- (d) Exemplarity — The criminal is punished to

serve as an example to deter others from

BOOK ONE committing crimes.
GENERAL PROVISIONS REGARDING THE - (e) Justice — That crime must be punished by
the State as an act of retributive justice, a
DATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND vindication of absolute right and moral law
APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS violated by the criminal.

CODE, AND REGARDING THE OFFENSES,

THE PERSONS LIABLE AND THE PENALTIES three-fold purpose purpose of penalty
UNDER RPC
Title Three: P E N A L T I E S
- (a) Retribution or expiation — The penalty is commensurate
with the gravity of the offense.
Chapter One PENALTIES IN GENERAL
- (b) Correction or reformation — as shown by the rules which
---------------------------------------------------------
regulate the execution of the penalties consisting in
- Penalty
deprivation of liberty.
- Penalty is the suffering that is inflicted by the State for
the transgression of a law.
- (c) Social defense — shown by its inflexible severity to
- CONCEPT: Penalty in its general sense signifies pain;
recidivists and habitual delinquents.
especially considered in the juridical sphere, it means
suffering undergone, because of the action of human
society, by one who commits a crime. (Pessina,
Constitutional restriction on penalties
Elementos de Derecho Penal, pp. 375-376)
- REASON: To secure justice.
- The Constitution directs that
- The State has an existence of its own to
- "excessive fines shall not be imposed,
maintain, a conscience of its own to assert,
- nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted."
and moral principles to be vindicated.
- The punishment is "cruel and unusual" when
- REASON: Penal justice must therefore be exercised by
it is so disproportionate to the offense
the State in the service and satisfaction of a duty and
committed as to shock the moral sense of
rests primarily on the moral rightfulness of the
all reasonable men as to what is right and
punishment inflicted. (Albert)
proper under the circumstances.
- CONDITIONS: Different juridical conditions of penalty:
- Example: Those inflicted at the whipping
(These are the juridical conditions of penalty according to the
post, or in pillory, burning at the stake,
classical school on which the Code is mainly based.)
breaking on the wheel, and the like.
- 1. Must be productive of suffering, without
(People vs. De la Cruz, 92 Phil. 906, 908)
however affecting the integrity of the human
- RULE [Cruel Punishment]: constitutional
personality.
stricture has been interpreted as referring
- 2. Must be commensurate with the offense —
to penalties that are inhuman and
different crimes must be punished with
barbarous, or shocking to the conscience
different penalties.
(Weems vs. U.S., 217 U.S. 349)
- 3. Must be personal — none should be
- RULE [Cruel Punishment]: fines or
punished for the crime of another.
imprisonment are definitely not in this
- 4. Must be legal — it is the consequence of a
category. (People vs. Dionisio, G.R. No. L-
judgment according to law.
25513, March 27, 1968, 22 SCRA 1299, 1301)
- 5. Must be certain — no one may escape its
effects.
- 6. Must be equal for all.
- 7. Must be correctional.

