B.

CRIMES AGAINST
THE FUNDAMENTAL
LAW OF THE STATE
(Criminal Law:Book II)
PREPARED BY: PEARLA MAE ANGELA P. AGMATA, JD.
Crimes against the fundamental law of the
state
• Arbitrary detention (Art 124)
• Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities (Art. 125)
• Delaying release (Art. 126)
• Expulsion (Art. 127)
• Violation of Domicile (Art. 128)
• Search Warrants Maliciously Obtained and abuse in the service of those legally
obtained (Art. 129)
• Searching domicile without witnesses (Art. 130)
• Prohibition, interruption, and dissolution of peaceful meetings (Art. 131)
• Interruption of religious worship (Art. 131)
• Offending the religious feelings (Art. 133)
ARBITRARY DETENTION

• ELEMENTS
a. Offender is a public official or employee
b. He detains a person; and
c. Detention is without legal grounds (US vs. Braganza)
ARBITRARY DETENTION

• Any public officer or employee who, without legal grounds, detains a

person, shall suffer:
a. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prisión correccional
in its minimum period, if the detention has not exceeded 3 days;
b. The penalty of prisión correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if
the detention has continued more than 3 but not more than 15 days;
c. The penalty of prisión mayor, if the detention has continued for more than
15 days but not more than 6 months; and
d. That of reclusión temporal, if the detention shall have exceeded 6 months.
 ARBITRARY DETENTION

• what is detention?
Detention is defined as the actual confinement of a person in an enclosure, or in
any manner detaining and depriving him or his liberty.
• Person considered in detention?
A person is detained when he is placed in confinement or there is restraint on his
person
Note:
The commission of a crime, or violent insanity or any other ailment requiring the
compulsory confinement of the patient in a hospital, shall be considered legal the
detention of any person. (Article 124, Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic
Act )
Arbitrary detention vs. Illegal Detention
Arbitrary detention
The principal offender must be a public
officer
The offender who is a public officer has a
duty which carries with it the authority to
detain a person
Illegal detention
The principal offender is a private person
The offender, even if he is a public officer,
does not include as his function the power
to arrest and detain a person
Arbitrary detention vs. unlawful arrest
Arbitrary detention
The offender is a public officer possessed
with authority to make arrests
The purpose for detaining the offended
party is to deny him of his liberty
Unlawful arrest
The offender may be any person
The purpose is to accuse the offended party
of a crime he did not commit, to deliver the
person to the proper authority, and to file
the necessary charges in a way trying to
incriminate him.
Delay in the delivery of detained persons to
the proper judicial authority

Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He has detained a person for some legal ground; and
3. He fails to deliver such person to the proper judicial authorities within:
a. 12 hours for crimes/offenses punishable by light penalties or their
equivalent;
b. 18 hours for crimes/offenses punishable by correctional penalties or their
equivalent
c. 36 hours for crimes/offenses punishable by afflictive penalties or their
equivalent.
DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSONS TO
THE PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES

• Delivery
It means the filing of correct information or complaint with the proper judicial
authorities. It does not mean physical delivery or turnover of arrested person to
the court.
• Proper judicial authorities
It refers to the courts of justice or judges of said courts vested with judicial
power to order the temporary detention or confinement of a person charged with
having committed a public offense.
DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSONS
TO THE PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES

• Duty of the officer if the judge is not available

Where a judge is not available, the arresting officer is duty-bound to
release a detained person, if the maximum hours for detention had
already expired. Failure to cause the release may result in an offense
under Art. 125 (Albor vs. Auguis)
Note:
• In every case, the person detained shall be informed of the cause of
his detention and shall be allowed upon his request, to communicate
and confer at any time with his attorney or counsel. (Article 125,
Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 10951)
Delay in the delivery of detained person vs.
arbitrary detention
Delay in the delivery of detained person Arbitrary detention
The detention is legal at the outset but The detention is illegal at the very inception
becomes arbitrary when the detention because of the absence of lawful cause for
exceeds any of the periods of time specified such arrest.
in Art. 125, without the person detained
having been charged before the proper
judicial authority
DELAYING RELEASE
a. Acts punishable
i. By delaying the performance of a judicial or executive order for the release of a
prisoner.
ii. By unduly delaying the service of the notice of such order to said prisoner.
iii.By unduly delaying the proceedings upon any petition for the liberation of such
person. (Reyes, Vol. 2, p. 61)
b. Elements
iv. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
v. That there is a judicial or executive order for the release of a prisoner or
detention prisoner, or that there is a proceeding upon a petition for the
liberation of such person.
vi. That the offender without good reason delays:
(1)The service of the notice of such order to the prisoner; or
(2)The performance of such judicial or executive order for the release of the prisoner; or
(3)The proceedings upon a petition for the release of such person. (Ibid., p.
EXPULSION

