ARTICLE 12 – EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES

Exempting circumstances (non-imputality) are those grounds for exemption from punishment
because there is wanting in the agent of the crime any of the conditions which make the act voluntary or
negligent.

In exempting circumstances, there is a crime committed but no criminal liability arises.

 ARTICLE 12 (1) – IMBECILITY OR INSANITY

1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted during a lucid interval.

When the imbecile or an insane person has committed an act which the law defines as a felony
(delito), the court shall order his confinement in one of the hospitals or asylums established for persons
thus afflicted, which he shall not be permitted to leave without first obtaining the permission of the same
court.

IMBECILITY INSANITY
DEFINITION An imbecile is one who, while Insanity exists when there is a
advanced in age, has a mental complete deprivation of
development comparable to that intelligence in committing the
of children between two to seven act.
years of age.
EXISTENCE OF LUCID
None Present
INTERVAL
EXEMPTION FROM Exempt from criminal liability in Not exempt from criminal
CRIMINAL all cases. liability if it can be shown that he
LIABILITY acted during a lucid interval.

 TESTS FOR EXEMPTION ON GROUNDS OF INSANITY

1. Test of cognition – whether the accused acted with complete deprivation of intelligence in
committing said crime.
2. Test of volition – whether the accused acted in total deprivation of freedom of will.

 OTHER INSTANCES OF INSANITY

1. Schizophrenia
2. Kleptomania
3. Epilepsy
4. Lack of controlled consciousness (eg, dreaming)
5. Somnambulism

 BASIS OF ART. 12 (1)

Complete absence of intelligence, an element of voluntariness.

 ARTICLE 12 (2) – A PERSON UNDER 9 YEARS OF AGE

2. A person under nine years of age.

The phrase "under nine years" should be construed "nine years or less;"
 AGE OF ABSOLUTE IRRESPONSIBILITY RAISED TO FIFTEEN YEARS OF AGE

Republic Act No. 9344 otherwise known as "Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006" raised the
age of absolute irresponsibility from nine (9) to fifteen (15) years of age.

Under Section 6 of the said law, a child fifteen (15) years of age or under at the time of the
commission of the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability. However, the child shall be subject to
an intervention program as provided under Section 20 of the same law.

 BASIS OF ART. 12 (2)

Complete absence of intelligence.

 ARTICLE 12 (3) – OVER 9 AND UNDER 15 OF AGE

3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen, unless he has acted with discernment, in which case,
such minor shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Art. 80 of this Code.

Discernment

It is the mental capacity to understand the difference between right and wrong including the
capacity to fully appreciate the consequences of his unlawful act.

 MIN. AGE OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY AN TREATMENT OF CHILD BELOW AGE

OF RESPONSIBILITY

AGE BRACKET CRIMINAL LIABILTY TREATMENT

15 years old and below The child shall be subjected to a
Exempt community-based intervention
program.
Above 15 but below 18, who acted The child shall be subjected to a
WITHOUT discernment Exempt community-based intervention
program.
Above 15 but below 18, who acted The child shall be subjected to a
Not exempt
WITH discernment diversion program.

 BASIS OF ART. 12 (2)

Complete absence of intelligence.

 ART. 12 (4) - ACCIDENT

4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes an injury by mere accident
without fault or intention of causing it.

ELEMENTS:

1. A person is performing a lawful act;

2. With due care;
3. He causes an injury to another by mere accident;
4. Without fault or intention of causing it.

ACCIDENT

An accident is something that happens outside the sway of our will, and although it comes about
through some act of our will, lies beyond the bounds of humanly foreseeable consequences. It
presupposes a lack of intention to commit the wrong done.

 BASIS OF ART. 12 (4)

The exempting circumstance in paragraph 4 of Art. 12 is based on lack of negligence and

intent.

 ART 12 (5) – IRRESISTABLE FORCE

5. Any person who act under the compulsion of irresistible force.

IRRESISTABLE FORCE

It is a degree of force which is external or physical which reduces the person to a mere instrument
and the acts produced are done without and against his will.

ELEMENTS:

1. That the compulsion is by means of physical force.

2. That the physical force must be irresistible.
3. That the physical force must come from a third person.

 BASIS OF ART 12 (5)

The exempting circumstance in paragraph 5 of Art. 12 is based on the complete absence of

freedom, an element of voluntariness
 ART. 12 (6) – UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR

6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury.

ELEMENTS:

1. That the threat which causes the fear is of an evil greater than or at least equal to, that which he is
required to commit;
2. That it promises an evil of such gravity and imminence that the ordinary man would have succumbed
to it.

IRRESISTABLE FORCE UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR

the offender uses violence or physical force to the offender employs intimidation or threat in
compel another person to commit a crime compelling another to commit a crime

 BASIS OF ART. 12 (6)

Absence of freedom

 ARTICLE 12 (7) – PREVENTED BY INSUPERABLE CAUSE

7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when prevented by some lawful insuperable
cause.