- THEORIES JUSTIFYING PENALTY

- (a) Prevention — The State must punish the
criminal to prevent or suppress the danger to
the State arising from the criminal acts of the
offender.
- (b) Self-defense — The State has a right to
punish the criminal as a measure of self-
defense so as to protect society from the
threat and wrong inflicted by the criminal.
- (c) Reformation — The object of punishment
in criminal cases is to correct and reform the
offender.
• __
---------------------------------------------------------
Article 21. Penalties that may be imposed. - No
felony shall be punishable by any penalty not
prescribed by law prior to its commission.
---------------------------------------------------------
STATE POLICY REGARDING PUNISHING CRIME
- Art. 21 simply announces the policy of the State as regards
punishing crimes.
- RULE [ARTICLE 21 IS NOT RESTRICTIVE TO ANY PROVISIONS OF
RPC]:
- It has no application to any of the provisions of the
Revised Penal Code for the reason that for every felony
defined in the Code, a penalty has been prescribed.
- RULE [ARTICLE 21 BEING TRIED FOR SOMETHING WITH NO
PENALTY PRESCRIBED BY LAW]
- The provisions of Art. 21 can only be invoked when a
person is being tried for an act or omission for which no
penalty has been prescribed by law.
- RULE [ARTICLE 21 NOT A PENAL PROVISION, INSTEAD
GUARANTY/DECLARATION TO THE PUBLIC, NO ACT SHALL BE
PUNISHED UNLESS IT IS AVAILABLE IN LAW.
- Art. 21 is not a penal provision. It neither defines a
crime nor provides a punishment for one. It has simply
announced the policy of the Government with
reference to the punishment of alleged criminal acts.
- It is a guaranty to the citizen of this country that no act
of his, will be considered criminal until the Government
has made it so by law and has provided a penalty.
- It is a declaration that no person shall be subject to
criminal prosecution for any act of his until after the
State has denned the crime and has fixed a penalty
therefor. (U.S. vs. Parrone, 24 Phil. 29, 35)
- RULE [SUBSIDIARY PENALTY CANNOT BE IMPOSED]: if not
prescribed by law
- Subsidiary penalty for a crime cannot be imposed, if it
was "not prescribed by law prior to its commission."
- DEFINITION: Subsidiary penalty is served if the penalty
imposed upon the convict includes fine but he cannot
pay the same because of insolvency.
---------------------------------------------------------
Article 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. - Penal
Laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as
they favor the persons guilty of a felony, who is
not a habitual criminal, as this term is defined in
Rule 5 of Article 62 of this Code, although at the
time of the publication of such laws a final
sentence has been pronounced and the convict is
serving the same.
---------------------------------------------------------
EXCEPTION RULE: When there is Retroactive effect of
penal laws.
- RULE [ARTICLE 22 IS NOT RESTRICTIVE TO ANY PROVISIONS OF
RPC]:
- The Legislature in enacting Art. 10 (first clause) of the
Revised Penal Code DID NOT intended to provide that
Art. 22 should not be applicable to special laws.
- EXCEPTION: where some former or subsequent law is
under consideration
- Its application to the Revised Penal Code can
only be invoked where some former or
subsequent law is under consideration. It must
necessarily relate
- (1) to penal laws existing prior to the
Revised Penal Code, in which the
penalty was less severe than those
of the Code; or
- (2) to laws enacted subsequent to the
Revised Penal Code, in which the
penalty is more favorable to the
accused.
- GENERAL RULE: General rule is to give criminal laws prospective
effect.
- EXCEPTION RULE: to give them retroactive effect when
favorable to the accused.
- It was held that although Republic Act No. 587 took
effect after the incident in question, the same may be
applied, it being more favorable to the accused.
(Lapuz vs. Court of Appeals, 94 Phil. 710, 713)
- CONSTITUTIONAL REASON: Giving a law retroactive
effect, if unfavorable to accused, will violate the
constitutional inhibition as to ex post facto laws.
- REASON FOR EXCEPTION:
2
• __
- The sovereign, in enacting a subsequent penal law
more favorable to the accused, has recognized that
the greater severity of the former law is unjust.
- The sovereign would be inconsistent if it would still
enforce its right under conditions of the former law,
which has already been regarded by conscientious
public opinion as juridically burdensome. (People vs.
Moran, 44 Phil. 387, 414)
- RULE [ARTICLE 22 APPLICABLE]: even if the accused is already
serving sentence
- The provision of Art. 22 that penal laws shall have a
retroactive effect insofar as they favor the person guilty
of a felony is applicable even if the accused is already