• The penalty of prisión correccional shall be imposed upon any

public officer or employee who, not being thereunto authorized by
law, shall expel any person from the Philippines or shall compel
such person to change his residence. (Article 127, Revised Penal
Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 10951)
EXPULSION

a. Acts punishable
i. By expelling a person from the Philippines.
ii. By compelling a person to change his residence. (Reyes, Vol. 2, p. 62)
b. Elements
iii. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
iv. That he expels any person from the Philippines, or compels a person to
change his residence.
v. That the offender is not authorized to do so by law. (Ibid., p. 63)
Illustration (Villavicencio vs. Lukban Case)

• The mayor of the city of manila wanted to make the city free from
prostitution. He ordered certain prostitutes to be transferred to
Davao, without observing due processes since they have not been
charged with any crime at all. It was held that the crime
committed was expulsion.
Note:
Only the court by final judgment can order a person to change his
residence. This is illustrated in ejectment proceedings, expropriation
proceedings, and in the penalty of destierro (Reyes, 2012)
Expulsion

• Essence of the crime of expulsion

It is coercion but it is specifically termed expulsion when committed by a
public officer.
• Grave Coercion
A private person who committed any of the punishable acts under Art 127 is
responsible for the crime of grave coercion
• Expulsion
The crime of expulsion is also committed when a filipino who, after
voluntarily leaving the country, is illegally refused re-entry by a public officer
because he is considered a victim of being forces to change his address.
VIOLATION OF DOMICILE

• The penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon
any public officer or employee who, not being authorized by judicial order,
shall enter any dwelling against the will of the owner thereof, search papers or
other effects found therein without the previous consent of such owner, or
having surreptitiously entered said dwelling, and being required to leave the
premises, shall refuse to do so.
• If the offense be committed in the night-time, or if any papers or effects not
constituting evidence of a crime be not returned immediately after the search
made by the offender, the penalty shall be prisión correccional in its medium
and maximum periods. (Article 128, Revised Penal Code, as amended by
Republic Act No. 10951)
VIOLATION OF DOMICILE
a. Acts punishable
i. By entering any dwelling against the will of the owner thereof; or
ii. By searching papers or other effects found therein without the previous
consent of such owner; or
iii. By refusing to leave the premises, after having surreptitiously entered said
dwelling and after having been required to leave the same. (Reyes, Vol. 2,
p. 64)
b. Elements common to 3 acts
iv. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
v. That he is not authorized by judicial order to enter the dwelling and/or to
make a search therein for papers or other effects. (Id.)
Violation of domicile

• “ against the will of the owner”

It presupposes opposition or prohibition by the owner, whether
express or implied, and not merely the absence of the consent.
• Trespass to dwelling
The crime committed is trespass to dwelling when the punishable acts
under Art 128 are committed by a private person.
Note:
What is punished is the refusal to leave, the entry having been made
surreptitiously
SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED AND ABUSE IN
THE SERVICE OF THOSE LEGALLY OBTAINED

• In addition to the liability attaching to the offender for the

commission of any other offense, the penalty of arresto mayor in
its maximum period to prisión correccional in its minimum period
and a fine not exceeding P200,000 shall be imposed upon any
public officer or employee who shall procure a search warrant
without just cause, or, having legally procured the same, shall
exceed his authority or use unnecessary severity in executing the
same. (Article 129, Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic
Act No). 10951
SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED AND ABUSE IN
THE SERVICE OF THOSE LEGALLY OBTAINED

