Ampatuan massacre only ONE CRIME, not 58 crimes of murder
Ampatuan
massacre only ONE CRIME,
not 58 crimes of murder
By BERTENI “TOTO”
CATALUNA CAUSING
Author, “Simplified
Libel Law in the Philippines”
The
Department of Justice committed its BIGGEST BLUNDER so far.
And it
committed the big ignorance of law in the case of the Maguindanao Massacre that
occurred on November 23, 2009, where it has been established that 58 persons,
including 33 journalists and two lady lawyers, were killed en masse and in one
occasion.
The case
that should have been filed against the suspects must only be ONE, and not 58
cases of murder.
There was only
one resolution on the part of the culprits: to commit one crime of killing all
they could intercept at the checkpoint at the time they could intercept the
team of now Maguindanao Governor Toto Mangudadatu.
Since there
was only one resolve and that resolve was to kill all the suspects must be
charged only with one crime: COMPLEX CRIME OF 58 MURDERS; not 58 murders.
Article 48
of the Revised Penal Code states that when one act results in more than one
crime, the offender shall be punished with the maximum penalty of the most or
more serious of the crimes that resulted.
Then there
is this doctrine of single criminal resolution.
One example
of one criminal resolution doctrine is that a robber will be charged with only
one crime of robbery if he boarded a bus and robbed all 60 passengers. In
reality, there were many crimes that were committed but these were done in a
continuous fashion without any interruption.
In a case
filed against then Immigration Commissioner Miriam Defensor-Santiago, the
Supreme Court quashed each of the criminal informations for several alien persons
that she signed to avail of citizenship.
That was because Defensor-Santiago committed only one act, by means of
one signature in the paper where these aliens’ names were listed. The case is entitled Miriam Defensor-Santiago
vs Hon. Francis Garchitorena, et al, G.R. No. 109266 December 2, 1993.
This case
of Miriam gave several examples of one criminal resolution or delito
continuado, to wit:
(1) The
theft of 13 cows belonging to two different owners committed by the accused at
the same time and at the same period of time (People v. Tumlos, 67 Phil. 320
[1939] ).
(2) The
theft of six roosters belonging to two different owners from the same coop and
at the same period of time (People v. Jaranillo, 55 SCRA 563 [1974] ).
(3) The
theft of two roosters in the same place and on the same occasion (People v. De
Leon, 49 Phil. 437 [1926] ).
(4) The
illegal charging of fees for services rendered by a lawyer every time he
collects veteran's benefits on behalf of a client, who agreed that the
attorney's fees shall be paid out of said benefits (People v. Sabbun, 10 SCRA
156 [1964] ). The collection of the legal fees were impelled by the same
motive, that of collecting fees for services rendered, and all acts of
collection were made under the same criminal impulse (People v. Lawas, 97 Phil.
975 [1955] ).
So that it
is very clear that the Department of Justice must have filed only ONE CASE OF
COMPLEX CRIMES OF 58 MURDERS and if the accused are found guilty, they shall be
meted only one penalty: RECLUSION PERPETUA.
Comments