serving sentence. (Escalante vs. Santos, 56 Phil. 483,
485)
- RULE [ARTICLE 22 APPLICABLE ONLY]: In order that a
subsequent statute may have a retroactive effect, it must in the
first place refer to the same deed or omission penalized by the
former statute and must seek the same end and purpose. (U.S.
vs. Macasaet, 11 Phil. 447, 449)
- RULE [ARTICLE 22 APPLICABLE]: Also applicable to SPECIAL
LAWS
- RULE [ARTICLE 22 APPLICABLE] [IF ABSOLUTE REPEAL] [CRIMINAL
LIABILITY EXTINGUISHED]
- ABSOLUTE REPEAL: People vs. Tamayo (61 Phil. 226)
- On the other hand, in the Tamayo case, the
repeal (completely eliminating Section 2 of
the Ordinance under which the accused was
being prosecuted) was absolute.
- Held: A person cannot be prosecuted,
convicted, and punished for acts no longer
criminal. The case was dismissed.
- REENACTMENT: When the repeal is by reenactment,
the court has jurisdiction to try and punish an accused
person under the old law. (U.S. vs. Cuna, 12 Phil. 241,
247)
- Criminal liability under former law is obliterated when
the repeal is absolute.
- RULE [ARTICLE 22 NOT APPLICABLE] [IF IMPLIED REPEAL?] [OR IF
REPEAL BY REENACTMENT] [CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF THE REPEALED
LAW SUBSISTS]
- Art. 366. Application of laws enacted prior to this Code.
Without prejudice to the provisions contained in Art. 22
of this Code, felonies and misdemeanors committed
prior to the date of effectiveness of this Code shall be
punished in accordance with the Code or Acts in force
at the time of their commission.
- IMPLIED REPEAL: These two articles mean that while
felonies and misdemeanors committed prior to the
date of effectiveness of the Revised Penal Code shall
be punished in accordance with the Code or Acts in
force at the time of their commission, the same should
not be the case if such Code or Acts are unfavorable
to the guilty party, for the general principle on the
retroactivity of favorable penal laws, recognized in Art.
22, should then apply. Lagrimas vs. Director of Prisons
(57 Phil. 249)
- REPEAL BY REENACTMENT: When the repeal is by
reenactment, the court has jurisdiction to try and
punish an accused person under the old law. (U.S. vs.
Cuna, 12 Phil. 241, 247)
- [SAVING CLAUSE] ]When there is a saving clause. (U.S.
vs. Cuna, 12 Phil. 241, supra; Wing vs. U.S., 218 U.S. 272)
- The right to punish offenses committed under
an old penal law is not extinguished if the
offenses are still punished in the repealing
penal law. (U.S. vs. Cuna, supra; People vs.
Rosenthal, 68 Phil. 328)
- RULE [ARTICLE 22 APPLICABLE]: General rule, penalty basis is at
the time of the commission of the crime, UNLESS a later law is
more favorable to the accused.
- IF penalty prescribed by a law enacted after the
commission of the felony may be imposed, if it is
favorable to the offender. (Art. 22)
- RULE [ARTICLE 22 NOT APPLICABLE]: TO CIVIL LIABILITY
- The principle that criminal statutes are retroactive so far
as they favor the culprit does not apply to the latter's
civil liability, because the rights of offended persons or
innocent third parties are not within the gift of arbitrary
disposal of the State.
- RULE [ARTICLE 22 NOT APPLICABLE]: as regards jurisdiction of
court. [basis: law in force at the time of action]
- The jurisdiction of a court to try a criminal action is to
be determined by the law in force at the time of
instituting the action, not at the time of the commission
of the crime. (People vs. Romualdo, 90 Phil. 739, 744)
- RULE [ARTICLE 22 NOT APPLICABLE]: a new law increasing the
civil liability cannot be given retroactive effect.
- EXCEPTION TO EXCEPTION POSSIBLE: When the law itself
provides
- Thus, Rep. Act No. 4661, reducing the period of
prescription of criminal action for libel from two years to
one year, specifically provides that "The provisions of
this amendatory Act shall not apply to cases of libel
already filed in court at the time of approval of this
amendatory Act."
- EXCEPTION TO EXCEPTION POSSIBLE: [When there is no law
punishing it before as to retroact to?] [When old RPC did not
punish it, it won’t retroact in a way of no punishment]
- People vs. Carballo (62 Phil. 651)
- Prior to January 1, 1932, when the Revised Penal Code
took effect, there was no law punishing the violation of
a conditional pardon as a crime. Held: The provisions of
the Revised Penal Code cannot be given retroactive
effect.
- Held: The intention of the Legislature in embodying this
provision of Art. 366 in the Revised Penal Code was to
insure that the elimination from this Code of certain
crimes penalized by former acts before the
enforcement of this Code should not have the effect
of pardoning guilty persons who were serving their
sentences for the commission of such crimes. Petition
denied. Lagrimas vs. Director of Prisons (57 Phil. 249)
3
• __

