Document Forgery

The use of forgeries to deceive an enemy or affect public opinion has been a
staple of disinformation throughout modern history. Forgeries can be more
easily exposed than other types of active deception measures largely
because careful analysis can often demonstrate convincingly that the
documents are fraudulent. Still, forgery is effective in at least three ways.
First, a forgery can cast aspirations on targeted governments and on
individuals (silent forgery). This can be the most damaging forgery, as the
victim does not know that the forgery is being circulated and may never get
the opportunity to refute it. Second, forgeries, when publicized, force the
target government to spend time, effort, and funds on refutation. Third,
denial never entirely offsets the damage done as doubt can be cast by
repeated reference to the forgery and to its contents.
Whalen documents. In 1930, the U.S. Congress was planning to establish a
committee to investigate Communist propaganda. Shortly before it was
formed, the New York City police department received copies of a set of
documents purporting to be letters from the Communist International
instructing Amtorg to carry out Communist propaganda in the United States.
Amtorg actually was deeply involved in Soviet espionage in the United
States. The documents were released to the press on May 2, 1930, and
appeared in print the next day. They were released by police Commissioner
Grover Whalen and came to be known as the "Whalen documents."
An examination of the documents revealed that they were forgeries. For
example, the letterhead read "Ispolkom Kominterna" (Excom Comintern). An
authentic document would have spelled out "Communist International,"
rather than using the nickname Comintern. The forgeries were exposed by
journalist John L. Spivak, who provided the evidence to Congressman
LaGuardia and wrote about the case in the New York Evening Graphic.

Forgery, in art, the false claim to authenticity for a work of art.

The Nature of Forgery

Because the provenance of works of art is seldom clear and because their
origin is often judged by means of subtle factors, art forgery has always been
commonplace. The sorts of deception involved include the complete
production of a work that is passed off as being of a particular period, false
claims regarding materials or workmanship, the piecing together of old
fragments to simulate antiquity, the selling as originals of faithful copies that
were not intended to be taken as anything but copies, and the false
attribution of minor works to great masters. Forgeries are distinguished from
falsifications, which include copies or even mechanical reproductions not
initially meant to pass for the original, in that they are intended to defraud.
These sorts of deceptions, made for financial gain, reflect prevailing taste
and fashion, conventions in collecting, and current modes of art criticism.
Forgery vs. Counterfeit

Forgery comes from the verb to forge. To forge an object means that you
fabricate by working, heating, hammering and shaping it into a certain shape.

Counterfeit contains the noun 'feit' that means something as 'fact' and
originates in Middle Dutch. In other words, forgery contains the act of
recreating, where counterfeit expresses the result of forgery and it's value -
non-genuine.

Forgery could be seen as a craftsmanship, it involves techniques, work and

mastery and often is of quality, it's well done. On the contrary counterfeit
lacks quality all together. Counterfeit on the could be seen as a value
statement, it involves, quality is not involved.

Why is the act of forgery then connected to the result of counterfeit?

Usually the word forgery is used when we speak about the unauthorized
reproduction of valuable documents or objects where the value is
determined not by the actual document but the social or mutual agreement
or culture, such as an agreement, art, or money. Unauthorized is the keyword
here.

The unauthorized reproduction of coins has been a craftsmanship that could

only be done by blacksmiths who actually used to work at a blacksmith-shop
or forgery. A reproduction of of coins therefore would be called a forged, and
it being done unauthorized would render these coins factually worthless -
counterfeit.

Forged identity documents are fake documents made illegally for the purpose
of deceiving the holders of the genuine identity documents or other persons.
It concerns especially passports, driver’s license, ID, and so on. Fabricating
such a document is considered a crime.

What are the forged documents used for?

Fake or stolen identity documents are used for various criminal activities
such as

leasing frauds and fraudulent loans - the criminal concludes a loan

agreement or a leasing contract using the forged document
Illegal migration - false travel documents are used for illegal migration
withdrawal from a bank account - the criminal uses the document to obtain
funds from a bank account
forging a sales contract - forged identity documents are used to forge a
contract
What is considered forging of identity documents?
counterfeit of the original document
fabricating an imaginary identity document (one that have never existed)
having stolen an identity document
replacing the photo
replacing a page
replacing specific information (e.g. age or name)
How are the forged documents produced?
A forged document is most often the result of either theft of the original and
its subsequent misappropriation, or the result of counterfeiting of the
document using stolen data (from a computer, from a copy of the original
document, etc.).