ELEMENTS:

1. That an act is required by law to be done;

2. That a person fails to perform such act;
3. That his failure to perform such act was due to some lawful or insuperable cause.
 BASIS OF ART. 12 (7)

The circumstance in paragraph 7 of Art. 12 exempts the accused from criminal liability, because
he acts without intent, the third condition of voluntariness in intentional felony.

JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES

No crime, no criminal liability There is a crime, but no criminal liability
ART. 13 – MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

are those which, if present in the commission of the crime, do not entirely free the actor from
criminal liability, but serve only to reduce the penalty.

 BASIS OF ART. 13

Mitigating circumstances are based on the diminution of either freedom of action, intelligence, or intent,
or on the lesser perversity of the offender.

 CLASSES OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

ORDINARY MITIGATING PRIVILEGED MITIGATING

Can be offset by aggravating circumstances
Ordinary mitigating circumstances, if not offset,
will operate to reduce the penalty to the
minimum period, provided the penalty is a
divisible one.
Circumstances enumerated in Paragraphs 1-10 of
Art. 13
Can never be offset by any aggravating
circumstance
Privileged mitigating circumstances operate to
reduce the penalty by one to two degrees,
depending upon what the law provides.
Minority, incomplete self-defense, two or more
mitigating circumstances without any aggravating
circumstances

ART. 13 (1) – INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING OR EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE

Par. 1. — Those mentioned in the preceding chapter when all the requisites necessary to justify the act
or to exempt from criminal liability in the respective cases are not attendant.

INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING OR EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE

Not all the requisites to justify the act are present or not all the requisites to exempt from criminal
liability are present.

 9 CIRCUMSTANCES OF JUSTIFICATION OR EXEMPTION WHICH MAY GIVE PLACE

TO MITIGATION
1. Self-defense
2. Defense of relatives
3. Defense of stranger
4. State of necessity
5. Performance of duty
6. Obedience to order of superior
7. Minority over 9 and under 15 years of age
8. Accident
9. Uncontrollable fear
 EFFECT ON CRIMINAL LIABILITY

LESS than the majority of the requisites necessary

to justify the act or exempt from criminal liability Ordinary Mitigating Circumstance
are present.
MAJORITY of the requisites needed to justify the
Privileged Mitigating Circumstance
act or exempt from criminal liability are present.

 ART. 13 (2) – UNDER 18 OR OVER 70 YEARS OLD

Par. 2. — That the offender is under eighteen years of age or over seventy years. In the
case of the minor, he shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of
Article 80 (now Art. 192, P.D. No. 603).

Under 18 years of age = entitled to a mitigating

ART. 13 (2)
circumstance of minority
repealed by…
15 or over but under 18 years of age
(without discernment)

= EXEMPT
RA 9344 – “Juvenile Justice and Welfare
15 or over but under 18 years of age
Act of
(with discernment)
2006”
=
MITIGATING/NOT EXEMPT
(goes to diversion programs)

 EFFECT ON CRIMINAL LIABILITY

AGE BRACKET CRIMINAL LIABILITY

15 and under Exempting
Without discernment: Exempting
Over 15 and under 18
With discernment: Mitigating (not exempted)
18 to 70 Full Criminal Responsibility
Over 70 Mitigating

 ART. 13 (3) – NO INTENTION TO COMMIT SO GRAVE A WRONG (PRAETER

INTENTIONEM)

Par. 3. — That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that
committed.

This circumstance can be taken into account only when the facts proven show that there is a
notable and evident disproportion between the means employed to execute the criminal act and its
consequences.

Not applicable to felonies by negligence

Not applicable when the offender employed brute force
Mitigating when the victim dies (crimes against persons)
Where the acts employed by the accused were reasonably sufficient to produce and did actually produce
the death of the victim = not mitigating

 ART. 13 (4) – SUFFICIENT THREAT OR PROVOCATION

Par. 4. — That sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party
immediately preceded the act.

THREAT

U because if it was, the threat to inflict real injury becomes an unlawful aggression which may give rise to
self-defense and thus, no longer a mitigating circumstance.

PROVOCATION

Any unjust or improper conduct or act of the offended party, capable of exciting, inciting, or irritating
any one.

 REQUISITES
1. That the provocation must be sufficient
2. That it must originate from the offended party
3. That the provocation must be immediate to the act

 DIFFERENCE OF SUFFICIENT THREAT OR PROVOCATION

As an element of self-defense It pertains to its absence on the part of the person

It pertains to the presence on the part of the
As a mitigating circumstance
offended party.

 ART. 13 (5) – VINDICATION OF GRAVE OFFENSE

Par. 5. — That the act was committed in the immediate vindication of a grave offense to
the one committing the felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitimate,
natural or adopted brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees.

 REQUISITES:

1. That there be a grave offense done to the one committing the felony, his spouse, ascendants,
descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same
degrees;

2. That the felony is committed in vindication of such grave offense. A lapse of time is allowed between
the vindication and the doing of the grave offense.
 SUFFICIENT THREAT OR PROVOCATION
It is made directly only to the person committing
the felony.
The cause that brought about the provocation need
not be a grave offense.
It is necessary that the provocation or threat
immediately preceded the act. There must be no
interval of time between the provocation and the
commission of the crime.
VINDICATION OF GRAVE OFFENSE
The grave offense may be committed also against
the offender’s relatives mentioned in the law.
The offended party must have done a grave offense
against the offender or his relatives mentioned in
the law.
The vindication of the grave offense may be
proximate which admits of interval of time
between the grave offense committed by the
offended party and the commission of the crime of
the accused.

