A conditional pardon is not an absolute extinguishment of criminal liability. Instead, it suspends or alleviates the penal consequences based on the compliance with specified conditions.
   • It operates prospectively, meaning the pardon becomes effective only upon acceptance and fulfillment of the conditions by the offender.

2. Authority to Grant:

   • Under Article VII, Section 19 of the Constitution, the President exercises the power to grant pardons. This power includes the discretion to impose conditions.
   • The grant of a conditional pardon cannot be questioned, as it is a political act within the exclusive domain of the Executive.

3. Conditions:

   • The conditions attached to a pardon must be lawful, reasonable, and possible to fulfill.
   • Common conditions include:
     • Good behavior and compliance with laws during the probationary period.
     • Reporting regularly to an agency or authority.
     • Prohibition from engaging in specific activities or visiting certain areas.

4. Acceptance by the Offender:

   • A conditional pardon requires the express acceptance of the offender for it to take effect. The grantee must agree to the terms imposed.
   • If the offender refuses to accept the conditions, the pardon is deemed ineffective.

5. Revocation for Non-Compliance:

   • If the offender violates the conditions of the pardon, the President has the power to revoke the pardon.
   • Upon revocation, the offender may be required to serve the unexpired portion of their original sentence.

---

Effects of a Conditional Pardon

1. Partial Extinction of Criminal Liability:

   • A conditional pardon mitigates or partially extinguishes the penalty imposed by the court but does not erase the crime itself. The civil liabilities arising from the crime remain enforceable.
   • The offender is not fully restored to their status prior to conviction unless explicitly stated in the pardon.

2. Retention of Disqualifications:

   • The pardon does not automatically remove the accessory penalties, such as perpetual disqualification from public office or loss of political rights, unless expressly included in the terms.

3. No Automatic Reinstatement:

   • A person conditionally pardoned does not regain public employment, offices, or licenses by mere virtue of the pardon unless these are specifically addressed by the conditions of the clemency.

---

Procedures for Conditional Pardon

1. Application:

   • The convict or their representative submits a petition for clemency to the Board of Pardons and Parole (BPP). The petition includes:
     • A certificate of good conduct issued by the Bureau of Corrections or relevant authority.
     • Evidence of rehabilitation and capacity to comply with the conditions.

2. Recommendation:

   • The BPP evaluates the application and forwards its recommendation to the President. This recommendation is not binding but serves as a critical advisory document.

3. Grant by the President:

   • The President issues the conditional pardon through an executive clemency document outlining the terms of the pardon and the specific conditions to be fulfilled.

4. Monitoring and Compliance:

   • The parole authorities or other designated agencies oversee the compliance of the grantee with the terms of the pardon.

5. Revocation Proceedings:

   • If the conditions are violated, the responsible agency reports the violation to the President, who may issue an order to revoke the pardon. The grantee is then subject to re-arrest and reincarceration.

---

Jurisprudence

1. People v. Crisola (G.R. No. L-43627, February 25, 1982):

   • Affirmed that a conditional pardon does not remove the crime’s stigma unless explicitly specified.
   • Violations of conditions result in the reimposition of the original penalty.

2. Torres v. Gonzales (G.R. No. 117415, October 4, 1996):

   • Highlighted that the acceptance of the conditional pardon binds the offender to comply fully with its terms, and failure to do so is tantamount to forfeiting its benefits.

3. Monsanto v. Factoran (G.R. No. L-55166, May 9, 1989):

   • Clarified that pardons, conditional or otherwise, do not automatically erase the accessory penalties unless explicitly stated.

---

Summary

Conditional pardons under Philippine law are a mechanism for partial extinction of criminal liability. They:

• Require presidential discretion and offender acceptance.
• Impose conditions that must be strictly followed to avoid revocation.
• Retain civil liabilities and other consequences unless explicitly pardoned.

These pardons serve a dual purpose of mitigating justice with mercy while ensuring the offender remains accountable and rehabilitated.

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

Partial Extinction of Criminal Liability

Under Philippine criminal law, the partial extinction of criminal liability refers to situations where the penalties imposed on an offender are either reduced or mitigated without entirely eliminating the liability. This concept is covered under Article 94 to Article 99 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) and addresses the reduction or modification of penalties through specific legal mechanisms or circumstances.

---

Legal Bases for Partial Extinction of Criminal Liability

1. Article 94: Partial Extinction by Conditional Pardon

   • A conditional pardon granted by the President under Article VII, Section 19 of the 1987 Constitution can result in a partial extinction of criminal liability.
   • Effects:
     • The convict's penalty is commuted or reduced based on conditions set forth by the President.
     • If the conditions are violated, the pardon may be revoked, and the convict could be required to serve the remaining penalty.

2. Article 95: Obligation to Comply with Conditions of Pardon

   • A conditionally pardoned convict must strictly comply with the terms imposed by the pardon.
   • Failure to comply may result in the reinstatement of the original penalty.

---

Circumstances for Partial Extinction of Criminal Liability

1. Commutation of Sentence

   • A reduction of the penalty by the President as part of the exercise of executive clemency.
   • Example: A death penalty commuted to life imprisonment or life imprisonment commuted to a fixed number of years.

2. Parole

   • The grant of parole by the Board of Pardons and Parole under Act No. 4103 (Indeterminate Sentence Law) allows a convict to serve the remaining portion of their sentence outside of incarceration, subject to compliance with conditions.
   • Parole does not extinguish the criminal liability but allows the convict some degree of freedom.

3. Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA)

   • Article 97 of the RPC: A convict’s sentence may be partially extinguished through deductions in their sentence for good behavior during incarceration.
   • Republic Act No. 10592 expanded the GCTA system to encourage inmates to reform.
   • Eligibility:
     • Inmates must demonstrate consistent good behavior.
     • Exceptions apply for certain heinous crimes.
   • Calculation of GCTA:
     • The law prescribes how much time is deducted per month or year based on conduct and length of incarceration.