Identity documents as well as all the pieces of data that appear on them are
considered ones of the most sensitive personal data - data such as name,
surname, date of birth, permanent residence and document number, are a
combination that an attacker or a forger can easily misuse. Therefore, it is
important to protect your personal documents and to beware of making
unauthorized copies - you never know if the copy will be secured enough and
if an unauthorized person or an attacker cannot get it.

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST

I. Concept: These are crimes which involve deceit, misrepresentation, or
falsity against the public at large. If the misrepresentation or deceit or falsity
was purposely availed of against a particular person the same will constitute
estafa.

II. The crimes are grouped into three categories:

A. Forgeries: these refer to deceits involving:

1. The seal of the government, the signature and stamp of the chief
executive

2. Coins

3. Treasury or bank notes, obligations and securities of the government

4. Documents

B. Other Falsities: these are deceits pertaining to : (1). Authority, rank or title
(2) Names (3) Uniforms and insignias and (4) False Testimonies

C. Frauds or acts involving machinations in public biddings and (2)

Combinations and Monopolies in Restraint of Trade and Commerce

A. FORGERIES

I. Those involving the seal of the government, the signature, or stamp of the
Chief Executive.
A. The acts punished are: (1). The act of counterfeiting the seal of the
government (2). Forging the signature of the Chief Executive or his stamp
and (3). Using the forged signature or counterfeit seal or stamp

B. The act of forging the signature is ordinarily punished as falsification but

it is set apart as a distinct crime with a much higher penalty (reclusions
temporal) to emphasize its gravity

C. The act of counterfeiting or forging the signature must be on what

purports to be an official document purporting to have been signed by the
Chief Executive in his official capacity, other wise the offense is ordinary
falsification

D. Example: (i). In what purports to be an appointment paper or grant of a

pardon bearing the heading of the Office of the President (ii). Forging the
signature in a private thank- you- letter is falsification

E. In the crime of using, the user is a third person not the forger or
counterfeiter

II. Those involving coins: (a) Counterfeit/false or (ii) mutilated coins

A. Counterfeit/false coins- those not authorized by the Central bank to be

minted for circulation as legal tender. They include coins which have been
demonetized so as to prevent the accused from using his skill upon genuine
coins

1. The acts punished

a. The act of counterfeiting, minting or making

b. The act of importing

c. The act of uttering- passing of as legal tender

d. Possession with intent to utter. Thus possession of coins as a collection is

not punished

B. Mutilated Coins- these are genuine coins or coins of legal tender whose
intrinsic value has been diminished due to the diminution of their metallic
contents.

1. The acts punished:

a. The act of mutilating or any act upon the coin the purpose of which is to
accumulate the metallic contents, such as by chipping off a portion, scraping
its surface or boring a hole

b. The act of selling, importing or uttering

c. Possession with intent to utter

C. Related Laws (1). Pres. Decree No. 247: (Penalizing the defacing,
mutilation, burning or destruction of central bank notes and coins) has
modified Article 164. (2) R.A. 427: which punishes the act of amassing coins
in excess of P50.00

III. Forgeries committed upon Treasury or Bank Notes, Obligations and

Securities
A. This is related to Banking and Finance. The subject matter are papers in
the form of obligations and securities issued by the government as its own
obligations which are also sued as legal tender

B. Not included are paper bills as the crime relative to them is

“counterfeiting”

C. They do not include commercial checks

D. The reason is to maintain the integrity of the currency and to ensure the
credit and standing of the government

E. Examples are:

1. Bonds issued by the Land Bank in connection with the Land Reform
Program

2. Postal Money Orders

3. Treasury Warrants

4.Treasury Certificates

5. Sweepstake Tickets ( Lotto tickets?)

F. The Acts punished are :

1.The act of forging or Forgery consisting of either:

(a). giving to a treasury or banknote or any document payable to bearer or to
order, the appearance of a true and genuine document. Such as the act of
manufacturing or producing fake treasury warrants

(b). erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering, by any means, the

letters, figures, words or signs contained therein.