 ART. 13 (6) – PASSION OR OBFUSCATION

Par. 6. — That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have produced passion or
obfuscation.

 REQUISITES:
1. The accused acted upon an impulse.
2. The impulse must be so powerful that it naturally produced passion or obfuscation in him.

 PASSION OR OBFUSCATION

Passion and obfuscation refer to emotional feeling which produces excitement so powerful as to
overcome reason and self-control. It must come from prior unjust or improper acts. The passion and
obfuscation must emanate from legitimate sentiments.

 WHY IS PASSION OR OBFUSCATION MITIGATING?

When there are causes naturally producing in a person powerful excitement, he loses his reason
and self-control, thereby diminishing the exercise of his will power.

 CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE PASSION OR OBFUSCATION IS NOT A MITIGATING

CIRCUMSTANCE
1. Lawlessness
2. Revenge

PASSION/OBFUSCATION
It is produced by an impulse which may cause
provocation.
The offense need not be immediate. It is only
required that the influence thereof lasts until the
moment the crime is committed.
PROVOCATION
The provocation comes from the injured party.
It must immediately precede the commission of
the crime.

PASSION/OBFUSCATION IRRESISTABLE FORCE

Mitigating Exempting
It cannot give rise to irresistible force because passion It requires physical force
or obfuscation has no physical force
The passion or obfuscation is on the offender himself It must come from a third person
It must arise from lawful sentiments The force used is unlawful
 ART. 13 (7) – VOLUNTARY SURRENDER OR CONFESSION OF GUILT

Par. 7. — That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in authority or his agents, or
that he had voluntarily confessed his guilt before the court prior to the presentation of the evidence for
the prosecution.

 TWO MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE ARE PROVIDED IN THIS PAR:

1. Voluntary surrender to a person in authority or his agents.
2. Voluntary confession of guilt before the court prior to the presentation of evidence for the
prosecution.

 REQUISITES OF VOLUNTARY SURRENDER

1. That the offender had not been actually arrested.
2. That the offender surrendered himself to a person in authority or to the latter's agent.
3. That the surrender was voluntary (spontaneous, showing the intent of the accused to submit
himself unconditionally to the authorities)

 REQUISITES OF PLEA OF GUILTY

1. That the offender spontaneously confessed his guilt;
2. That the confession of guilt was made in open court, that is, before the competent court that is to
try the case; and
3. That the confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation of evidence for the prosecution.

 ART. 13 (8) – PHYSICAL DEFECT

Par. 8. — That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering from some physical defect
which thus restricts his means of action, defense, or communication with his fellow beings.

PHYSICAL DEFECT

A person's physical condition, such as being deaf and dumb, blind, armless, cripple, or stutterer,
whereby his means of action, defense or communication with others are restricted or limited. The
physical defect that a person may have must have a relation to the commission of the crime.

 REQUISITES OF PHYSICAL DEFECT

1. The offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering from some physical defect; and
2. Such physical defect restricts his means of action, defense, or communication with his fellow
beings.
 ART. 13 (9) – ILLNESS OF THE OFFENDER

Par. 9. — Such illness of the offender as would diminish the exercise of the will-power of the offender
without however depriving him of consciousness of his acts.

 REQUISITES OF ILLNESS OFOFFENDER

1. That the illness of the offender must diminish the exercise of his will-power.
2. That such illness should not deprive the offender of consciousness of his acts.

 ART. 13 (10) – SIMILAR AND ANALOGOUS CIRCUMSTANCES

Par. 10. — And, finally, any other circumstance of a similar nature and analogous to those
abovementioned.

EXAMPLES:

1. The act of the offender of leading the law enforcers to the place where he buried the instrument of the
crime has been considered as equivalent to voluntary surrender.
2. Stealing by a person who is driven to do so out of extreme poverty is considered as analogous to
incomplete state of necessity, unless he became impoverished because of his own way of living his
life, i.e. he had so many vices.
3. Defendant who is 60 years old with failing eyesight is similar to a case of a person over 70 years of
age.
4. Impulse of jealous feeling, similar to passion and obfuscation.
5. Voluntary restitution of property, similar to voluntary surrender.
6. Outraged feeling of the owner of animal taken for ransom is analogous to vindication of grave
offense.
7. Esprit de corps is similar to passion and obfuscation.
8. Wartime state of confusion resulting in illegal possession of firearm after the liberation, as being
similar to lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong.
9. Testifying for the prosecution without being discharged from the information, as being like a plea of
guilty.
10. Acting out of embarrassment and fear caused by the victim because of gambling debts of the accused,
as akin to passion or obfuscation.
11. Retaliating for having been assaulted during a public dance where the accused was well known and
respected, as similar to vindication.