4. Other Time Allowances

   • Art. 98: Special Time Allowance for Loyalty
     • If an inmate demonstrates loyalty to the authorities by not taking advantage of chaos or disorder (e.g., a jailbreak opportunity), they may receive a special time allowance.
   • Art. 99: Rules for Deduction of Allowances
     • The Director of Prisons or the proper administrative authority calculates and applies the allowances to the convict’s sentence.

---

Limitations and Considerations in Partial Extinction

• Not Applicable to Certain Crimes:

  • Individuals convicted of heinous crimes, repeat offenders, or those who escape from prison may be disqualified from partial extinction mechanisms like GCTA or parole.

• Mandatory Compliance:

  • All partial extinguishment mechanisms require strict adherence to legal conditions. Violations may lead to revocation or reimposition of penalties.

• Discretion of Authorities:

  • The application of parole, conditional pardon, or time allowances is subject to the discretion of the relevant administrative or executive body. Courts have no authority to grant such relief directly.

---

Key Principles

• Rehabilitation and Reintegration:

  • Partial extinction mechanisms aim to rehabilitate the offender and encourage their reintegration into society by rewarding good behavior and compliance.

• Balancing Justice and Mercy:

  • These provisions ensure that the justice system remains compassionate without undermining the rule of law.

• Judicial vs. Executive Functions:

  • While courts impose penalties, the modification or reduction through partial extinction is typically a function of executive or administrative bodies.

---

Case Law and Jurisprudence

1. People v. Vera (G.R. No. 45685, 1937)

   • Established the constitutionality of parole and its discretionary nature.

2. Inmates of the New Bilibid Prison v. De Lima (G.R. No. 212719, 2019)

   • Highlighted the scope and limitations of R.A. No. 10592 regarding GCTA and exclusions for heinous crime convicts.

3. Garcia v. Executive Secretary (G.R. No. 157584, 2004)

   • Discussed the extent of the President’s powers in granting conditional pardons.

---

Conclusion

The partial extinction of criminal liability provides mechanisms for modifying penalties without erasing accountability. These provisions aim to promote fairness, reform, and reintegration while maintaining societal order and justice. Understanding the specific rules and limitations is essential for its proper application in criminal law.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Extinction of Criminal Liability | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

(Criminal Law > Revised Penal Code – Book One > Extinction of Criminal Liability)

Under the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines (RPC), criminal liability can be extinguished under certain circumstances as enumerated in Articles 89 to 94. These provisions outline how criminal liability ceases to exist, whether through the lapse of time, the death of the offender, or other legal grounds. Below is a meticulous discussion of the topic:

---

I. LEGAL GROUNDS FOR THE EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Article 89 of the RPC enumerates the causes that extinguish criminal liability:

1. Death of the convict (Before or during service of sentence)

   • If the offender dies before final judgment, both criminal and civil liability ex delicto are extinguished.
   • If the offender dies during service of sentence, criminal liability is extinguished, but civil liability arising from a final judgment survives and may be enforced against the estate.

2. Service of Sentence

   • Full compliance with the penalties imposed by the court extinguishes criminal liability. This includes imprisonment, fine, or other penalties such as public censure.

3. Amnesty

   • Amnesty, granted by the government, extinguishes criminal liability and includes crimes already committed.
   • It obliterates the offense itself, as if it had never been committed.

4. Absolute Pardon

   • Granted by the President under the Constitution, an absolute pardon extinguishes the criminal liability but does not extinguish civil liability, unless expressly stated.
   • Pardon does not erase the conviction but relieves the penalty imposed.

5. Prescription of the Crime

   • The lapse of the prescriptive period for the prosecution of the crime bars the filing of criminal charges.
   • Prescription periods depend on the penalty imposable:
     • 20 years for crimes punishable by reclusion perpetua or death.
     • 15 years for afflictive penalties.
     • 10 years for correctional penalties.
     • 1 year for light offenses.

6. Prescription of the Penalty

   • Once a judgment of conviction becomes final, the penalty may also prescribe. This occurs when the penalty is not enforced within the prescribed period:
     • 20 years for penalties of reclusion perpetua or death.
     • 15 years for afflictive penalties.
     • 10 years for correctional penalties.
     • 1 year for light penalties.

7. Marriage of the Offender and Offended Party

   • In cases involving crimes against chastity (e.g., seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness), the subsequent valid marriage between the offender and offended party extinguishes criminal liability (Article 344).

8. Other Causes Provided by Law

   • Legislative acts such as the repeal of penal laws may also extinguish liability, especially if the law being repealed had decriminalized certain acts.

---

II. EFFECTS ON CIVIL LIABILITY

1. Death Before Final Judgment

   • Both criminal and civil liability are extinguished if the offender dies before final judgment.
   • If civil liability is based on sources other than the criminal act (e.g., quasi-delict, contract), it survives and may be pursued against the estate.

2. Death After Final Judgment

   • Civil liability ex delicto survives and is enforceable against the estate of the offender.

3. Amnesty and Absolute Pardon

   • Amnesty extinguishes civil liability ex delicto.
   • Absolute pardon does not affect civil liability unless explicitly stated in the pardon.

4. Prescription of Crime and Penalty

   • Prescription of the crime or penalty extinguishes the basis of civil liability ex delicto, but separate civil actions may still be filed based on other grounds.

---

III. APPLICATION OF THE PRESCRIPTIVE PERIODS

1. Crimes

   • The running of the prescriptive period is interrupted by:
     • Filing of the complaint or information in court.
     • Issuance of a warrant of arrest.
   • Once interrupted, the prescription period begins anew only if the case is dismissed without the accused being convicted.

2. Penalties

   • The prescriptive period for penalties begins from the date the judgment becomes final and executory.

---

IV. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AMNESTY AND PARDON

Aspect	Amnesty	Pardon
Source	Legislative act or constitutional authority.	Presidential act.
Scope	Granted to classes of persons.	Granted to specific individuals.
Effect	Obliterates the crime.	Relieves penalty; conviction remains.
Civil Liability	Extinguished.	Retained unless explicitly waived.