Note: (i).if the note does not resemble a true and genuine document in that it
can not possibly fool any person the act is considered as frustrated forgery

(ii). Where the accused encashed a treasury warrant by posing and signing
as payee, the crime is falsification

2. The act of importing or uttering

3. The act of possession or use

(a). Possession must be with intent to utter

(b). Possessor must know the notes are forged

IV. Forgeries Upon Documents

A. The proper term is Falsification

B. Document is : (1) any writing, whether paper based or in any solid surface,
which is complete, creating rights or extinguishing obligations, or defining
the relations between persons. Examples: deeds and contracts, receipts,
promissory notes, checks (2) a writing used as evidence of the facts
contained in the document such as death/birth certificates; clearances,
medical records, x-rays; driver’s license

C. General Classification: (In falsification, it is essential to specify the

document falsified)

1. Falsification of Legislative Document punished under Art. 170- bills,

resolutions, ordinances whether approved or pending approval, by any
legislative body

a). the act of falsification is limited to alterations of a genuine legislative

document

b). if by any other means, such as simulating a legislative document, the

offense is ordinary falsification.

2. Falsification of a Non-Legislative Document

a). Document proper under Article 171 and 172

b). Wireless, Telegram, cablegram, telephone Messages under Article 173

c). Certificates under Article 174

D. Kinds of Documents Proper

1. Public Documents: they consists of the following

a). Those which embody the official acts of a public officer such as
Decisions/Resolutions; Administrative Orders; Marriage Contract; Oaths of
Office

b). Those issued by a public officer or in which he participates, virtute officii

( by virtue of his office) such as clearances; certificates of appearance,
designation of personnel; receipts. These are the so called “Official
Documents”.

Thus all official documents are public documents but not all public
documents are official documents

c). Those acknowledged before a Notary Public such as deeds and

conveyances

d). Private documents :

(i). which already formed part of the public records ( Public by Incorporation)
such as private deeds submitted to the office of the Register of Deeds;
acknowledgment letter sent to the Local \Civil Registrar; Protest letters to
the Assessor’s Office; libelous letters offered as exhibits in a trial; letters
formally seeking opinions

(ii). those which are intended to form part of the public record ( Public by
Intention)

Per Monteverde vs. PP ( Aug. 12, 2000) involving falsification of sales

invoices required by the BIR, it was held: : “ If the document is intended by
law to be part of the public or official record, the preparation of which being
in accordance with rules and regulations issued by the government, the
falsification of that document, although it was a private document at the
time of the falsification ton, is regarded as falsification of public or official
documents”
Examples: Falsification of Civil Service or Bar Exam Booklets; Application
letters and personal data sheets sent to personnel officers.

Query: What about attendance sheets during seminars or conferences?

Note: In case of falsification of Travel Documents ( Visa, Passport, and any

document submitted in connection therewith) the law applicable is R.A. 8239
or the Philippine Passport Act.

2.Commercial Documents: (a). those used by merchants or business people

to promote trade or credit transactions or commercial dealings and (b) those
defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce or other commercial laws..
Examples: commercial checks; sales receipts and invoices; trust receipts;
deposit and withdrawal slips and bank passbooks; tickets issued to
passengers; enrollment forms; grades.

3. Private Documents: any other document, deed or instruments executed by

private persons without the intervention of a notary public or of other
persons legally authorized, by which some disposition or agreement is
proved, evidenced or set forth. Examples: unnotarized deeds, letters, private
receipts, class cards, timre records in private employment. Vouchers of
business people are private, not commercial, documents ( Batulanon vs. PP,
502 SCRA 35)

E. Importance of distinguishing Falsification of Public from Falsification of

Private Documents
1. As to penalty: a higher penalty is imposed for falsification of public
documents

2. As to modes of commission: there are 8 ways of falsifying a public

documents as against 7 as to private documents

3. As to complexing with Estafa: Estafa cannot be complexed with

Falsification of Private document. The reason is because both have a
common element which is damage

a). The crime is falsification if the deception cannot be committed without

falsification, i.e. the falsification is committed as a means to commit estafa.

b). It is estafa if the estafa can be committed without the necessity of

falsifying a document

4. As to requirement of damage: In falsification of a private document the act

of falsification must be coupled with either (a) actual damage even if there
was no intent to cause damage or (b) an intent to cause damage even if no
actual damage resulted. In falsification of public document, the gravamen of
the offense is the perversion of truth; the loss of faith and confidence by the
public in the document even if there is no actual damage t the public

