G.R. No. L-8926 - People vs. Togonon

An information was filed in 1952 by the provincial fiscal of Iloilo in the Court of First Instance accusing 94 persons of multiple offenses, which included rebellion, multiple murder, arson, kidnapping, rape, robbery, and physical injuries.
Only some of the accused were tried while the great majority remained at large. Some were acquitted whereas others were convicted.

Togonon was charged with having joined a Huk group that publicly rose and took arms against the government with the purpose of detaching the Philippine Islands from government allegiance.
Specifically, evidence indicated that Togonon participated in the killing of the Dolinog brothers, Juan and Abundio, who were beheaded while their hands were bound, as part of the Huk retaliation when these brothers had denounced the Huk presence.
The trial judge separated the offenses:

Convicted Togonon of simple rebellion with a penalty of 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor.
Convicted him of double murder (the beheading of the Dolinog brothers) with an indeterminate penalty ranging from 12 years and 1 day of prision mayor to 17 years, 4 months and 1 day of reclusidn temporal, plus indemnity to the heirs of each deceased.

Testimonies from surrendered Huks confirmed her presence in the mountains of Lambunao, Iloilo in 1950.
She held significant roles, serving as an officer of the Section Organization Committee, becoming chairman of the Huk medical corps, and later assuming the position of treasurer.
Despite her active involvement, she did not take part in the raids conducted by her co-members.

In her testimony, Chiva claimed that she was originally kidnapped from her barrio and, subsequently, became associated with the Huk not entirely by her own volition. Later, due to constant surveillance and continuous raids by constabulary forces, she voluntarily surrendered in April 1952.

In Togonon’s case, the Government presented proof of a 1950 meeting held by Huks at the house of Eleno Dolinog in Libacao, Capiz, where Togonon’s group threatened the locals with severe consequences if they reported the Huk presence, which later led to the ambush and subsequent execution of the Dolinog brothers.
The defense for Togonon contended that the killing was either already included in the rebellion or occurred outside the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court.
Concerning Chiva, the defense raised the objection regarding the admissibility of the co-conspirators’ declarations under Section 12 of Rule 123. However, the Court referenced prior decisions, explaining that such extrajudicial declarations of co-conspirators (and not their direct testimony) were admissible once the conspiracy was otherwise established.

The case revisits principles established in People vs. Hernandez and People vs. Geronimo regarding the nature of rebellion as a crime that integrates both the intent to overthrow and the overt acts of violence.
The ruling reflects on whether certain acts, even if violent, are subsumed under the single crime of rebellion when committed in furtherance thereof.

Is the act of beheading the Dolinog brothers, committed in clear retaliation, legally considered a separate crime of murder, or is it absorbed as part and parcel of the crime of rebellion?
Was the trial court, in convicting Togonon for murder, exercising proper jurisdiction given that the murder was committed outside its territorial limits?
Should Togonon be convicted of a complex crime of rebellion combined with murder, or should the elements of these crimes remain distinct based on the legal principles previously established in similar cases?

Does the evidence, particularly the co-conspirators’ declarations and her own testimony, support her conviction for simple rebellion despite claims of having been initially kidnapped and later coerced into joining?
To what extent should mitigating circumstances—such as her claim of involuntary association with the Huk and subsequent voluntary surrender—factor into the determination of her sentence?