culpa.
This maxim is not an absoluteone because it is not applied to
Express or implied repeal.
- Express or implied repealrefers to the manner the repeal is
done.Express repeal takes place when a subsequent lawcontains a
provision that such law repeals an earlierenactment. For example, in
Republic Act No. 6425 (TheDangerous Drugs Act of 1972), there is an
expressprovision of repeal of Title V of the Revised Penal
Code.Implied repeals are not favored. It requires a competentcourt
to declare an implied repeal. An implied repeal willtake place when
there is a law on a particular subjectmatter and a subsequent law is passed
also on the samesubject matter but is inconsistent with the first law,
suchthat the two laws cannot stand together, one of the twolaws
must give way. It is the earlier that will give way tothe later law because the
later law expresses the recentlegislative sentiment. So you can have
an implied repealwhen there are two inconsistent laws. When the
earlierlaw does not expressly provide that it is repealing anearlier law, what
has taken place here is implied repeal.If the two laws can be reconciled, the
court shall alwaystry to avoid implied repeals. For example, under
Article 9,light felonies are those infractions of the law for
thecommission of which a penalty of arresto mayor or a finenot exceeding
P200.00 or both is provided. On the otherhand, under Article 26, a fine
whether imposed as asingle or an alternative penalty, if it exceeds
P6,000.00but is not less than P200.00, is considered a
correctionalpenalty. These two articles appear to be inconsistent.
Soto harmonize them, the Supreme Court ruled that if theissue
involves the prescription of the crime, the felonywill be considered a
light felony and, therefore,prescribes within two months. But if the
issue involvesprescription of the penalty, the fine of P200.00 will
beconsidered correctional and it will prescribe within 10years.
Clearly, the court avoided the collision betweenthe two
articles.Consequences if repeal of penal law is express orimplied:1.
If a penal law is
impliedly repealed
, thesubsequent repeal of the repealing law will revive theoriginal
law.
So the act or omission which waspunished as a crime under the
original law will berevived and the same shall again be crimes
althoughduring the implied repeal they may not bepunishable.
2.
If the
repeal is express
, the repeal of the repealinglaw will not revive the first law, so the
act or omission will no longer be penalized.
These effects of repeal do not apply to self-repealing lawsor those
which have automatic termination. An exampleis the Rent Control Law
which is revived by Congressevery two years.When there is a repeal, the repealing
law expresses thelegislative intention to do away with such law,
and,therefore, implies a condonation of the punishment.
Suchlegislative intention does not exist in a self-terminatinglaw
because there was no repeal at all.
BASIC MAXIMS IN CRIMINAL LAW
Doctrine of Pro Reo
Whenever a penal law is to be construed or applied andthe law admits of two
interpretations - one lenient to theoffender and one strict to the
offender- thatinterpretation which is lenient or favorable to
theoffender will be adopted.This is in consonance with the fundamental
rule that alldoubts shall be construed in favor of the accused andconsistent
with the presumption of innocence of theaccused. This is peculiar
only to criminal law.One boy was accused of parricide and was found
guilty.This is punished by reclusion perpetua to death. Assumingyou
were the judge, would you give the accused thebenefit of the Indeterminate
Sentence Law (ISLAW)? TheISLAW does not apply when the penalty
imposed is lifeimprisonment or death. Would you consider the
penaltyimposable or the penalty imposed, taking intoconsideration
the mitigating circumstance of minority?
If you will answer “no,” then you go against the doctrine of
Pro Reo, because you can interpret the ISLAW in a morelenient manner.
Taking into account the doctrine, we caninterpret the ISLAW to mean that
the penalty imposableand not the penalty prescribed by law, since it is
morefavorable for the accused to interpret the law.
Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege
There is no crime when there is no law punishing thesame. This is
true to civil law countries, but not to commonlaw countries.Because
of this maxim, there is no common law crime inthe Philippines. No
matter how wrongful, evil or bad act is,if there is no law defining the
act, the same is notconsidered a crime.Common law crimes are
wrongful acts which thecommunity/ society condemns as contemptible,
eventhough there is no law declaring the act criminal.Not any law
punishing an act or omission may be valid as acriminal law. If the law
punishing an act is ambiguous, it isnull and void.
Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea
The act cannot be criminal where the mind is not criminal.This is
true to a felony characterized by dolo, but not afelony resulting from
culpable felonies, or thosethat result from negligence.
Utilitarian Theory or Protective Theory
The primary purpose of the punishment under criminal lawis the
protection of society from actual or potentialwrongdoers. The
courts, therefore, in exacting retributionfor the wronged society,
should direct the punishment topotential or actual wrongdoers,
since criminal law isdirected against acts and omissions which the
society doesnot approve of. Consistent with this theory, the
malaprohibita principle which punishes an offense regardless
of malice or criminal intent, should not be utilized to applythe full
harshness of the special law.In
Magno vs. CA,
decided on June 26, 1992, the SupremeCourt acquitted Magno of violation
of Batas Pambansa Blg.22 when he acted without malice. The
wrongdoer is notMagno but the lessor who deposited the checks. He
shouldhave returned the checks to Magno when he pulled out theequipment. To
convict the accused would defeat the nobleobjective of the law and the law
would be tainted withmaterialism and opportunism.
DEVELOPMENT OF CRIMINAL LAW IN THEPHILIPPINES
Code of Kalantiao
If you will be asked about the development of criminal lawin the Philippines,
do not start with the Revised PenalCode. Under the Code of Kalantiao,
there were penalprovisions. Under this code, if a man would have a
relationwith a married woman, she is penalized. Even
offendingreligious things, such as gods, are penalized. The Code
of Kalantiao has certain penal provisions. The Filipinos havetheir own
set of penology also.
Spanish Codigo Penal
When the Spanish Colonizers came, the Spanish CodigoPenal was
made applicable and extended to thePhilippines by Royal Decree of
1870. This was madeeffective in the Philippines on July 14, 1876.
Who is Rafael Del Pan?
He drafted a correctional code which was after theSpanish Codigo Penal was
extended to the Philippines.But that correctional code was never
enacted into law.Instead, a committee was organized headed by
thenAnacleto Diaz. This committee was the one which draftedthe
present Revised Penal Code.
The Present Revised Penal Code
When a committee to draft the Revised Penal Code wasformed, one of
the reference that they took hold of wasthe correctional code of Del Pan.
In fact, many provisionsof the Revised Penal Code were no longer from
theSpanish Penal Code; they were lifted from thecorrectional code of
Del Pan. So it was him whoformulated or paraphrased this provision
making itsimpler and more understandable to Filipinos because
atthat time, there were only a handful who understoodSpanish.
Code of Crimes by Guevarra
During the time of President Manuel Roxas, a codecommission was
tasked to draft a penal code that will bemore in keeping with the custom,
traditions, traits as wellas beliefs of the Filipinos. During that time,
the codecommittee drafted the so-called Code of Crimes. This
too,slept in Congress. It was never enacted into law. Amongthose
who participated in drafting the Code of Crimeswas Judge Guellermo
Guevarra.Since that Code of Crimes was never enacted as law,
heenacted his own code of crimes. But it was the Code of Crimes that was
presented in the Batasan as Cabinet BillNo. 2. Because the Code of Crimes
prepared by Guevarrawas more of a moral code than a penal code,
there wereseveral oppositions against the code.
Proposed Penal Code of the Philippines
Through Assemblyman Estelito Mendoza, the UP LawCenter formed a
committee which drafted the Penal Codeof the Philippines. This Penal Code
was substituted asCabinet Bill No. 2 and this has been discussed in
the floorof the Batasang Pambansa. So the Code of Crimes now inCongress was
not the Code of Crimes during the time of President Roxas. This is a
different one. Cabinet Bill No. 2is the Penal Code of the Philippines
drafted by a codecommittee chosen by the UP Law Center, one of
themwas Professor Ortega. There were seven members of thecode
committee. It would have been enacted into law if not for the dissolution of the
Batasang Pambansa. TheCongress was planning to revive it so that it can
beenacted into law.
Special Laws
During Martial Law, there are many Presidential Decreesissued aside
from the special laws passed by thePhilippine Legislature
Commission. All these special lawswhich are penal in character, are
part of our Penal Code