---

V. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS UNDER THE RPC

1. Complex Crimes and Continuous Crimes

   • Prescription applies to the crime as a whole and not to individual acts constituting the offense.

2. Crimes Against the State

   • Certain crimes, such as treason, do not prescribe, in line with Article 114.

3. Interruptions to Prescription

   • The running of the prescriptive period is halted by acts such as:
     • The filing of a complaint.
     • The issuance of an arrest warrant.

4. Marriage as Extinguishment

   • For crimes against chastity, marriage must be valid to extinguish criminal liability.

---

VI. NOTABLE CASE LAW AND APPLICATIONS

• People v. Bayotas (G.R. No. 102007, 1994): Clarified the effect of the death of an accused on civil liability, distinguishing between civil liability ex delicto and those arising from other sources.
• Torres v. Gonzales: Affirmed the independent prescriptive periods for crimes and penalties.

---

VII. SUMMARY OF TIME LIMITS FOR PRESCRIPTION

Offense/Penalty	Time Limit
Reclusion Perpetua/Death	20 years
Afflictive Penalties	15 years
Correctional Penalties	10 years
Light Penalties	1 year
Light Offenses	1 year

Understanding these provisions is critical for ensuring due process and fair application of the law. The extinction of criminal liability balances the principles of justice, rehabilitation, and the legal recognition of time’s effect on penal responsibility.

Probation [P.D. No. 968, as amended by R.A. No. 10707 (An Act Amending P.D. No. 968)] | Execution and Service of Penalties | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

CRIMINAL LAW > II. REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE > F. Execution and Service of Penalties > 6. Probation

---

I. INTRODUCTION TO PROBATION

Probation is a privilege granted by the court allowing a convicted offender to avoid incarceration and instead remain in the community under specific terms and conditions, supervised by a probation officer. Probation seeks to promote rehabilitation and reintegration into society while reducing incarceration costs. It is governed by Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 968, as amended by Republic Act (R.A.) No. 10707.

---

II. LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

A. Presidential Decree No. 968 (Probation Law of 1976)

Enacted to introduce probation as an alternative to imprisonment for offenders deserving of a second chance. The law establishes the structure for the probation process, including eligibility, application, and the duties of probation officers.

B. Republic Act No. 10707

Amended P.D. No. 968 to:

1. Expand the qualifications for probation.
2. Clarify disqualifications.
3. Strengthen mechanisms for rehabilitation.
4. Provide detailed procedures for application and revocation.

---

III. ELIGIBILITY FOR PROBATION

A. General Rule

Any offender convicted by a trial court of a crime punishable by imprisonment of less than six (6) years may apply for probation, provided certain conditions are met.

B. Exceptions (Disqualified Offenders)

1. Conviction of crimes against national security:
   • Treason.
   • Espionage.
   • Rebellion.
2. Conviction of crimes against public order:
   • Sedition.
   • Coup d'état.
3. Conviction of heinous crimes:
   • Rape.
   • Murder.
   • Drug trafficking.
4. Previous conviction of an offense punishable by imprisonment exceeding six (6) years.
5. Probation revocation due to violation of terms.
6. Benefit from other non-imprisonment sentences (e.g., parole or conditional pardon).

C. Additional Conditions Post-R.A. No. 10707

• Probation may no longer be denied outright for certain minor infractions or violations of prior probation, depending on judicial discretion.

---

IV. PROCEDURE FOR PROBATION APPLICATION

A. Application Process

1. Filing of Application:

   • The application must be filed with the trial court after conviction but before the sentence becomes final.
   • The convicted offender waives the right to appeal when applying for probation.

2. Investigation by Probation Officer:

   • A court-appointed probation officer conducts a post-sentence investigation (PSI).
   • The investigation includes assessing the offender’s character, antecedents, environment, and the likelihood of rehabilitation.

3. Judicial Determination:

   • The court evaluates the PSI report and decides whether to grant or deny probation based on the offender's suitability.

---

V. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF PROBATION

A. Standard Conditions

1. Report to the probation officer as scheduled.
2. Do not commit any other offense.
3. Remain within the court’s jurisdiction unless permitted to travel.
4. Participate in rehabilitative programs, such as:
   • Counseling.
   • Community service.

B. Special Conditions

The court may impose additional conditions tailored to the offender, such as:

• Undergoing drug rehabilitation.
• Paying restitution or indemnification to victims.
• Attending vocational training.

---

VI. REVOCATION OF PROBATION

A. Grounds for Revocation

1. Violation of any probation condition.
2. Commission of a new offense during the probation period.

B. Procedure for Revocation

1. Probation officer files a report on the alleged violation.
2. The court schedules a hearing, where the offender is given the opportunity to be heard.
3. Upon finding sufficient evidence, the court may:
   • Revoke probation.
   • Order execution of the original sentence.

---

VII. POST-PROBATION PROVISIONS

A. Termination of Probation

Upon satisfactory compliance with all conditions, the court issues an order terminating probation. The offender is then fully discharged.

B. Restoration of Civil Rights

Successful completion of probation restores certain civil rights, such as the right to vote and hold public office, which may have been suspended due to conviction.

C. Expungement

• Upon completion, the probationer may apply for the expungement of the conviction from their record, subject to the court’s discretion.

---

VIII. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES UNDER R.A. NO. 10707

1. Flexibility in Application:

   • R.A. No. 10707 removed several procedural barriers, making probation accessible to a broader range of offenders.

2. Emphasis on Rehabilitation:

   • Strengthened requirements for the implementation of rehabilitative programs.

3. Alignment with Restorative Justice:

   • Encouraged alternative measures like community service, conciliation with victims, and restorative agreements.

4. Enhanced Role of Probation Officers:

   • Officers are now mandated to conduct follow-ups even after termination to ensure reintegration.

---

IX. PRACTICAL APPLICATION AND JUDICIAL DISCRETION

The application of probation involves significant judicial discretion. Courts weigh factors such as:

1. Gravity of the offense.
2. Remorse and willingness to reform.
3. Victim impact.

Judges are also tasked with balancing public safety against the rehabilitative needs of the offender.

