1.

The Janitor of Sanggunian Panglusod of Tacloban City, passed a note which he prepared
that the meeting for the Christmas Party will be postponed. So the employees were not
able to attend and the meeting pushed through? Is the janitor committed the crime under
Art. 143?
Yes, the janitor is not liable under Article 143. The following are the elements of the article:
a. There be projected or actual meeting of the Congress or any of its committees or
subcommittees, constitutional committees or divisions thereof, or of any provincial board
or city or municipal council or board
b. Offender, who may be any person, prevents such meeting by force or fraud
Alternative Answer: No, he is not liable since the meeting was for the employees and not the
members of the city council.
How if the meeting was able to continue but the Janitor turned the sound system inside the
meeting place and played a music so loud. Is he liable under Art. 144?
Yes, the janitor is liable under Article 144.
Article 144 elements:
a. There is a meeting of Congress or any of its committees or subcommittees, constitutional
commissions or committees or divisions thereof, or any provincial board or city or municipality
council or board
b. Offender does any of the following acts: a. Disturbs any such meetings b. Behaves while in the
presence of any such bodies, in such a manner as to interrupt its proceedings or to impair the
respect due it
Alternative Answer: No, he is not liable since the meeting was for the employees and not the
members of the city council.

2. In the meeting of the Sanggunian Lungsod of Tacloban City, Counsellor Tsiktiradas was
not able to attend because a good looking girl told her that there was a bomb threat and
the meeting was cancelled. It turned out that the girl purposely prevented him to attend
the meeting. The girl is a woman right advocate and she knew that the counsellor will
vote against her interest. Is she liable under Art. 145?
No, the girl is not liable under Article 145 since what the said article talks about are the members
of the Congress and not the members of the Sangguniang Panglungsod.
Article 145 elements:
1. Using force, intimidation, threats, or frauds to prevent any member of Congress from – a.
Attending the meetings of congress or of any of its committees or subcommittees,
constitutional commissions or committees b. Expressing his opinions c. Casting his vote
2. Arresting or searching any member thereof while Congress is in regular or special session.

3. Group of armed persons were gathered in a meeting for the purpose of kidnapping
different intended victims. Mr. X who was unarmed was one of the audience and he was
incited to join in the kindapping. Is Mr. X liable under Art. 146?
Yes, X is liable for illegal assembly. The presence of armed men during the gathering brings about
the crime of illegal assembly.
 The persons liable are:
1. Organizers or leaders of the meeting
2. Persons merely present at the meeting
How about if no one is armed is Mr. X liable or the organizers or the other persons
present?
If none of the persons present in the meeting are armed, there is no crime. E.g. Persons unarmed
conspiring in a meeting to commit qualified theft is not punishable.
4. Mr. X organized Tokhangers death squad. He was able to recruit 20 members whose
relatives or families were victims of the alleged extrajudicial killings. They are targeting
police officers. Are the members liable under Art. 147?
Yes. The basis of illegal association is the formation of or organization of an association to engage
in an unlawful purpose which is not limited to a violation of the RPC. The association is organized
for some purpose contrary to public morals.
5. When Mr. X was about to be arrested by the police, he was able to push the police when
he refused to be arrested. Is he liable for under Art. 148?
No, he is not liable. The following are the elements of direct assault:
1. That the offender: a. Makes an attack b. Employs force c. Makes a serious intimidation d.
Makes a serious resistance
2. The person assaulted is a person in authority or his agent
3. That at the time of the assault the person in authority or his agent a. Is engaged in the
actual performance of official duties, or b. That he is assaulted, by reason of the past
performance of official duties
4. That the offender knows that the one he is assaulting is a person in authority or his agent
in the exercise of his duties
5. That there is no public uprising
Following the elements, Mr X cant be held liable since element no. 1 is absent. No serious
resistance was made.
6. Mr. X and Mr. Y, a policeman, were drinking in a bar. They had an altercation which
resulted in a fist fight. Is Mr. X liable under Art. 148?
No, Mr X is not liable under Article 148. In order for the article to lie, the officer, at the time
of the assault, a. Is engaged in the actual performance of official duties, or b. That he is
assaulted, by reason of the past performance of official duties.

7. Mr. X was shouting in a neighbourhood when Mr. Y, a policeman who was passing thereat
and not wearing a uniform accosted Mr. X. Mr. X got angry with Mr. Y and attacked him.
Is he liable under Art. 148?
No, Mr. X is not liable, assuming that he did not know that the person he assaulted was a
policeman. There is absence of the fourth element of direct assault.