- EXCEPTION TO EXCEPTION POSSIBLE: When the culprit is a reparation should have been made of the damage
habitual delinquent suffered by the offended party. (People vs. Benitez, 59
- But when the culprit is a habitual delinquent, he is not O.G. 1407)
entitled to the benefit of the provisions of the new -
favorable statute. (People vs. Alcaraz, 56 Phil. 520, 522)
--------------------------------------------------------- except as provided
- RULE [ARTICLE 23]: EXCEPTION RULE:
in Article 344 of this Code; ADULTERY AND
CONCUBINAGE [PARDON BARS CRIMINAL
PROSECUTION]
- The offended party in the crimes of adultery and
concubinage cannot institute criminal prosecution, if
he shall have consented or pardoned the offenders.
(Art. 344, par. 2)
- RULE: Pardon under Art. 344 must be made before
institution of criminal prosecution.

except as provided
- RULE [ARTICLE 23]: EXCEPTION RULE:
in Article 344 of this Code; EXPRESS PARDON in
the following crimes [parents, grandparents,
guardian] [PARDON BARS CRIMINAL
PROSECUTION]
- In the crimes of seduction,
- abduction,
- rape
- or acts of lasciviousness,
- there shall be no criminal prosecution if the offender
has been expressly pardoned by the offended party or
her parents, grandparents, or guardian, as the case
Article 23. Effect of pardon by the offended party. may be. The pardon here must be express.
- A pardon of the offended party does not - RULE: Pardon under Art. 344 must be made before
extinguish criminal action except as provided in institution of criminal prosecution.
Article 344 of this Code; but civil liability with
regard to the interest of the injured party is - civil liability with regard to the
RULE [ARTICLE 23]:

extinguished by his express waiver. interest of the injured party is extinguished by his
express waiver.
- As a general rule, an offense causes two classes of
--------------------------------------------------------- injuries:
PARDON BY THE “OFFENDED PARTY” - (1) social injury, produced by the disturbance
- RULE [ARTICLE 23]: GENERAL RULE: pardon of the and alarm which are the outcome of the
offended party does not extinguish criminal offense; and
- (2) personal injury, caused to the victim of the
action [State may still file a case]
crime who suffered damage either to his
- Even if the injured party already pardoned the
person, to his property, to his honor or to her
offender, the fiscal can still prosecute the offender.
chastity.
Such pardon by the offended party is not even a
- But since personal injury is repaired through indemnity,
ground for the dismissal of the complaint or
which is civil in nature, the offended party may waive it
information.
and the State has no reason to insist in its payment.
- Reason: A crime committed is an offense against the
State. In criminal cases, the intervention of the ---------------------------------------------------------
aggrieved parties is limited to being witnesses for the
prosecution. (People vs. Despavellador, 53 O.G. 21797)
Only the Chief Executive can pardon the offenders.
(Art. 36)

- RULE [ARTICLE 23]: Compromise does not extinguish criminal

liability. The State may still pursue the case instead of the private
offended persons.
- It is well-settled that criminal liability for estafa is not
affected by compromise, for it is a public offense
which must be prosecuted and punished by the
Government on its own motion even though complete

4
• __
Article 24. Measures of prevention or safety
which are nor considered penalties. - The
following shall not be considered as penalties:
1. The arrest and temporary detention of accused
persons, as well as their detention by reason of
insanity or imbecility, or illness requiring their
confinement in a hospital.
2. The commitment of a minor to any of the
institutions mentioned in Article 80 and for the
purposes specified therein.
3. Suspension from the employment of public
office during the trial or in order to institute
proceedings.
4. Fines and other corrective measures which, in
the exercise of their administrative disciplinary
powers, superior officials may impose upon their
subordinates.
5. Deprivation of rights and the reparations which
the civil laws may establish in penal form.
---------------------------------------------------------
following shall not be considered as penalties
- Why are they not considered penalties?
- They are not penalties, because they are not imposed
as a result of judicial proceedings. Those mentioned in
paragraphs Nos. 1,3 and 4 are merely preventive
measures before conviction of offenders.
- arrest and temporary detention of accused person
- BLANK
- detention by reason of insanity or imbecility, or illness requiring
their confinement in a hospital.
- Paragraph No. 1 of Article 24 contains the above
phrase. This paragraph does not refer to the
confinement of an insane or imbecile who has not
been arrested for a crime.
- RULE [applicable to ACCUSED ONLY]: It refers to
"accused persons" who are detained "by reason of
insanity or imbecility." The word "their" in the second
clause of paragraph No. 1, refers to "accused persons"
in the first clause.
- commitment of a minor to any of the institutions mentioned in
Article 80 and for the purposes specified therein.
- The commitment of a minor mentioned in paragraph 2
is not a penalty, because it is not imposed by the court
in a judgment of conviction.
- The imposition of the sentence in such case is
suspended.
- Suspension from the employment of public office during the
trial
- BLANK
- Fines and other corrective measures which, in the exercise of
their administrative disciplinary powers, #superiors [NOT
IMPOSED BY THE COURT]
- The "fines" mentioned in paragraph 4 are not imposed
by the court, because when imposed by the court,
they constitute a penalty. (See Art. 25)
- Deprivation of rights and the reparations which the civil laws
may establish in penal form.
- The deprivation of rights established in penal form by
the civil laws is illustrated:
- in the case of parents who are deprived of
their parental authority if found guilty of the
crime of corruption of their minor children, in
accordance with Art. 332 of the Civil Code.
---------------------------------------------------------
5
• __

