REPUBLIC ACT NO.

11053- ANTI-
HAZING ACT OF 2018
(AMENDING RA 8049 ANTI-HAZING ACT OF 1995)
 DEFINITION OF HAZING

Hazing refers to any act that results in physical or psychological suffering, harm, or
injury inflicted on a recruit, neophyte, applicant, or member as part of an initiation or a
requirement for continuing membership in a fraternity, sorority, or organization.
Hazing includes paddling, whipping, beating, branding, forced calisthenics,
exposure to the weather, forced consumption of any food, liquor, beverage, drug or other
substance, or any other brutal treatment of forced physical activity which is likely to
adversely affect the physical and psychological health of such recruit, neophyte, applicant,
or member. 
Hazing shall also include any activity, intentionally made or otherwise, by one
person alone or acting with others, that tends to humiliate or embarrass, degrade, abuse, or
endanger, by requiring a recruit, neophyte, applicant or member to do menial, silly, or
foolish tasks (Section 2 of RA No. 8049 as amended by RA No. 11053, June 29, 2018).
 ELEMENTS OF HAZING

1. That there is initiation rite or practice made as a prerequisite for admission

or a requirement for continuing membership in a fraternity, sorority, or
organization;
2. That during the initiation rite or practice, physical or psychological
suffering, harm, or injury is inflected on a recruit, neophyte, applicant, or
member of the fraternity, sorority or organization; and
3. As a consequence of the hazing, death, rape and sodomy, or mutilation
results.
INITIATION RITE OR PRACTICE

Initiation or initiation rites refer to ceremonies,

practices, rituals, or other acts, whether formal or informal,
that a person must perform or take part in order to be
accepted into a fraternity, sorority, or organization as a full-
fledged member. It includes ceremonies, practices, rituals,
and other acts in all stages of membership in a fraternity,
sorority, or organization.
 ORGANIZATION

Organization refers to an organized body of people which includes, but is not

limited to, any club, association, group, fraternity, and sorority. This term shall
include:
1. Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP)
2. Philippine National Police (PNP)
3. Philippine Military Academy (PMA)
4. Philippine National Police Academy (PNPA)
5. other similar to those abovementioned uniformed service learning institutions.
6. Philippine Merchant Academy
7. Company or private corporation
DEATH, RAPE, SODOMY OR MUTILATION

RA No. 8049 as amended by RA No. 11053, declares

all forms of hazing shall be prohibited in fraternities,
sororities, and organizations. Section 14 thereof prescribes
for penalties for all forms of hazing. However, the penalty
is higher where death, rape, sodomy, or mutilation results
from hazing.
MALUM PROHIBITUM

Congress created a special law on hazing founded upon the

principle of mala prohibita where good faith is not a defense.

The deliberation of the Senate shows that what is important is

not the intention to kill the neophyte during the hazing but the
result of the act hazing. Also, the framers of the law intended that
the consent of the victim to be injured shall not be a defense in
hazing. The very act of inflicting physical or psychological pain is
a punishable act. Death is just an aggravating circumstance.
PERSONS LIABLE FOR HAZING

1. Presence – Sec. 14, RA No. 11053 punishes all persons who are present in the
conduct of the hazing. However, the penalty is higher if the persons, who are present
during the hazing, are: (1) officers of the fraternity, sorority, or organization; (2)
former officers, nonresident members, or alumni thereof; (3) members thereof who
are intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs.

2. Actual participation – The penalty for hazing is also higher if the person actually
participated in the conduct of hazing. The actual participants are liable for hazing
even if they are not members of the fraternity, sorority, or organization.
PERSONS LIABLE FOR HAZING

3. Planning – The law punishes all persons, who actually planned the conduct of
the hazing. Even though these planners were not present when the acts
constituting hazing were committed, they shall still be liable as principals.

4. Adviser – The law also punishes the adviser of a fraternity, sorority, or

organization who is present when the acts constituting the hazing were
committed and failed to take action to prevent the same from occurring or
failed to promptly report the same to the law enforcement authorities if such
adviser or advisers can do so without peril to their person or their family.
PERSONS LIABLE FOR HAZING

5. Inducement- Officers or members of the fraternity, sorority, or

organization, who knowingly cooperated in carrying out the hazing by
inducing the victim to the present thereat, are liable for hazing.

6. Incumbent officers- the incumbent officers of the fraternity, sorority, or

organization concerned shall be jointly liable with those members who
actually participated in the hazing.
PERSONS LIABLE FOR HAZING

7. Owner or lessee – The law punishes the owner or lessee of the place where hazing is
conducted as principal for hazing, when he has actual knowledge of the hazing conducted
therein but failed to take any action to prevent the same from occurring or failed to promptly
report the same to the law enforcement authorities if they can do so without peril to their
person or their family.

