G.R. No. 11676 - People vs. Pablo

Case Summary (G.R. No. 11676)

Factual Background

On October 21, 1915, Police Officer Andres Pablo, acting by order of his chief, went to the barrio of Tuyo, Balanga, to raid a suspected jueteng game. He found a vacant lot with a low table, a tambiolo, and thirty-seven bolas. He saw Francisco Dato at the lot and later observed Maximo Malicsi and Antonio Rodrigo leave the vicinity, although he did not arrest them at that time. He prepared a memorandum reporting the raid and naming Malicsi, Rodrigo, and Dato, and then reported the seizure of the tambiolo and bolas.

Initial Prosecution for Gambling

On October 22, 1915, Chief of Police Jose D. Reyes filed a complaint in the justice of the peace court charging Antonio Rodrigo, Maximo Malicsi, and Francisco Dato with gambling in violation of municipal Ordinance No. 5. The accused were arrested and later admitted to bail. At the justice of the peace hearing Francisco Dato pleaded guilty. Malicsi and Rodrigo pleaded not guilty. The memorandum prepared by the policeman Pablo and his testimony were offered at the hearing.

Police Testimony and Acquittal of Codefendants

At the justice of the peace hearing the policeman testified that he and his companion saw persons run away before they arrived; that when they reached the lot they saw only the table and later found the tambiolo and bolas; and that he did not see Malicsi and Rodrigo on the lot or see them run, learning of their identities later from an unknown informant. On that testimony and other evidence the justice of the peace acquitted Malicsi and Rodrigo and convicted only Dato.

Alleged Bribery and the Perjury Information

Before the justice of the peace trial, Pablo met with Malicsi and Rodrigo at the house of Valentin Sioson and was instructed not to testify against them. Pablo allegedly received money through Gregorio Ganzon. After a preliminary investigation, the provincial fiscal filed an information on December 1, 1915 in the Court of First Instance of Bataan charging Pablo with perjury under Act No. 1697 for having sworn falsely at the justice of the peace that he did not see or overtake Malicsi and Rodrigo, when, the information alleged, he in fact had so seen and overtaken them.

Trial Evidence on the Perjury Charge

At the perjury trial witnesses testified that when the policemen arrived they found the gamblers and that Malicsi escaped while the policemen were searching. Dato testified that he had told the policemen who the gamblers were and that he later pleaded guilty pursuant to an agreement with his coaccused. Malicsi testified that he, Rodrigo, and Dato had agreed to give Pablo P 20 to exclude Malicsi and Rodrigo from the charge, and that P 15 was delivered to Pablo through Gregorio Ganzon. Ganzon corroborated the meeting and delivery to some extent. Pablo testified under oath that he did not see Malicsi and Rodrigo at the place where the game was allegedly being played, that the players ran away before they arrived, and that he found only the table, tambiolo, and bolas after a fifteen-minute search.

Trial Court Finding and Sentence

The Court of First Instance found Pablo guilty of perjury and, on December 28, 1915, sentenced him to two years' imprisonment, to pay a fine of P 100, to suffer subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay costs. The judgment disqualified him from holding public office and from testifying in the courts of the Philippine Islands until the disqualification was removed.

Legal Issue on Applicable Penal Law

On appeal the Court considered the statutory framework for punishing false testimony and perjury. The opinion recounts that this Court's prior interpretations treated Act No. 1697 as having repealed Articles 318 to 324 of the Penal Code, which relate to false testimony. The Administrative Code (Act No. 2657) later repealed Act No. 1697 but did not expressly state whether Articles 318 to 324 of the Penal Code remained repealed or were revived. The Court confronted the question whether perjury or false testimony was left without penal sanction following those repeals.

Court's Doctrinal Reasoning on Repeals and Continuing Liability

The Court reasoned that society requires a penal sanction for perjury or false testimony and that it would be inconceivable to permit such offenses to go unpunished. Because the Administrative Code did not explicitly repeal Articles 318 to 324 of the Penal Code when it repealed Act No. 1697, the Court held that those Penal Code provisions must be deemed in force and applicable. The opinion invoked historical authority, including the Novisima Recopilacion (Law 11, Title 2, Book 3), to support the proposition that laws not expressly repealed remain operative.

Application of Facts to Law and Aggravating Circumstance

The Court

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 11676)

Parties and Procedural Posture

The parties are THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, and ANDRES PABLO, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
The complaint that gave rise to the events at issue was filed by Chief of Police Jose D. Reyes in the justice of the peace court of Balanga on October 22, 1915.
After preliminary proceedings in the justice of the peace court, the provincial fiscal filed an information on December 1, 1915 in the Court of First Instance of Bataan charging Andres Pablo with perjury under section 3 of Act No. 1697.
The trial court convicted Andres Pablo on December 28, 1915 and sentenced him to two years' imprisonment, a fine of P100, costs, and disqualification from public office and from testifying, from which conviction the defendant appealed.
The present decision reviewed the conviction and sentence on appeal and reassessed the applicable penal law and appropriate penalty.

Key Factual Allegations

At about noon on October 21, 1915, Andres Pablo, a municipal policeman of Balanga, went by order of his chief to raid an alleged jueteng game in barrio Tuyo.
On arrival to a vacant lot the policeman found a low table, a tambiolo, thirty-seven bolas, and Francisco Dato, but he initially did not see Maximo Malicsi and Antonio Rodrigo and therefore arrested only Dato.
The policeman prepared a memorandum stating that he had raided a jueteng game, seized a tambiolo and bolas, and saw the cabecillas Maximo Malicsi and Antonio Rodrigo who escaped.
Prior to the justice of the peace hearing, Andres Pablo met with Malicsi and Rodrigo at the house of Valentin Sioson and was instructed not to testify against them in consideration of money paid through Gregorio Ganzon.
Witness testimony at the perjury trial asserted an agreement to pay P20 to exclude Malicsi and Rodrigo, with only P15 being delivered to Pablo through Gregorio Ganzon; one earlier statement reported a P5 payment through Ganzon.

Evidentiary Record

The prosecution introduced the memorandum prepared by Andres Pablo and examined him under oath regarding what he did and saw at the raid.
Francisco Dato testified that he saw the policemen arrive, that Malicsi and Rodrigo were present and escaped, and that he later identified the gamblers to the policemen.
Maximo Malicsi testified that he escaped while the policemen searched and that Pablo had long known him and could have arrested him.
Gregorio Ganzon corroborated parts of the payment and delivery evidence, though he did not specify the exact amount he delivered.
Andres Pablo testified that he did not see Malicsi and Rodrigo on the lot where the game was being played and that he found only the table, tambiolo, bolas, and Dato after a fifteen-minute search.

Procedural History

The justice of the peace court prosecuted the original gambling case in which Dato pleaded guilty and Malicsi and Rodrigo were acquitted.
The provincial fiscal instituted perjury