- Indivisible penalties are those which have no

fixed duration.The indivisible penalties are:
- 1. Death.
- 2. Reclusion perpetua.
- 3. Perpetual absolute or special
disqualification.
- 4. Public censure.
- Divisible penalties are those that have fixed
duration and are divisible into three periods.
---------------------------------------------------------

Capital punishment:

Death.

Afflictive penalties:

Reclusion perpetua,

Reclusion temporal,

Perpetual or temporary absolute

disqualification,

Perpetual or temporary special

disqualification,

Prision mayor.

Correctional penalties:

Prision correccional,

Arresto mayor,

Suspension,

Destierro.

Chapter Two CLASSIFICATION OF

PENALTIES
Article 25. Penalties which may be imposed. - The
penalties which may be imposed according to
this Code, and their different classes, are those
included in the following:
Scale
Principal Penalties
---------------------------------------------------------
- those expressly imposed by the court in the judgment of
conviction.
- The principal penalties may be classified:
- According to their divisibility.
Light penalties:
Arresto menor,
Public censure.
---------------------------------------------------------
- Public censure is a penalty, and being such, is not proper in
acquittal. But a competent court, while acquitting an accused
may, with unquestionable propriety express its disapproval or
reprehension of those acts to avoid the impression that by
acquitting the accused it approves or admires his conduct.
---------------------------------------------------------
Penalties common to the three preceding
classes:
Fine, and