---

X. CONCLUSION

Probation under P.D. No. 968, as amended by R.A. No. 10707, embodies a shift toward a rehabilitative and restorative justice system in the Philippines. It is a progressive tool that:

1. Reduces incarceration costs.
2. Promotes offender reintegration.
3. Advances public safety by addressing root causes of criminal behavior.

Courts, probation officers, and the community must work in synergy to maximize the program’s success.

Indeterminate Sentence Law [Act No. 4103, as amended by R.A. No. 4203] | Execution and Service of Penalties | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Indeterminate Sentence Law (Act No. 4103, as amended by R.A. No. 4203)

The Indeterminate Sentence Law (ISL), codified under Act No. 4103, as amended by R.A. No. 4203, governs the imposition of penalties for crimes punishable under the Revised Penal Code and special laws in the Philippines. The law aims to rehabilitate offenders by granting them conditional freedom under parole and minimizing their exposure to the adverse effects of prolonged imprisonment.

---

Key Features and Objectives of the Indeterminate Sentence Law

1. Applicability:

   • The ISL applies to all persons convicted of crimes punishable by imprisonment exceeding one year, except in certain cases outlined below.
   • It covers crimes under both the Revised Penal Code and special penal laws.

2. Purpose:

   • To ensure the offender’s rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
   • To provide a framework that balances punishment with leniency.
   • To decongest prisons by granting parole to rehabilitated offenders.

---

Indeterminate Sentence Defined

An indeterminate sentence consists of:

1. A minimum term: The least period of imprisonment the offender must serve to become eligible for parole.
2. A maximum term: The upper limit of imprisonment based on the penalty prescribed by law for the offense.

---

Guidelines for Imposing Indeterminate Sentences

For Crimes Punishable Under the Revised Penal Code:

• The minimum term is fixed within the range of the penalty next lower in degree than the penalty prescribed for the offense.
• The maximum term is within the range of the penalty prescribed by law.

For Crimes Punishable Under Special Laws:

• The minimum term is set anywhere within the range of the penalty prescribed by law.
• The maximum term is likewise within the range of the penalty prescribed by law.

---

Exceptions: When the ISL Does Not Apply

1. Offenders sentenced to death or life imprisonment.
2. Habitual delinquents, as defined under the Revised Penal Code.
3. Those convicted of offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua.
4. Those convicted of treason, conspiracy, or proposal to commit treason.
5. Persons convicted of misprision of treason, sedition, or espionage.
6. Those who escape from confinement or evade service of sentence.
7. Offenders granted parole but violate the terms of their parole.
8. Those convicted of crimes where probation is not applicable under the Probation Law.

---

Parole Eligibility

Parole eligibility under the ISL is determined by serving the minimum sentence:

• Offenders may be released on parole after serving the minimum term of their indeterminate sentence if:
  • They demonstrate good behavior and capacity for reform.
  • They comply with conditions set by the Board of Pardons and Parole.

Role of the Board of Pardons and Parole:

• Conducts evaluations and determines eligibility for parole.
• Imposes conditions for parolees to ensure public safety and offender rehabilitation.

---

Role of the Trial Court

The trial court determines the minimum and maximum terms of the indeterminate sentence upon conviction. The judge considers:

• The nature of the crime.
• Aggravating, mitigating, and alternative circumstances.
• The range of penalties prescribed under the applicable law.

---

Illustrative Example

Crime: Estafa (Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code) with a penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period (4 years, 2 months, and 1 day to 8 years).

• Maximum Term: Fixed within the range of 4 years, 2 months, and 1 day to 8 years, depending on the aggravating and mitigating circumstances.
• Minimum Term: Fixed within the penalty next lower in degree, which is arresto mayor maximum to prision correccional medium (4 months and 1 day to 4 years and 2 months).

---

Legal Implications and Importance

1. Restorative Justice: Promotes offender reintegration while safeguarding societal interests.
2. Judicial Discretion: Balances the imposition of penalties with leniency for eligible offenders.
3. Prison Management: Helps alleviate prison overcrowding by granting parole to qualified inmates.

The Indeterminate Sentence Law represents a forward-looking approach to criminal justice, emphasizing reform and reducing recidivism. By striking a balance between punishment and rehabilitation, it contributes to a more humane penal system.

Three-Fold Rule | Execution and Service of Penalties | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Three-Fold Rule under the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines

The Three-Fold Rule is a principle codified in Article 70 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) of the Philippines, addressing the manner of serving penalties when a convict is sentenced to multiple penalties of imprisonment.

---

Key Provisions of the Three-Fold Rule

1. General Principle:

   • When a convict is sentenced to multiple penalties, the total duration of imprisonment cannot exceed three times the length of the most severe penalty imposed.
   • However, the maximum period of imprisonment cannot exceed 40 years, regardless of the penalties imposed.

2. Purpose:

   • The rule aims to:
     • Mitigate excessively long sentences that may result from the aggregation of multiple penalties.
     • Promote humane treatment of offenders in alignment with the constitutional principle of social justice.

3. Limitations:

   • The Three-Fold Rule applies only to multiple penalties arising from multiple convictions in one or several cases.
   • The rule does not alter the penalties themselves; it merely limits the period for which they may be served consecutively.

4. Application:

   • The penalties are cumulated, starting with the most severe, until the limit of three times the most severe penalty or the 40-year cap is reached, whichever comes first.

---

Illustrative Example

• A person is convicted of:

  1. Reclusión perpetua (20 to 40 years imprisonment).
  2. Reclusión temporal (12 years and 1 day to 20 years).
  3. Prisión mayor (6 years and 1 day to 12 years).

  Analysis:

  • The most severe penalty is reclusión perpetua.
  • Under the Three-Fold Rule:
    • Maximum possible imprisonment = 3 × 40 years (maximum duration of reclusión perpetua) = 120 years.
    • However, the rule caps the total period at 40 years.

  Conclusion:

  • The convict serves a maximum of 40 years imprisonment, regardless of the aggregate duration of the sentences.