8. Parents- Under the law, if the hazing is held in the home of one of the officers or members of
the fraternity, sorority, or organization, the parents shall be held liable as principals for hazing
when they have actual knowledge of the hazing conducted therein but failed to take any
action to prevent the same from occurring or failed to promptly report the same to the law
enforcement authorities if such parents can do so without peril to their person or their family.
PERSONS LIABLE FOR HAZING

9. School Authorities - School authorities including faculty members as well as

barangay, municipal, or city officials shall be liable as an accomplice for hazing
conducted by fraternities, sororities, and other organizations , if it can be shown that:
(1) the school or barangay, municipal, or city officials allowed or consented to the
conduct pf hazing; or (2) where there is actual knowledge of hazing, but such
officials failed to take any action to prevent the same from occurring or failed to
promptly report to the law enforcement authorities if the same can be done without
peril to their person or their family.
Even though school authorities and faculty members have had no direct
participation in hazing, they may nonetheless be charged as accomplices if
it is shown that: (1) hazing occurred; (2) the accused are school authorities
or faculty members; and (3) they consented to or failed to take preventive
action against hazing in spite actual knowledge thereof (People v. Bayabos,
supra) or to report The matter to the authorities.
 The corresponding responsibilities of the principal, accomplice, and accessory are
distinct from each other. As long as the commission of the offense (hazing) can be
duly established in evidence, the determination of the liability of the accomplice
can proceed independently of that of the principal ( People v. Bayabos, supra).
 
Under Section 7 of RA No. 8049 as amended by RA No. 11053, the faculty adviser
or advisers, who accepted his role after being selected by an accredited fraternity,
sorority, or organization, shall be responsible for monitoring the activities of the
fraternity, sorority, or organization. In case of violation of any of the provisions of
this Act, it is presumed that the faculty adviser has knowledge and consented to the
commission of any of the unlawful acts stated therein.
 
Under Section 4, 5, 10, and 11 of RA No. 8049 as amended by RA No. 11503,
initiation rites are allowed if the fraternity, sorority, or organization obtained
approval from school authority, or punong barangay, or city or municipal mayor,
authorities upon writing application undertaking that no harm of any kind shall be
committed. During approved initiation rites, at least two school or barangay, or
city or municipal representatives must be present. If hazing is still committed
despite their presence, no liability shall attach to them unless it is proven that they
failed to perform an overt act to prevent or stop the commission thereof.

Failure to provide school representatives during the approved initiations rites is

also punishable.
PERSONS LIABLE FOR HAZING

10. Obstruction of Justice- The law also punishes former officers,

nonresident members, or alumni of the fraternity, sorority, or
organization who, after the commission of hazing will perform any act
to hide, conceal, or otherwise hamper or obstruct any investigation that
will be conducted thereafter.
PERSONS LIABLE FOR HAZING

11. Forcible Recruitment- The law also punishes any person who shall
intimidate, threaten, force, or employ, or administer any form of
vexation against another person for the purpose of recruitment in joining
or promoting a particular fraternity, sorority, or organization.

The persistent and repeated proposal or invitation made to a person

who had twice refused to participate or join to the proposed fraternity,
sorority, or organization, shall be prima facie evidence of vexation for
12. Corporate or Company Officers- Under RA No. 8049, in no case shall
hazing be made a recruitment for employment in any business or
corporation. The president, manager, director, or other responsible officer of
business or corporations engaged in hazing as a recruitment for
employment also criminally liable.
 COMMON DEFENSE

In hazing, taking action to prevent the occurrence of hazing or reporting the matter to the
police is a defense by the following offenders:
1. Adviser;
2. Owner or lessee of the place of hazing;
3. Parents of the member or officer of fraternity, sorority, or organization;
4. School authorities and faculty members, barangay, municipal, or city officials if they
being charged on the basis of their knowledge of the conduct of hazing.

*Taking preventive measure or reporting the matter to the authorities will also negate
the presumption of actual participation.
REGULATED HAZING

Not all forms of initiation rites are prohibited by the law. Section 2 of RA No. 8049
provides that initiation rites of fraternities, sororities, or organizations shall be allowed
provided that the following requisites are met:

1. That the fraternity, sorority, or organizations has a prior written notice to the school
authorities or head of organization;

2. The said written notice must be secured at least seven days before the conduct of
such initiation;
REGULATED HAZING

3. That the written notice shall indicate:

(a) The period of the initiation activities, which shall not exceed three days;
(b) The names of those to be subjected to such activities; and
(c) An undertaking that no physical violence be employed by anybody during such initiation
rites(Dungo v. People, supra; 2002 Bar Exam).
 
RA No. 8049 qualifies that the physical, mental and psychological testing and training
procedure and practices members to determine and enhance the physical, mental and
psychological fitness of prospective regular of the AFP and the PNP, as approved by the secretary
National Defense and the National police Commission, duly recommended by the Chief of
Staff of the AFP and the director General of the PNP, shall not be considered as hazing.
REFERENCES:

1. SPECIAL PENAL LAWS (2019 Edition), Judge MARLO B. CAMPANILLA

2. www.lawphil.net
3. www.cnnphilippines.com