By Procuring A Search Warrant Without By Exceeding His Authority Or By Using

Just Cause Unnecessary Severity In Executing A
Search Warrant Legally Procured

i. That the offender is a public officer or i. That the offender is a public officer or
employee. employee.
ii. That he procures a search warrant. ii. That he has legally procured a search
iii. That there is no just cause. (Reyes, Vol. warrant.
2, p. 67) iii. That he exceeds his authority or uses
unnecessary severity in executing the
same. (Ibid., p. 71)
SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED AND ABUSE
IN THE SERVICE OF THOSE LEGALLY OBTAINED

• Search Warrant
It is an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the Philippines, signed by
a judge and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for personal
property described therein and bring it before the court.
• Requisites for the issuance of search warrant
A search warrant shall not issue except upon probable cause in connection with one
specific offense to be determined personally by the judge after examination under
oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be searched and the things to be seized which may
be anywhere in the Philippines. (Sec 4, Rule 126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)
Note: A search warrant shall be valid for 10 days from its date. Thereafter, it shall be
void.
SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT WITNESSES
• The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods
shall be imposed upon a public officer or employee who, in cases
where a search is proper, shall search the domicile, papers or
other belongings of any person, in the absence of the latter, any
member of his family, or in their default, without the presence of
two witnesses residing in the same locality. (Article 130, Revised
Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act 10951)
• Order of Witnesses During Search
1. Homeowner
2. Members of the family of sufficient age and discretion
3. Responsible members of the community
SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT WITNESSES

a. Elements
i. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
ii. That he is armed with search warrant legally procured.
iii. That he searches the domicile, papers or other belongings of any
person.
iv. That the owner, or any member of his family, or two witnesses
residing in the same locality are not present. (Reyes, Vol. 2, p. 72)
Note: this article does not apply to searches of vehicles and other
means of transportation (Reyes, 2008)
PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION, AND DISSOLUTION OF
PEACEFUL MEETINGS

• The penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum period shall be

imposed upon any public officer or employee who, without legal
ground, shall prohibit or interrupt the holding of a peaceful meeting,
or shall dissolve the same.
• The same penalty shall be imposed upon a public officer or
employee who shall hinder any person from joining any lawful
association or from attending any of its meetings.
• The same penalty shall be imposed upon any public officer or
employee who shall prohibit or hinder any person from addressing,
either alone or together with others, any petition to the authorities
for the correction of abuses or redress of grievances. (Article 131,
Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 10951)
 PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION, AND
DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS
• a. Acts punishable
i. By prohibiting or by interrupting, without legal ground, the holding of a
peaceful meeting, or by dissolving the same.
ii. By hindering any person from joining any lawful association or from
attending any of its meetings.
iii. By prohibiting or hindering any person from addressing, either alone or
together with others, any petition to the authorities for the correction
of abuses or redress of grievances. (Reyes, Vol. 2, p. 74) b. Elements
common to 3 acts i. That the offender is a public officer or employee;
and ii. That he performs any of the acts mentioned above. (Ibid., p. 75)
INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP

• Interruption of religious worship - The penalty of prisión

correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any
public officer or employee who shall prevent or disturb the
ceremonies or manifestations of any religion.
• If the crime shall have been committed with violence or threats,
the penalty shall be prisión correccional in its medium and
maximum periods. (Article 132, Revised Penal Code, as amended
by Republic Act 10951)
INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP

• a. Elements
i. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
ii. That religious ceremonies or manifestations of any religion are
about to take place or are going on.
iii. That the offender prevents or disturbs the same.
iv. Qualifying circumstance - If the crime is committed with
violence or threats. (Reyes, Vol. 2, p. 79)
OFFENDING OF RELIGIOUS FEELINGS

• The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prisión correccional in its
minimum period shall be imposed upon anyone who, in a place devoted to
religious worship or during the celebration of any religious ceremony shall
perform acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful. (Article 133,
Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 10951)
• a. Elements
i. That the acts complained of were performed:
(1) In a place devoted to religious worship, or
(2) During the celebration of any religious ceremony.
ii. That the acts must be notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful.
(Reyes, Vol. 2, p. 79)