F. Principles Involving Falsification:

1. The Falsification maybe complexed with the crimes of Estafa ( save

private documents) malversation or theft

2. Maybe committed intentionally or through negligence

a). Examples through negligence: (i) The Register of Deeds who issued a
duplicate title without noting on its back a notice of the encumbrances (ii) A
Clerk who issues a certified true copy of a birth certificate but inadvertently
copied the wrong entries (iii) a person who signs a check to accommodate a
payee without verifying the payee’s identification

b). Thus the accused who is charged with intentional falsification may be
convicted for falsification thru negligence without amending the Information
because the former includes the latter ( see PP vs Uy 475 SCRA 248)

3. As to the liability of Heads of Offices as final approving authority if it turns

out the document to which they affixed their signatures contains falsities:

a). The Arias Principle ( Arias vs. Sandiganbayan, 180 SCRA 315) as
reiterated in Magsuce vs. Sandiganbayan ( Jan. 3, 1995) holds: “ All heads of
offices have a right to rely to a reasonable extent on their subordinate and on
the good faith of those who prepared the documents, and are not liable for
the falsification”

b). Exceptions: (i). Where there is a clear evidence of conspiracy with the
authors (ii) if through their negligence, they brought about the commission of
the crime. Thus in PP. vs. Rodis the Head of Office was held liable where the
document signed by him contained anomalies which were glaring in the
document

4. The following are accepted as defenses

a). Good faith and lack of intent to pervert the truth. As in the case of a co-
employee who signed for another in the payroll because the latter was sick

b). Alterations which are in the nature of corrections such as changing the
civil status from single to married in a Community Tax Certificate
d). Alterations which do not affect the integrity or veracity of the document.
Example: The Certification by the treasurer that he paid the salary on July
10 when in truth it was on July 12

e) Minor inaccuracies as in a deed of sale which declared the consideration

was paid in cash when it was paid in two installments

5. Presumption of Authorship of the Falsification: In the absence of

satisfactory explanation, one found in possession of and who used a forged
document is the forger of said document. If a person had in his possession a
falsified document and he made sue of it, taking advantage of it and profiting
thereby, the clear presumption is that he is the material author of the
falsification. ( Nierva vs. PP. 503 SCRA 114).

6. There is a ruling that generally, falsification of public/commercial

documents have no attempted or frustrated stages unless the falsification is
so imperfect that it may be considered as frustrated. (Personal Opinion: the
crime should be consumated since what was frustrated was not the act but
the purpose of the offender)

7. There are as many falsifications as there are documents falsified; or as

there are separate acts of falsification committed by one person within the
same period of time

a). The falsification of several signatures in one payroll is only one

falsification

b). Several checks falsified at the same time gives rise to several separate
crimes

8. Falsification is not a continuing crime

V. Proof of Falsification.

A. An allegation of forgery and a perfunctory comparison of the

signature/handwritings by themselves cannot support a claim of forgery, as
forgery cannot be presumed and must be proved by clear, positive and
convincing evidence and the burden of proof lies on the party alleging
forgery.

B. Criteria to determine forgery or falsification: per Ladignon vs. CA ( 390

Phil. 1161 as reiterated in Rivera vs. Turiano ( March 7, 2007)

The process of identification must include not only the material differences
between or among the signatures/handwritings but a showing of the
following:

(i) the determination of the extent, kind and significance of the resemblance
and variation ( of the handwriting or signature)

(ii) that the variation is due to the operation of a different personality and not
merely an expected and inevitable variation found in the genuine writing of
the same writer

(iii) that the resemblance is a result more or less of a skillful imitation and
not merely a habitual and characteristic resemblance which normally
appears in genuine handwriting

ART. 171. Falsification by public officer, employee, or notary

or ecclesiastic minister
I. Coverage: this article provides: (1) the penalty of falsification if committed
by a public officer or employee or a notary or an ecclesiastical minister. The
penalty is higher than if committed by a private person. The document may
be any document. (2) And the eight acts of falsification.