---

Special Rules and Considerations

1. 40-Year Cap:

   • The absolute maximum duration of imprisonment under Philippine law is 40 years.
   • This aligns with the constitutional prohibition on inhumane punishment.

2. Effect on Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA):

   • The 40-year cap is the basis for computing credits under the GCTA law, provided the convict complies with the requirements.

3. Imposition in Continuous Crimes:

   • If a single criminal act results in multiple injuries or damages, resulting in separate convictions, the Three-Fold Rule still applies.

4. Exception for Life Imprisonment:

   • The Three-Fold Rule does not technically apply to life imprisonment, as this is not a time-bound penalty. However, courts apply analogous principles when reducing life imprisonment sentences in line with Article 70 and the Constitution.

---

Relevant Jurisprudence

1. People v. Ganayo (G.R. No. 170689, September 13, 2007):

   • The Supreme Court clarified that the 40-year limit applies regardless of the number of sentences or the aggregate penalties imposed.

2. People v. Mercado (G.R. Nos. 146176-78, April 30, 2003):

   • Reinforced the principle that the Three-Fold Rule is not a mode of penalty reduction but a guideline for limiting the service of penalties.

3. People v. Peralta (G.R. No. 131925, July 12, 1999):

   • The Court ruled that the computation of imprisonment under the Three-Fold Rule starts from the time the convict begins serving the sentence.

---

Practical Implications

1. Judicial Discretion:

   • Judges must ensure that the sentences do not exceed the 40-year maximum when applying multiple penalties.

2. Rehabilitation Focus:

   • By capping imprisonment, the Three-Fold Rule emphasizes rehabilitation over punitive excess.

3. Guidance for Legal Practitioners:

   • Lawyers must account for the Three-Fold Rule when advising clients on the implications of multiple convictions or when negotiating plea agreements.

4. Human Rights Compliance:

   • The Three-Fold Rule ensures compliance with international human rights standards prohibiting excessively long or indefinite incarceration.

---

Conclusion

The Three-Fold Rule under Article 70 of the Revised Penal Code is a critical provision that balances justice and humanity in the Philippine penal system. By limiting the aggregate duration of imprisonment to a maximum of 40 years, it prevents disproportionate punishment while safeguarding the rehabilitative goals of criminal law.

Successive Service of Sentence | Execution and Service of Penalties | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Successive Service of Sentence

Under Philippine criminal law, successive service of sentence pertains to the order and manner in which multiple penalties imposed on a convicted individual are served. This doctrine is primarily governed by Articles 70 and 71 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). Below is an exhaustive discussion on this topic, including principles, legal provisions, and jurisprudence.

---

1. Legal Basis

Article 70 of the Revised Penal Code

This article outlines the rules for successive service of penalties:

1. When multiple penalties are imposed on the accused, the maximum duration for their successive service shall not exceed 40 years (known as the "40-year limitation" or prisión perpetua equivalent).

2. The penalties shall be served successively in the order of their severity, as follows:

   • Death
   • Reclusión perpetua
   • Reclusión temporal
   • Prisión mayor
   • Prisión correccional
   • Arresto mayor
   • Arresto menor
   • Fine and bond for good behavior (civil obligations).

3. If the penalties to be served exceed 40 years:

   • Only the penalties that fit within the 40-year period shall be served.
   • Other penalties are deemed absorbed or not executable due to the limitation.

---

Article 71 of the Revised Penal Code

Article 71 specifies that penalties of the same kind (e.g., imprisonment, fines) are to be served successively. However:

• If the penalties include both afflictive and correctional penalties, afflictive penalties must be served first.

---

2. Guiding Principles

Successive Service by Order of Severity

Penalties are served in the order of their severity, starting with the highest penalty imposed. For example:

• A convict sentenced to reclusión perpetua and prisión correccional will first serve reclusión perpetua before serving prisión correccional.

40-Year Limitation Rule

This limitation is based on humanitarian considerations to avoid indefinite or inhuman punishment. The convict is not required to serve the cumulative penalties if they exceed 40 years.

---

3. Special Rules

Exception: Indivisible Penalties

• When a death penalty is commuted (due to the abolition of the death penalty), it is replaced with reclusión perpetua. However, it does not alter the sequence of penalties to be served.

Exception: Probation and Pardon

• Probation, pardon, or parole may intervene to suspend or alter the service of penalties.
• A presidential pardon, when granted, can reduce or completely negate penalties.

---

4. Jurisprudence on Successive Service

People v. Barde (G.R. No. 147678, June 3, 2004)

The Supreme Court upheld that the 40-year limitation applies to ensure the humane treatment of prisoners.

People v. Samson (G.R. No. 133006, August 15, 2000)

This case reiterated the order of service, emphasizing that penalties should be served in order of their severity unless otherwise provided by law.

People v. Lucas (G.R. No. L-56602, May 28, 1984)

The Court clarified the application of the 40-year cap, emphasizing that penalties exceeding this limit are effectively extinguished.

---

5. Illustrative Example

Case Facts:

A defendant is convicted of:

1. Reclusión perpetua (40 years)
2. Prisión mayor (6 years)
3. Prisión correccional (2 years)

Application:

1. Serve reclusión perpetua first (40 years).
2. Since the total penalties (48 years) exceed the maximum, only penalties within the 40-year limit are served.
3. The prisión mayor and prisión correccional penalties are deemed subsumed due to the 40-year rule.

---

6. Key Takeaways

1. The principle of successive service ensures penalties are served in the order of severity.
2. The 40-year limitation promotes humane treatment by capping the total imprisonment period.
3. Special considerations apply for probation, pardon, or parole.
4. Jurisprudence consistently upholds these principles to balance justice with humanity.

This doctrine reflects the intent of Philippine criminal law to administer justice fairly while respecting the rights and dignity of individuals under the penal system.

Release on Recognizance [R.A. No. 10389 (The Recognizance Act of 2012)] | Execution and Service of Penalties | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Release on Recognizance [R.A. No. 10389 (The Recognizance Act of 2012)]

Overview: The Recognizance Act of 2012 (Republic Act No. 10389) provides a system whereby a person accused of a crime, who is unable to post bail due to financial incapacity, may be released from detention under the custody of a qualified individual or organization, subject to specific conditions.

