PEOPLE VS. FERRER [48 SCRA 382; NOS.L-32613-14; 27 DEC 1972]
Monday, February 09, 2009 Posted by Coffeeholic Writes Labels: Case Digests, Digests, Political Law Facts: Hon. Judge Simeon Ferrer is the Tarlac trial court judge that
decl declar ared ed RA17 RA1700 00 or the the An Anti ti-Su -Subv bver ersi sive ve Ac Actt of 19 1957 57 as a bill bill of attainder. Thus, dismissing the information of subversion against the following: 1.) Feliciano Co for being an officer/leader of the Communist Part Party y of the the Ph Phil ilip ippi pine nes s (CPP (CPP)) aggr aggrav avat ated ed by circ circum umst stan ance ces s of contempt and insult to public officers, subversion by a band and aid of armed men to afford impunity. 2.) Nilo Tayag and 5 others, for being members/leaders of the NPA, inciting, instigating people to unite and over overth thro row w the the Ph Phil ilip ippi pine ne Gove Govern rnme ment nt.. At Atte tend nded ed by Ag Aggr grav avat atin ing g Circumstances of Aid or Armed Men, Craft, and Fraud. The trial court is of opinion that 1.) The Congress usurped the powers of the judge 2.) Assu As sume med d judi judici cial al magi magist stra racy cy by pron pronou ounc ncin ing g the the guil guiltt of the the CPP CPP with withou outt any any form forms s of safeg safeguar uard d of a judi judici cial al tria trial. l. 3.) 3.) It crea create ted d a presum presumpti ption on of organi organizat zation ional al guilt guilt by being being membe members rs of the CPP regardless of voluntariness. The Anti Subversive Act of 1957 was approved 20June1957. It is an act to outlaw outlaw the CPP CPP and simila similarr associa associatio tions ns penali penalizin zing g member membershi ship p therein, and for other purposes. It defined the Communist Party being alth althou ough gh a poli politi tica call part party y is in fact fact an orga organi nize zed d cons conspi pira racy cy to overthrow the Government, not only by force and violence but also by deceit, subversion and other illegal means. It declares that the CPP is a clear and present danger to the security of the Philippines. Section 4 provided that affiliation with full knowledge of the illegal acts of the CPP CPP is puni punish shab able le.. Sect Sectio ion n 5 stat states es that that due due inve invest stig igat atio ion n by a designated prosecutor by the Secretary of Justice be made prior to fili filing ng of info inform rmat atio ion n in cour court. t. Sect Sectio ion n 6 prov provid ides es for for pena penalt lty y for for furnishing false evidence. Section 7 provides for 2 witnesses in open court for acts penalized by prision mayor to death. Section 8 allows the renunciation of membership to the CCP through writing under oath. Sectio Section n 9 declar declares es the consti constitut tution ionali ality ty of the statut statute e and its valid valid exer exerci cise se unde underr free freedo dom m if thou though ght, t, asse assemb mbly ly and and assoc associa iati tion on..
Issues:
(1) Whether or not RA1700 is a bill of attainder/ ex post facto law. (2) (2)
Whet Whethe herr
or
Not Not
RA1 RA1700
viola iolate tes s
free freed dom
of
expr xpressio ssion. n.
Held: The court holds the VALIDITY Of the Anti-Subversion Act of 1957.
A bill of attainder is solely a legislative act. It punishes without the benefit of the trial. It is the substitution of judicial determination to a legislative determination of guilt. In order for a statute be measured as a bill of attainder, the following requisites must be present: 1.) The statute specifies persons, groups. 2.) the statute is applied retroactively and reach past conduct. (A bill of attainder relatively is also an ex post facto law.) In the case at bar, the statute simply declares the CPP as an organized conspiracy for the overthrow of the Government for purposes of example of SECTION 4 of the Act. The Act applies not only to the CPP but also to other organizations having the same purpose and their successors. The Act’s focus is on the conduct not person. Membership to this organizations, to be UNLAWFUL, it must be shown that membership was acquired with the intent to further the goals of the organization by overt acts. This is the element of MEMBERSHIP with KNOWLEDGE that is punishable. This is the required proof of a member’s direct participation. Why is membership punished. Membership renders aid and encouragement to the organization. Membership makes himself party to its unlawful acts. Furthermore, the statute is PROSPECTIVE in nature. Section 4 prohibits acts committed after approval of the act. The members of the subversive organizations before the passing of this Act is given an opportunity to escape liability by renouncing membership in accordance with Section 8. The statute applies the principle of mutatis mutandis or that the necessary changes having been made. The declaration of that the CPP is an organized conspiracy to overthrow the Philippine Government should not be the basis of guilt. This declaration is only a basis of Section 4 of the Act. The EXISTENCE OF SUBSTANTIVE EVIL justifies the limitation to the exercise of “Freedom of Expression and Association” in this matter. Before the enactment of the statute and statements in the preamble, careful investigations by the Congress were done. The court further stresses that whatever interest in freedom of speech and association is excluded in the prohibition of membership in the CPP are weak considering NATIONAL SECURITY and PRESERVATION of DEMOCRACY. The court set basic guidelines to be observed in the prosecution under RA1700. In addition to proving circumstances/ evidences of subversion, the following elements must also be established:
1. Subversive Organizations besides the CPP, it must be proven that the organization purpose is to overthrow the present Government of the Philippines and establish a domination of a FOREIGN POWER. Membership is willfully and knowingly done by overt acts. 2. In case of CPP, the continued pursuance of its subversive purpose. Membership is willfully and knowingly done by overt acts. The court did not make any judgment on the crimes of the accused under the Act. The Supreme Court set aside the resolution of the TRIAL COURT.
