Case Summary (G.R. No. 271081)
Motion to Quash and RTC Ruling
Petitioner moved to quash the Information on three grounds: (1) supervening repeal of the gun ban by RA 10952; (2) extinguishment of liability owing to the postponement of elections and related COMELEC/PNP issuances; and (3) lack of prosecutorial authority outside COMELEC. The Regional Trial Court denied the motion, holding that the gun ban remained in effect at the time of arrest and that the Prosecutor’s Office was duly authorized to file the Information.
Appellate Ruling of the Court of Appeals
The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, applying the three elements of gun-ban violation: (a) possession of a firearm; (b) occurrence during the election period; and (c) presence in a public place. It rejected retroactive application of RA 10952 to those arrested before the gun-ban suspension on October 4, 2017.
Issue on Retroactive Application of RA 10952
Petitioner advanced two main arguments before the Supreme Court: (1) his firearm use was in self-defense (Article 11, RPC); and (2) RA 10952’s postponement of the October 2017 elections and its repealing clause eliminated the gun-ban element retroactively (Article 22, RPC).
Legal Framework on Prohibited Acts and Election Period
Under Section 261(q) of B.P. 881, as amended by RA 7166 Section 32, carrying firearms outside a residence during the election period—unless COMELEC-authorized—constitutes an election offense punishable under Section 264. The election period for barangay polls runs 15 days before election day and 30 days thereafter, fixed by COMELEC Resolution No. 10198 for October 23, 2017.
Principle of Retroactivity in Penal Laws
Article 22 of the RPC mandates retroactive application of penal laws favorable to an accused, provided the law is penal or substantive, beneficial, and the accused is not a habitual criminal. This exception arises from principles of strict justice and is not limited to RPC provisions but extends to special laws with penal effect.
Application of Article 22 of the RPC to RA 10952
Although RA 10952 does not define a new crime or prescribe a penalty, it substantively alters an essential element of the gun-ban offense by postponing the election date and repealing inconsistent provisions. The new election period no longer includes September 23 to October 30, 2017, t
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 271081)
Procedural Posture
- Petitioner Dexter Bargado y Morgado was charged under Section 261(q) in relation to Section 264 of the Omnibus Election Code, as amended by Section 32 of Republic Act No. 7166 and COMELEC Resolution No. 10198, for carrying a .45-caliber firearm during the October 2017 barangay election gun ban.
- The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 10, Tuguegarao City, denied petitioner’s Motion to Quash and, after trial, found him guilty, sentencing him to one year’s imprisonment, disqualification to hold public office, and deprivation of suffrage.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction, rejecting petitioner’s argument that the subsequent enactment of Republic Act No. 10952 (postponing the October 2017 elections) retroactively lifted the gun ban.
- Petitioner filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari before the Supreme Court, raising (a) self-defense under Article 11, RPC, and (b) the retroactive effect of RA 10952 under Article 22, RPC.
Facts
- On October 1, 2017, PNP officers on mobile patrol received word of a commotion at Aguinaldo Street, Centro 02, Tuguegarao City.
- Upon arrival at 2:00 a.m., SPO1 Enrique Melad Jr. saw Bargado holding a loaded Rock Island Armory .45-caliber pistol with serial number RIA 1867480 and seven live rounds.
- Five to six persons were about to attack Bargado; he was arrested for violating the election gun ban in effect from September 23 to October 30, 2017.
- The firearm was marked, inventoried, and submitted for ballistic examination; petitioner presented his license and permit but no COMELEC exemption.
- Defense witnesses testifie