6
• __
Bond to keep the peace.
Accessory Penalties
---------------------------------------------------------
- those that are deemed included in the imposition of the
principal penalties.
--------------------------------------------------------
Perpetual or temporary absolute
disqualification,
Perpetual or temporary special
disqualification,
Suspension from public office, the right to
vote and be voted for, the profession or
calling.
Civil interdiction,
Indemnification,
Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments
and proceeds of the offense,
Payment of costs.
Penalties that are either Principal or Accessory.
- ff may be principal or accessory penalties:
- (1) Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification,
- (2) perpetual or temporary special disqualification, and
- suspension,
- because they are formed in the two general
classes.
- Art. 236, punishing the crime of anticipation of duties of a
public office, provides for (3) suspension as a principal penalty.
- Arts. 226, 227 and 228, punishing infidelity of public officers in
the custody of documents, provide for temporary special
disqualification as a principal penalty
---------------------------------------------------------
CLASSIFICATION OF PENALTIES
- RULE: EXCLUSIVE LIST?
- "The penalties which may be imposed, according to
this Code, x x x are those included" in Art. 25 only.
- A sentence of "five years in Bilibid" is defective,
because it does not specify the exact penalty
prescribed in the Revised Penal Code. (U.S. vs. Avillar,
28 Phil. 131, 134-135)
- The penalty of life imprisonment or cadena perpetua
imposed by the trial court is an erroneous designation.
The correct term is reclusion perpetua. The penalty of
cadena perpetua was abolished by the Revised Penal
Code. (People vs. Abletes, No. L-33304, July 31, 1974, 58
SCRA 241, 248)
- RULE: Can hard labor be required from prisoners?
- The penalty of hard labor in addition to imprisonment
cannot be imposed, because it is not authorized by the
Revised Penal Code. (U.S. vs. Mendoza, 14 Phil. 198,
203; People vs. Limaco, 88 Phil. 35, 43-44)
- UPDATED LENGTH: RECLUSION PERPETUA
- Under R.A. No. 7659, the duration of reclusion perpetua
is now from 20 years and 1 day to 40 years.
- Classification of penalties according to subject-matter:
1. Corporal (death).
2. Deprivation of freedom (reclusion, prision, arresto).
3. Restriction of freedom (destierro).
4. Deprivation of rights (disqualification and suspension).
5. Pecuniary (fine).
- Classification of penalties according to their gravity:
1. Capital,
2. Afflictive,
3. Correctional,
4. Light.
- Major Classification
1. PRINCIPAL PENALTIES.
- Those expressly imposed by the court in the judgment
of conviction.
2. ACCESSORY PENALTIES.
- Those that are deemed included in the imposition of
the principal penalties.
3. SUBSIDIARY PENALTIES.
- Those imposed in lieu of principal penalties, i.e.,
imprisonment in case of inability to pay the fine
- RULE: Court acquitting the accused may criticize his acts or
conduct.
- The court may, with unquestionable propriety, express
its disapproval or reprehension of those acts to avoid
the impression that by acquitting the accused it
approves or admires his conduct.
---------------------------------------------------------
Article 26. When afflictive, correctional, or light
penalty. - A fine, whether imposed as a single of
as an alternative penalty, shall be considered an
afflictive penalty, if it exceeds 6,000 pesos; a
correctional penalty, if it does not exceed 6,000
pesos but is not less than 200 pesos; and a light
penalty if it less than 200 pesos.
REPUBLIC ACT No. 10951
Art. 26. When afflictive, correctional, or light
7
• __

- A fine, whether imposed as a single of as

penalty. - A fine, whether imposed as a single or
as an alternative penalty, shall be considered an alternative penalty, shall be considered
an afflictive penalty, if it exceeds One million an light penalty
two hundred thousand (₱1,200,000); a - if it less than 200 pesos.
correctional penalty, if it does not exceed One ---------------------------------------------------------
million two hundred thousand pesos
(₱1,200,000) but is not less than Forty thousand
pesos (₱40,000); and a light penalty, if it be less
than Forty thousand pesos (₱40,000)."

---------------------------------------------------------
afflictive, correctional, or light penalty

- "Whether imposed as a single or as an alternative penalty."

- [ALTERNATIVE] Fines are imposed in many articles of this
Code as an alternative penalty. Example: In Art. 144,
punishing disturbance of proceedings, the penalty is
arresto mayor or a fine ranging from P20 0 to P1.000.
- [SINGLE] Example of fine as a single penalty is a fine of
200 to 6,000.

- RULE: Penalties cannot be imposed in the alternative.

- Held: The law does not permit any court to impose a
sentence in the alternative, its duty being to indicate
the penalty imposed definitely and positively. (People
vs. Mercadejas, C.A., 54 O.G. 5707; People vs. Tabije,
C.A., 59 O.G. 1922)

- RULE: ART 26 DOES NOT DEFINE LIGHT FELONY. ART 9 SHOULD

PREVAIL
- Art. 26 merely classifies fine and has nothing to do with
the definition of light felony.
- A felony punishable by arresto menor or a fine not
exceeding P200 is a light felony. (Art. 9, par. 3)
- When the penalty is correctional, it is a less grave
felony. (Art. 9, par. 2)
- It is a light penalty if the amount of the fine imposed is
less than P200, and it is a correctional penalty if it is not
less than P20 0 and does not exceed f*6,000. (Art. 26)
- If the fine prescribed by the law for a felony is exactly
P200, is it a light felony or a less grave felony? It is a light
felony because Art. 9, par. 3, which defines light felony
should prevail.

- afflictive penalty
- A fine, whether imposed as a single of as
an alternative penalty, shall be considered
an afflictive penalty
- if it exceeds 6,000 pesos;

- correctional penalty
- A fine, whether imposed as a single of as
an alternative penalty, shall be considered
an correctional penalty
- if it does not exceed 6,000 pesos but is
not less than 200 pesos;

- light penalty