Case Digest (G.R. No. L-943)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Domingo Capacete, G.R. No. L-943, November 22, 1947, the Supreme Court En Banc, Tuason, J., writing for the Court. The appellant, Domingo Capacete, was prosecuted in the People's Court on an information containing four counts charging treason for conduct during the Japanese occupation; the People of the Philippines was plaintiff and appellee. The People's Court found Capacete guilty on all four counts and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, imposed a P10,000 fine and costs. Capacete appealed to the Supreme Court.The information alleged in Count I that, in December 1944 in San Pedro, Laguna, Capacete had enlisted in and served the Makabayan Katipunan ng mga Pilipino (MAKAPILI), an organization of military character that gave aid to the Japanese, participated in procurement and confiscation of provisions, fought with the enemy and fled with them. Counts II–IV charged that on specified dates in December 1944 Capacete, acting as informer or agent of the Imperial Japanese Forces and with members of the Makapili and municipal police, led or accompanied Japanese raids that resulted in the arrest and delivery to the Japanese of several persons (Feliciano Casacup, Jacinto Polintan, Ignacio Gilbuena) who were tortured, one of whom was thereafter killed.
On appeal the Supreme Court reviewed the trial record. The Court found the proof insufficient to sustain Count I: witnesses’ assertions did not establish formal induction, insignia, typical duties, or an organized Makapili branch in San Pedro Tunasan; the term “makapili” was used loosely by witnesses. However, the Court found convincing evidence that Capacete acted as an informer/agent of the Japanese: multiple witnesses placed him accompanying Japanese troops on night raids, carrying a pistol, and participating in the arrests of the victims whose subsequent maltreatment and disappearance were p...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the prosecution’s evidence sufficient to prove that the accused was a member of the Makapili as charged in Count I?
- Was there sufficient proof that the accused, as an informer or agent of the Imperial Japanese Forces, committed the overt acts constituting treason as charged in Counts II–IV?
- Did the alibi offered by the accused bar convictio...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)