Key Provisions and Concepts:

---

1. Definition of Recognizance

Recognizance is a legal mechanism allowing the release of an indigent accused from detention without the need to post bail. The accused is placed under the custody of a qualified custodian who undertakes to ensure their appearance in court.

---

2. Objectives of R.A. No. 10389

1. Ensure Equal Access to Justice: Addresses the disparity between the rich and poor by providing a remedy for indigent accused persons unable to afford bail.
2. Decongest Jails: Mitigates overcrowding in detention facilities by releasing qualified individuals under recognizance.
3. Reinforce Constitutional Rights: Upholds the constitutional presumption of innocence and the right to bail.

---

3. Coverage and Applicability

The law applies to:

• Persons detained during trial or preliminary investigation for crimes punishable by imprisonment not exceeding six months and/or a fine of P2,000.00 or both.
• Indigent accused as determined by specific criteria.

Recognizance does not apply to:

• Persons charged with offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding six months.
• Individuals with a prior conviction for any crime.
• Persons previously granted recognizance but failed to comply with the conditions.

---

4. Qualification of the Accused

To avail of release on recognizance:

• The accused must be an indigent. This is determined based on the Indigency Test under R.A. No. 10389.
• The offense charged must be punishable by imprisonment not exceeding six months or a fine of P2,000.00 or both.

---

5. Qualified Custodians

The accused must be released under the custody of a qualified person or organization, such as:

• A responsible member of the community (e.g., barangay official, religious leader, or local government official).
• A representative of a non-governmental organization (NGO) accredited by the court.
• Other persons deemed qualified by the court based on reputation, ability, and resources to supervise the accused.

The custodian must execute an undertaking to:

• Ensure the appearance of the accused in court.
• Notify the court immediately in case the accused absconds.

---

6. Procedure for Release on Recognizance

1. Filing of Application:

   • The accused, through their counsel, files an application for release on recognizance.
   • The application must be accompanied by proof of indigency and a recommendation from the arresting officer or detention officer.

2. Hearing:

   • The court conducts a hearing to determine if the accused meets the qualifications.
   • The court evaluates the custodian's qualifications and undertakings.

3. Order of Release:

   • If the court approves the application, it issues an order for the release of the accused under recognizance.
   • The custodian executes a written undertaking before the court.

---

7. Responsibilities of the Custodian

• Ensure the accused’s appearance at all stages of the proceedings.
• Notify the court if the accused absconds or violates the conditions of release.

Failure of the custodian to fulfill these obligations may result in:

• Criminal, civil, or administrative liability, as appropriate.

---

8. Termination of Recognizance

Recognizance is automatically terminated when:

1. The case against the accused is dismissed.
2. The accused is acquitted.
3. The accused begins to serve their sentence upon conviction.

---

9. Penalties for Violation

If the accused:

• Fails to appear without justifiable reason, they forfeit their recognizance and may be subject to rearrest.
• Violates any conditions set by the court, their recognizance may be revoked.

---

10. Implementing Rules and Guidelines

R.A. No. 10389 mandates the formulation of implementing rules by the Supreme Court and other agencies to ensure effective implementation. Key agencies include:

• Supreme Court: Issues procedural rules.
• Local Government Units (LGUs): Assist in indigency determination and custodianship supervision.

---

Key Points of Judicial Interpretation

1. Presumption of Innocence: Recognizance reinforces the constitutional right to bail and ensures the presumption of innocence is upheld for indigent accused.
2. Judicial Discretion: Courts retain discretion in granting recognizance but must adhere to the guidelines of R.A. No. 10389.
3. Equal Protection Clause: The law ensures that justice is accessible irrespective of economic status.

---

Conclusion

The Recognizance Act of 2012 (R.A. No. 10389) is a significant step in ensuring that indigent accused individuals are not unduly punished through pre-trial detention simply because of financial incapacity. It promotes equal protection under the law, decongestion of jails, and adherence to constitutional guarantees of liberty and presumption of innocence.

Community Service [R.A. No. 11362 (An Act Authorizing the Court to… | Execution and Service of Penalties | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Community Service as a Penalty under R.A. No. 11362 (Community Service Act)

The Community Service Act (Republic Act No. 11362), signed into law on August 8, 2019, introduces community service as an alternative penalty for individuals convicted of crimes punishable by arresto menor and arresto mayor under the Revised Penal Code. This law aims to promote restorative justice, decongest jails, and provide offenders with opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration into society.

Scope and Applicability

• Arresto menor: Penalties ranging from 1 day to 30 days.
• Arresto mayor: Penalties ranging from 1 month and 1 day to 6 months.
• The law applies only to first-time offenders convicted of light offenses where arresto menor or arresto mayor is imposed.
• It does not apply to habitual delinquents, recidivists, or those convicted of more serious crimes.

---

Key Features of the Community Service Act

Discretion of the Court

• Courts are authorized to impose community service in lieu of imprisonment, subject to the consent of the accused.
• The court has discretion to determine:
  • Type of community service appropriate for the offender.
  • The duration and location of the service.
  • Supervisory agencies, usually local government units (LGUs) or other authorized entities, to monitor the offender.

Nature of Community Service

• Community service entails rendering unpaid work for the benefit of the public.
• Examples include:
  • Cleaning public parks or facilities.
  • Assisting in community welfare programs.
  • Other tasks designated by local government units.

Period of Community Service

• The duration of the community service must correspond to the period of the penalty imposed (e.g., if arresto mayor is imposed, community service will span the equivalent number of days).

Supervision and Monitoring

• The offender’s compliance is supervised by designated local government agencies or entities authorized by the court.
• Supervisory agencies are required to submit periodic reports to the court on the progress of the offender.

---

Conversion of Community Service

If the offender fails to comply with the terms of community service, the court may:

• Revoke the order for community service.
• Impose the original penalty of imprisonment for arresto menor or arresto mayor.

