Maximum Penalty for Perjury in the Philippines: A Comprehensive Overview

Perjury—commonly understood as lying under oath—is punishable under the Revised Penal Code (RPC) of the Philippines. While it might sound straightforward, the legal treatment of perjury has nuances that can affect the actual penalty a convicted offender faces. This article explores the statutory provisions, the elements of the crime, relevant jurisprudence, and, most importantly, the maximum penalty that may be imposed for perjury under Philippine law.

1. Governing Law and Definition

1.1. Revised Penal Code Provisions

Perjury, as typically charged under Philippine law, is primarily covered by Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). This article penalizes the act of making untruthful statements under oath in an affidavit, or when testifying in an official proceeding, with knowledge of their falsehood and with willful intent to deceive.

Article 183 (RPC) in essence provides:
Any person who, knowingly making untruthful statements, shall testify under oath in any judicial or other official proceeding, or shall make an affidavit, upon any material matter, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prisión correccional in its minimum period.

1.2. Distinguishing Perjury from False Testimony

Under Philippine law, the term "false testimony" often appears alongside perjury. While closely related, false testimony generally involves lying under oath during a judicial proceeding (especially in criminal or civil cases), whereas perjury more broadly covers making false statements in affidavits or sworn statements (written or oral) in official proceedings or documents. Nonetheless, Article 183 frames both scenarios—false testimony under oath and falsification by affidavit—as perjury for penalty purposes.

2. Elements of Perjury

The Supreme Court of the Philippines has consistently held that to secure a conviction for perjury, the prosecution must establish the following elements:

Statement Under Oath: The offender made a statement under oath, administered by a competent authority (e.g., a judge, notary public, or other officer empowered to administer oaths).
Material Matter: The false statement pertains to a material matter, meaning it is relevant and significant to the proceeding or document.
Falsity and Knowledge: The offender made the statement with the knowledge that it was false.
Willful Intent to Deceive: There must be a deliberate intention to mislead or lie, rather than mere mistake, confusion, or oversight.

If any of these elements is not adequately proven, an acquittal or dismissal of the perjury charge is likely.

3. Penalties for Perjury

3.1. Statutory Range

Under Article 183 of the RPC, the penalty for perjury is:

Arresto mayor in its maximum period (4 months and 1 day to 6 months), to
Prisión correccional in its minimum period (6 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months).

This penalty range is somewhat broad, reflecting the court’s discretion based on the circumstances of the case. It also reflects the intent to penalize lying under oath—but not as severely as graver crimes such as serious physical injuries or theft of high value.

3.2. Maximum Penalty

Given that the prescribed penalty spans from arresto mayor in its maximum period up to prisión correccional in its minimum period, the highest possible duration a court may impose is:

2 years and 4 months of imprisonment.

In practical application, courts often consider aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the gravity of the perjured statement’s effects, and the offender’s criminal history (if any) when determining the specific penalty within that range.

3.3. Fines

While the principal penalty for perjury is imprisonment, the trial court may, in its discretion and in accordance with the Revised Penal Code’s applicable rules, also impose a fine. The exact amount will vary depending on the circumstances and the judge’s assessment, but must be within the parameters allowed by law for penalties falling under arresto mayor or prisión correccional. In practice, however, imprisonment remains the primary penalty, and any fine is typically supplemental.

4. Relevant Jurisprudence

Philippine jurisprudence provides guidance on how courts interpret and implement perjury laws:

Materiality of the Statement
Courts have consistently ruled that the false statement must be material—i.e., relevant to the issue at hand. A misstatement regarding trivial or collateral details typically does not qualify as perjury unless it has a direct impact on the proceeding or the affidavit’s purpose.
Requirement of Willful Intent
An honest mistake, confusion, or oversight does not amount to the willful and deliberate falsehood required for perjury. The courts look for clear evidence that the accused knowingly and intentionally lied under oath.
Affidavits vs. Oral Testimony
The same penalty provision (Article 183) applies to both false testimony in court and false affidavits, as long as all elements of perjury are present.
Other Liabilities
Where the false statement causes damages or implicates other legal interests, the offender may incur additional liability (e.g., civil liability for damages, or potential liability for obstruction of justice). However, such additional liabilities are generally separate from the core perjury charge.

5. Common Defenses to Perjury Charges

Lack of Knowledge or Intent
The accused may argue that the falsehood resulted from an honest mistake or a lapse in memory, negating the required criminal intent.
Immaterial Statement
If the allegedly false statement does not pertain to a material fact or issue, the perjury charge fails.
Improper Oath Administration
If the oath was administered by someone not lawfully authorized to do so, this procedural flaw may derail the prosecution’s case.
Absence of Falsehood
Where the statement is actually true or can be proven accurate, or if the prosecution cannot prove falsity, there can be no perjury.

6. Proposed Legislative Reforms

Over the years, there have been legislative proposals to amend the Revised Penal Code and increase the penalty for perjury, given concerns that the existing penalty range (capping at 2 years and 4 months) might not be enough of a deterrent. Some bills have sought to elevate the penalty or introduce heavier fines. As of this writing, no major amendments have been codified into law that substantially alter the maximum penalty. Nonetheless, legal observers and lawmakers continue to debate the adequacy of existing penalties in deterring false statements.

7. Practical Considerations

Impact on Court Proceedings
The relatively limited maximum penalty means prosecutors, defense lawyers, and judges sometimes view perjury as a less severe offense compared to graver crimes. However, perjury still carries reputational harm and can lead to prison time.
Professional Repercussions
Lawyers, notaries, and other professionals who commit perjury may face administrative sanctions (e.g., disbarment for lawyers) on top of criminal penalties.
Public Officers
If a public officer is found guilty of perjury committed in relation to official duties, administrative charges and penalties (dismissal from service, forfeiture of benefits, perpetual disqualification from public office) may apply in addition to the RPC penalty.
Discouraging False Affidavits
Affidavits are heavily used in Philippine legal and administrative processes. The existence of a perjury law—despite its moderate maximum penalty—acts as a legal mechanism to underscore the importance of honesty in sworn statements.

8. Conclusion

Perjury remains a punishable offense in the Philippines under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code, with the maximum penalty set at 2 years and 4 months of imprisonment (prisión correccional in its minimum period). While there have been calls to increase this penalty, as of current law, the prescribed range stands. Beyond the prison term, individuals found guilty may also face fines, administrative sanctions (if they hold professional or public office), and the broader social consequences of a criminal conviction.

Ultimately, the core purpose of the perjury law is to protect the integrity of sworn statements and official proceedings. Anyone making a statement under oath—whether in court testimony or in affidavits—must remain vigilant as to truthfulness, as willful deception can result in criminal liability.