A. The public officer must take advantage of his official position or that there
was abuse of office. By this is meant that his functions include participating
in the preparation, recording, keeping, publishing or sending out to the public
of the falsified document otherwise he will be punished as a private person.
As for instance: secretaries, the Clerk of Court; the record officers; those
who issue receipts or licenses; the Register of Deeds; Local Civil Registrar.

B. As for an ecclesiastic, the document he falsified must affect the civil

status of a person, else he will be considered as a private person. The usual
document involved is a marriage contract

II. The acts of falsification:

A. By counterfeiting, imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric. To

counterfeit a handwriting or signature is to create one that is so similar to
the genuine as to make it difficult to distinguish and thus easily fool the
public. This act includes creating or simulating a fictitious handwriting or
signature

B. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or

proceeding when they did not in fact so participate

1). There is no need to imitate the signature or handwriting

2). This includes simulating a public document like a Warrant of Arrest as

having been issued by a judge
3) Examples: impersonating a person in a document; voting in place of a
registered voter, posing as payee if a negotiable instrument in order to
encash the same

C. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding

statements other than those in fact made by them proceeding when they did
not in fact so participate.

1). This is twisting the statements or putting words into the mouth of another

2). Substituting a forged will where the accused is now named as an heir in
lieu of the original where he was not so named

3). Where the accused was instructed to prepare a Special Power of Attorney
over a parcel of land, with himself as the agent but he instead prepared a
deed of sale with himself as the vendee

D. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts

1). This require that (i) the accused knows that what he imputes is false (ii)
the falsity involves a material fact (iii) there is a legal obligation for him to
disclose the truth and (iv) such untruthful statements are not contained in an
affidavit or a statement required by law to be sworn to.

2). by legal obligation is meant that the law requires a full disclosure of
facts such as in a public official’s Statements of Assets and Liabilities; the
Personal Data Sheet submitted to the NBI; the contents of an Application for
Marriage; the Community Tax Certificate

3). Narration of facts means an assertion of a fact and does not include
statements of opinion or conclusions of law. Thus when the accused placed
himself as “eligible” in his statement of candidacy when in truth he is
disqualified, this is not a narration of fact but a conclusion of law. Similarly,
the accused as claimant to a land stated in his application that he entitled to
the ownership when under the law he is disqualified, is not liable
4). There is no falsification if there is some colorable truth in the statement
of facts by the accused

5). False statements in an application form of the Civil Service, which was
under oath, for police examination is perjury not falsification

6). But when a third person, not the Affiant, alters a prepared Affidavit, the
crime committed by him is falsification under mode number 6

E. Altering true dates. This requires that the date must be material as in the
date of birth or marriage; date of arrest; date when a search warrant was
issued; date of taking the oath of office

F. Making alterations or intercalations in a genuine document which changes

its meaning. The change must affect the integrity of the document. It must
make the document speak something false so that alterations to make it
speak the truth cannot be falsification.

1. Changing the grades in one’s Transcript of Records

2. Changing one’s time of arrival in the DTR

3. Changing the stated consideration a deed of sale

4. Deleting a condition in a contract of lease

G. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be an original

when no such original exist, or including in such copy a statement contrary
to, or different from, that of the genuine original.

1. This can only be committed by the Official Custodian of documents

2. Example: Issuing a Certified True Copy of a birth certificate of a person

when no such certificate exists or
3. Issuing a true copy of a title and indicating therein the land is mortgaged
when no such encumbrance exist on the original on file with the office

H. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a

protocol, registry or official book

1. Example: Inserting a Birth Certificate in the recorded of the Civil Registrar

to make it appear the birth was recorded

ART. 172. Falsification by a private individual and

Use of falsified documents

I. Punishes these acts: (1) If the falsification is by a private person and the
document falsified is a public or commercial document (2) Falsification by
any person of a private document and (3) Introducing in any judicial
proceeding a falsified document or (4) Using a falsified document in any
transaction

II. There are only seven acts of falsification of a private person. In the
falsification of a private document the damage includes damage to honor.

III. In introducing a falsified document in a judicial proceeding, damage is not

required. Example: The act of the defendant in introducing a falsified receipt
to show that the debt was paid.