---

Amendments to Criminal Procedures

The Supreme Court issued A.M. No. 20-06-14-SC (June 25, 2020), which provides guidelines for the implementation of R.A. No. 11362. These include:

Procedural Guidelines

1. Consent of the Accused:

   • Community service can only be imposed with the voluntary consent of the offender.
   • The court ensures that the accused understands the nature and consequences of community service.

2. Judicial Order:

   • The court issues a formal order outlining the specific community service program and conditions.
   • The order must include the specific duties of the offender, the location, and the supervisory authority.

3. Pre-Sentence Investigation (PSI):

   • A PSI report is required to assess the offender’s suitability for community service.
   • Factors considered include:
     • Personal circumstances of the offender.
     • Capability to perform community service.
     • Likelihood of compliance.

4. Service of Sentence:

   • Offenders are required to personally report to the designated supervisory agency to commence their service.

5. Post-Completion Report:

   • Upon completion, the supervisory agency must file a report with the court certifying compliance.
   • The court may issue an order of discharge or any other appropriate order.

---

Key Principles and Policy Objectives

1. Restorative Justice:

   • Community service aims to rehabilitate offenders and promote accountability without resorting to incarceration.

2. Decongestion of Jails:

   • Offers an alternative to imprisonment, reducing the burden on overcrowded detention facilities.

3. Social Reintegration:

   • Offenders contribute positively to society while being reintegrated as law-abiding citizens.

---

Offender’s Rights and Responsibilities

• Offenders have the right to:
  • Be informed about their options and consequences.
  • Receive clear instructions on community service tasks.
  • Access legal remedies if procedural lapses occur.
• Responsibilities include:
  • Complying fully with the community service order.
  • Reporting regularly to the supervisory agency.
  • Avoiding any conduct that violates the terms of the service.

---

Offenses Excluded

• The law does not apply to:
  • Habitual delinquents and recidivists.
  • Offenders convicted of crimes punishable by penalties beyond arresto menor and arresto mayor.

---

Conclusion

R.A. No. 11362 and its implementing guidelines under A.M. No. 20-06-14-SC mark a significant shift in the Philippine criminal justice system by offering an alternative to incarceration for minor offenses. By promoting rehabilitation and public accountability, the law seeks to balance justice with compassion, ensuring that penalties serve both punitive and restorative purposes.

Execution and Service of Penalties | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

CRIMINAL LAW > II. REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE > F. EXECUTION AND SERVICE OF PENALTIES

---

Execution and Service of Penalties is a critical aspect of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) of the Philippines. It encompasses the legal processes, principles, and rules governing the implementation and fulfillment of penalties imposed by the courts. Below is a meticulous breakdown of the subject matter:

---

1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES IN EXECUTION AND SERVICE OF PENALTIES

Execution and service of penalties are premised on the following principles:

• Legality: Penalties must be imposed and executed in accordance with law (Art. 3, Civil Code; nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege).
• Certainty and Proportionality: Penalties should correspond to the gravity of the offense, ensuring fairness.
• Humanitarian Considerations: The execution should respect human dignity and prohibit cruel or degrading punishment (Art. III, Sec. 19, Philippine Constitution).

---

2. PURPOSE OF PENALTIES

Penalties are imposed to:

1. Reform and Rehabilitate: Reform the offender to become a law-abiding member of society.
2. Protect Society: Prevent crime by deterring the offender and others.
3. Retribution: Impose punishment proportional to the offense.
4. Restitution: Where applicable, make amends to the offended party.

---

3. CLASSIFICATION OF PENALTIES UNDER THE RPC

Penalties under the Revised Penal Code are divided into:

1. Principal Penalties:
   • Death (now suspended by R.A. 9346).
   • Reclusion perpetua.
   • Reclusion temporal.
   • Prision mayor.
   • Prision correccional.
   • Arresto mayor.
   • Arresto menor.
   • Fine.
2. Accessory Penalties:
   • Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification.
   • Perpetual or temporary special disqualification.
   • Civil interdiction.
   • Forfeiture of public office or employment.

---

4. EXECUTION OF PENALTIES

The following rules apply to the execution of penalties:

A. Imposition of Penalties

• Judicial Authority: Penalties are imposed only by competent courts after a valid conviction.
• No Excess of Sentence: Execution shall not exceed what is expressly stated in the judgment.
• Nature and Effects of Penalties: The nature of each penalty, as provided by law, must be observed.

B. Death Penalty (Art. 81-83)

• Abolished by R.A. 9346: Death penalty is now replaced by reclusion perpetua.
• Suspension: Pregnant women or offenders below 18 years old at the time of the commission of the crime are exempted from execution.

C. Reclusion Perpetua and Reclusion Temporal

• Definition:
  • Reclusion Perpetua: Imprisonment for 20 years and 1 day to 40 years.
  • Reclusion Temporal: Imprisonment for 12 years and 1 day to 20 years.
• Place of Confinement: National penitentiary or other facilities under the Bureau of Corrections.
• No Parole for Reclusion Perpetua: Persons sentenced to reclusion perpetua are not eligible for parole (R.A. 9346).

D. Prision Mayor, Prision Correccional, Arresto Mayor, and Arresto Menor

• Definitions:
  • Prision Mayor: 6 years and 1 day to 12 years.
  • Prision Correccional: 6 months and 1 day to 6 years.
  • Arresto Mayor: 1 month and 1 day to 6 months.
  • Arresto Menor: 1 day to 30 days.
• Confinement: May be served in provincial jails, city jails, or municipal jails depending on the duration of imprisonment.

---

5. SERVICE OF PENALTIES

A. Rules for Sentenced Individuals

1. Voluntary Submission: Offenders surrendering voluntarily may receive mitigating credit during the execution of penalties.
2. Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA):
   • Governed by R.A. 10592.
   • Inmates may reduce their sentence for good behavior.

B. Accessory Penalties

• Automatically imposed as a consequence of certain principal penalties unless otherwise specified by law (e.g., perpetual disqualification from public office after conviction for reclusion perpetua).

