Case Summary (G.R. No. 161886)
Demurrer and Lower Court Ruling
At the Court of First Instance of Sulu, defense counsel filed a demurrer challenging jurisdiction and the existence of a public offense under Philippine law. The trial judge overruled the demurrer, conducted a full trial, and found both defendants guilty of piracy. Each was sentenced to cadena perpetua, ordered jointly with co-defendants to return or indemnify the thirty-nine sacks of copra (924 rupees), and to pay one-half of the court costs.
Jurisdiction Over Piracy
The Supreme Court affirmed that piracy is hostis humani generis—an offense against all nations that occurs on the high seas without lawful authority, with animo furandi and universal hostility. Jurisdiction is not territorially limited; it extends to any competent tribunal wherever the offender is found, even if the act occurred within a foreign three-mile limit.
Continued Application of Spanish Penal Code
Under established principles of public law and the McKinley Instructions, municipal laws in force at the time of territorial transfer remain operative if consistent with the new sovereignty. The Spanish Penal Code provisions on piracy (Arts. 153–156) were expressly intended to apply in the Philippines, treating Filipinos as “Spaniards” under Art. 156. These articles criminalize piracy against nonbelligerent subjects, prescribe penalties from cadena temporal to cadena perpetua or death, and define aggravating circumstances.
Harmonization with U.S. Law
The U.S. Constitution authorizes Congress to define and punish piracies and felonies on the high seas. U.S. statutes adopt the law-of-nations definition of piracy, prescribing life imprisonment (formerly death). The Philippine piracy provisions closely mirror U.S. statutory language and intent, demonstrating no inconsistency.
Penal Code Construction and Application
By logical substitution—“United States” for “Spain,” and “citizens of the United States and citizens of the Philippine Islands” for “Spaniards”—Arts. 153 and 154 remain effective. Under these provisions, piracy accompanied by rape (an offense against chastity) and abandonment without means of rescue falls within the highest penalty range (cadena perpetua to death).
Aggravating Circumstances and Penalty Assessment
The crime involved two qualifying circumstances under Art. 154(3) and (4): sexual violations and abandonment of helpless victims. The trial court recognized nocturnity as an aggravating factor and lack of instruction as mitigating. The Supre
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 161886)
Facts
- On or about June 30, 1920, two boats departed Matuta (a Dutch possession) bound for Peta (another Dutch possession).
- One boat carried a single Dutch subject; the other carried eleven Dutch subjects (men, women, and children).
- After several days at sea, at about 7 PM the second boat arrived between Buang and Bukid in the Dutch East Indies.
- Six Moro-manned vintas, armed with firearms, surrounded and boarded the Dutch boat under the pretense of requesting food.
- The Moros seized all cargo, assaulted several men, and brutally violated two young women by methods described in the record as “too horrible to be described.”
- After looting, they placed all survivors except the two women back on the boat, created holes intending to sink it, and left them adrift.
- The stranded Dutch subjects endured eleven days of hardship before rescue arrived.
- Meanwhile, the Moros transported the two women to Maruro (Dutch possession), repeatedly raping them.
- At Maruro the two women successfully escaped. Two of the attackers—Lol-lo (who raped one of the women) and Saraw—fled back to South Ubian, Tawi-Tawi, Sulu, Philippine Islands.
Procedural History
- Upon their return to South Ubian, Lol-lo and Saraw were arrested and charged with piracy in the Court of First Instance of Sulu.
- Counsel de officio filed a demurrer claiming lack of jurisdiction and arguing that the facts did not constitute a public offense under Philippine law.
- The trial court overruled the demurrer, proceeded to trial, found both defendants guilty, and sentenced each to cadena perpetua, ordering indemnification (924 rupees) and payment of half the costs.
- The defendants appealed to this Court, raising primarily questions of jurisdiction and the continued force of the Spanish-era Penal Code provisions on piracy.
Issues Presented
- Whether a Philippine court has jurisdiction to try and punish acts of piracy committed against foreign subjects on the high seas.
- Whether Articles 153–156 of the Spanish Penal Code (defining and punishing piracy) remain in force in the Philippine Islands after cession to the United States.
- What penalty is appropriate under the existing law given the facts and qualifying/aggravating circumstances.
Jurisdiction Over Piracy
- Piracy is “hostis humani gener