IV. In the crime use of a falsified document, the user is not the falsifier but a
third person, who must know the falsity of the document.
ART. 173. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegram
and telephone messages

!. Acts punished: (1) The act of falsifying said messages (2) Uttering of said
falsified messages and (3) Using such falsified damages with intent to cause
damage or to the damage of third persons

II. The acts of falsifying and uttering:

1). The offender must be officers or employees of the government or of a

private entity engaged in the business of sending or receiving such
messages

2) Examples: making up a false “break-up” telegram or decreasing the

number of the words in a message even if the contents are not changed

III. The crime of using may be committed by any person

Crimes Affecting Medical Certificate, Certificates

of Merit and the Like

A. Acts punished:

1. Issuing a false medical certificate by a physician or surgeon

a). The contents are not true in that the person was never examined; or that
he actually had no illness; or that the illness is not as serious as stated in the
certificate; or that the period of confinement or rest is not as stated therein.
2. Issuing a false certificate of merit or service, good conduct or similar
circumstances by a public officer

a). as in the case of a barangay captain who issues a Certificate of Good

Moral Character to a bully , or a head of office who issues a Certificate of
Exemplary Conduct to an employee with several disciplinary penalties

3). The act of falsifying by a private person of medical certificate or

certificate of merit

a). The name of the crime is Falsification of a Medical Certificate or

Certificate of Merit to distinguish it from ordinary falsification

b). Example: the patient who altered the period of days of confinement

4. The act of knowingly using said false certificates

Art. 175. Manufacturing and Possession of instruments

or implements for falsification

Acts punished:

1. Making any instrument or implements intended to be used in the crime

of counterfeiting or falsification.

a). Examples: false seals, false branding instruments

b). The tools need not be a complete set

2. Introducing into the Philippines of said instruments or implements

3. Possession of said implements with animus utendi or intent to use

OTHER FALSITIES

Note: the subject of these falsities are not papers, instruments or documents
but : (1) official authority or functions; (2) rank, title, names, (3) uniforms and
insignias and (4) testimonies under oath. These are also capable of being
falsified or subjected to acts of deception

Art. 177. Usurpation of Authority or official functions

A. Usurpation of Authority- the crime committed by a person who knowingly

and falsely represents himself to be an officer agent, representative or any
department or agency of the Philippine government or foreign country. :

1. The representation must be active, i.e by words or acts and the accused
need not actually perform any function pertaining to the office
misrepresented. What is punished is the act of false misrepresentation. He
who does not object when introduced as a ranking official is not guilty of
usurpation.

2. This is different from the crime of Usurpation of Powers under articles

239 to 241 which deals with interference in the functions of one department
by another department

3. This includes any government owned or controlled corporations

4. Example: a private person greets tourists, gives them the key to the city,
welcomes them, by declaring that he is the city mayor
B. Usurpation of Functions- the crime committed by any person who actually
performs an act pertaining to a public official of the government or any
agency thereof accompanied by a pretense that he is such public official.

1. There must be a pretense or falsie assertion of being a public official. In

the absence thereof, there is no usurpation of functions.

a) Thus one who enters a public school ands starts teaching pupils,
without claiming to be a teacher, is not liable. Same with one who asks
questions on witnesses about a crime without asserting he is a police
investigator. Or one who directs traffic might be performing a civic action.

b) One who introduces himself to be an NBI agent and begins interrogating

witnesses is liable. As with one who claims to be a BIR agent and begins
going over the books of a businessman, or one who claims to be with the
Department of Labor and starts inquiries as to the employment status of
employees.

c) There is such a crime as Seduction through Usurpation of Official

Functions.

2. The offender may himself be a public official who assumes a position

without color of law. As in the case of a number one councilor who took over
the position of the mayor who was on leave despite opinions that it be the
vice mayor who must be the acting mayor.

3. However, if the authority or function usurped pertains to a diplomatic,

consular or other accredited officers of a foreign government, the offender is
also liable under R.A. 75.

Art. 178. Using Fictitious Name and concealing true name.

A. Using Fictitious Name is the act of publicly using a name other than one’s
registered or baptismal name for the purpose of either to: (1) conceal a crime
(2) evade judgment or (3) cause damage to public interest

1. A fictitious name is any name which a person publicly applies to himself

without authority of law.

2. The purpose is material even if it is simply to cause confusion among

the public

3. If the purpose is to cause damage to a private person’s interest, the

crime may constitute estafa

4. If the purpose is to obstruct justice the offense is punished under P.D.

1829

5. The use of Aliases is punished under C.A. 142