C. Special Considerations for Women and Minors

• Pregnant Women: Execution of penalties may be deferred until 2 months after childbirth (Art. 83).
• Minors: Special rules apply under the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act (R.A. 9344).

D. Civil Liabilities

• Offenders must fulfill civil liabilities as adjudged by the court, including restitution or payment of damages.

---

6. MODIFICATION AND SUSPENSION OF PENALTIES

Penalties may be modified, reduced, or suspended under the following conditions:

1. Pardons and Paroles: Granted by the President of the Philippines.
2. Amnesty: May be declared by the State under specific conditions.
3. Suspension of Execution: Allowed under special laws or court orders (e.g., probation under P.D. 968).

---

7. TERMINATION OF PENALTIES

Penalties are terminated upon:

1. Completion of Sentence: Full service of the imposed penalty.
2. Death of the Offender: Extinguishes both criminal and civil liability, except obligations arising from contracts (Art. 89).
3. Amnesty or Pardon: By presidential proclamation.

---

8. RELEVANT CASE LAW

Key jurisprudence interpreting the execution and service of penalties:

• People v. Hernandez: Discussed reclusion perpetua and its accessory penalties.
• People v. Temporada: Clarified the rules on mitigating circumstances in execution.
• People v. Echegaray: Interpreted the imposition of the death penalty before its abolition.

---

9. AMENDMENTS AND RELATED LAWS

1. R.A. 10592: Expanded GCTA and time allowances for prisoners.
2. R.A. 9346: Abolished the death penalty.
3. R.A. 10159: Adjusted penalties for certain minor offenses.
4. R.A. 9344: Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act providing special treatment for children in conflict with the law.

---

This comprehensive guide provides a structured understanding of the execution and service of penalties under the Revised Penal Code, reflecting not only statutory provisions but also jurisprudential interpretations and contemporary updates.

Subsidiary Penalty | Penalties | REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK ONE

Subsidiary Penalty under the Revised Penal Code (RPC) of the Philippines

Definition and Purpose
The subsidiary penalty is a secondary or substitute punishment imposed on a convicted individual who fails to pay the pecuniary penalties (fines, costs, or indemnities) imposed by the court. It ensures that the penalty is not rendered ineffective due to the convict's insolvency or inability to pay.

Legal Basis

• Article 39, Revised Penal Code: Subsidiary imprisonment is specifically addressed in Article 39 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), as amended. This provision explains when and how a subsidiary penalty is imposed for failure to satisfy fines.

---

Key Provisions of Article 39 (RPC)

1. Applicability

   • Subsidiary imprisonment applies only when the convict is unable to pay fines imposed as part of the sentence.
   • It is not applicable if the penalty imposed is purely imprisonment, nor does it apply when fines are voluntarily paid.

2. Computation of Subsidiary Imprisonment

   • The duration of subsidiary imprisonment is determined by converting the unpaid fine into days of imprisonment.
   • Conversion Rate: One day of imprisonment for every ₱8.00 of unpaid fine.
   • Maximum Duration:
     • For Light Penalties: Up to one-third of the principal penalty, but not exceeding 30 days.
     • For Other Penalties: Not exceeding the duration of the principal penalty.

3. Exclusions and Limitations

   • Habitual Delinquents: Subsidiary imprisonment is not applicable to habitual delinquents as defined in the RPC.
   • Maximum Limits: The subsidiary penalty cannot exceed the duration of the principal penalty.

4. Application to Different Sentences

   • Subsidiary imprisonment is cumulative when there are multiple fines imposed. Each unpaid fine is converted individually, and the subsidiary penalties for each are served successively.

5. Nature of Imprisonment

   • The convict serving subsidiary imprisonment is not considered a detention prisoner but rather a convicted prisoner serving a penalty.

---

Examples of Application

• Example 1: Fine for Grave Felonies
  A convict sentenced to reclusión perpetua (which does not include a fine) cannot be subjected to subsidiary imprisonment since no fine is imposed.

• Example 2: Fine for Light Offense
  A convict fined ₱200 for unjust vexation fails to pay the fine. The unpaid amount is converted to 25 days of subsidiary imprisonment (₱200 ÷ ₱8 = 25 days).

• Example 3: Multiple Fines
  If a convict owes ₱1000 and ₱500 under two separate cases and cannot pay either fine, the subsidiary penalties are computed separately (125 days for the first fine and 62.5 days for the second fine).

---

Amendments and Jurisprudence

• RA 10159: The fine-to-subsidiary penalty conversion rate of ₱8 per day was retained in this amendment. However, subsequent jurisprudence reflects adjustments in certain circumstances to align with contemporary realities.

• Jurisprudence:

  • In People v. Diaz, the Supreme Court ruled that subsidiary penalties are mandatory unless explicitly excluded in the judgment.
  • In People v. Ong, it was clarified that the subsidiary penalty is imposed only if the convict fails to pay the fine, and this does not extend beyond the principal penalty.

---

Related Concepts

1. Civil Obligations in Criminal Cases:

   • If indemnities or restitution are not paid, the convict is civilly liable, but this does not automatically convert to subsidiary imprisonment.

2. Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA):

   • The convict serving a subsidiary penalty may earn time deductions under the GCTA law, reducing the period of imprisonment.

---

Practical Implications

1. Ensuring Justice: The subsidiary penalty ensures that convicts are not excused from their penalties solely due to insolvency.
2. Rights of the Convict:
   • The convict retains the right to petition for alternatives, such as partial payments or installment arrangements, subject to judicial discretion.
3. Enforcement and Execution:
   • The court issues a writ of execution to enforce the pecuniary penalty. If the fine remains unpaid after diligent efforts, subsidiary imprisonment is implemented.

Conclusion

Subsidiary penalties are a critical mechanism in the Philippine criminal justice system. They uphold the principles of fairness and accountability, ensuring that monetary penalties are not evaded. While limited by the principal penalty's duration and certain exclusions, the subsidiary penalty reflects the balance between retribution and practicality in enforcing justice.