Title
People vs. Mateo
Case
G.R. No. L-869
Decision Date
Feb 9, 1948
Pastor Tan Mateo, a Philippine citizen, was convicted of treason for aiding Japanese forces during WWII by reporting guerrilla activities, leading to arrests. The court upheld his 15-year sentence, citing sufficient evidence under the "two-witness rule."
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-869)

Facts:

  • Identity and Charge
    • Pastor Tan Mateo, also known as Nene Tan Mateo, a native-born Filipino citizen, was charged with treason.
    • He was tried, found guilty, and sentenced to 15 years of reclusion temporal with legal accessories, a fine of P2,000, and costs. He appealed the judgment.
  • Prosecution Evidence and Appellant's Activities
    • From June 1942 to March 1945, Mateo worked in the Public Opinion Office in Dumaguete, Oriental Negros, headed by Teodorico Lajato.
    • The office's purpose was to gather intelligence for the Japanese Army regarding guerrilla movements and activities in Oriental Negros.
    • Mateo was frequently seen at the head office residence of Lajato on Silliman Avenue, later relocated to W.A. Jones St. on October 18, 1943.
    • He routinely traversed Dumaguete and nearby areas to observe and collect information about guerrilla operations and reported these to Lajato or Major Bartolome Soledad, Chief of Police of Dumaguete.
    • On March 28, 1943, Mateo reported to Chief Soledad suspicions that Alfonso Calubiran and Antonio Chan were collaborating with guerrillas, noting their unconcerned movements in and out of town. He recommended their arrest and investigation.
    • Acting on this, Mateo, along with police personnel including Sergeant Tomas Merced and several patrolmen, went to barrio Ubos that evening and arrested Calubiran and Chan.
    • The two suspects were jailed for eight days in the Trade School building, investigated, ill-treated, and later released.
    • In mid-October 1944, Mateo, accompanied by other patrolmen, sought Angeles Catan in barrio Ubos; upon learning his location at Pedro Adanza's house, they apprehended him and took him to the Kempei Tai headquarters in Silliman Hall, Dumaguete.
  • Defense and Contradictory Claims
    • Mateo admitted being a provincial guard and working for the Public Opinion Office in 1943 but denied being an informer or causing the arrest of Calubiran, Chan, or accompanying the arrest of Catan.
  • Witness Testimonies on the Public Opinion Office and Appellant
    • Multiple witnesses, including Alejandro Lazola, Antonio Chan, Alfonso Calubiran, Pedro Gadiani, and Socorro Carino, testified regarding the existence and operations of the Public Opinion Office.
    • Although several witnesses confirmed seeing Mateo in the office and moving around town, the court found no single overt act witnessed by two or more witnesses on the same occasion, except for the arrest of Calubiran and Chan.
    • The arrest of Calubiran and Chan was corroborated by more than two witnesses who were present.
  • Nature of the Arrests and Treasonous Acts
    • The arrest of Calubiran and Chan was based on Mateo’s report to the Chief of Police, motivated by suspicions of their collaboration with guerrillas who served as runners and provided intelligence and supplies to guerrilla forces and USAFFE personnel.
    • This arrest was considered an overt act of treason, providing aid and comfort to the enemy.
    • Evidence about the arrest of Angeles Catan was inconclusive regarding any treasonous intent. Catan reportedly returned to the barrio after arrest and died after the American liberation.
    • Mateo’s participation in Catan’s arrest was acknowledged, but the arrest itself was not deemed an overt act of treason.
  • Legal Considerations and Trial Court Findings
    • The prosecution failed to prove the first count of treason by the two-witness rule regarding some acts but succeeded regarding the second count, the arrest of Calubiran and Chan.
    • The trial court noted mitigating circumstances, including lack of instruction to Mateo, when imposing the penalty.
    • The penalty imposed was within the legal limits.

Issues:

  • Whether or not Mateo’s acts constituted treason under Philippine law.
  • Whether the evidence satisfied the constitutional two-witness rule on an overt act proving adherence to the enemy.
  • Whether Mateo’s participation in the arrests of Alfonso Calubiran, Antonio Chan, and Angeles Catan were overt acts of treason.
  • Whether the penalty imposed by the trial court was proper.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.