BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 22: ANNOTATED This is an annotation of Batas Pambansa Blg.

("BP") 22 -- "AnAct Penalizing the Making or Drawing an !ss"ance of a #heck $itho"t %"fficient &"n s or #re it an for 'ther P"r(oses"(%ee also) &"ll te*t of BP 22+ &or"m Disc"ssion). BP 22, often referre to as the "Bo"ncing #hecks -aw," go.erns the criminal liabilit/ arising from the iss"ance of bo"nce checks. $hat the law ("nishes is the iss"ance of a bo"ncing check an not the ("r(ose for which the check was iss"e , nor the terms an con itions of its iss"ance. To etermine the reasons for which checks are iss"e , or the terms an con itions for their iss"ance, will greatl/ ero e the faith the ("blic re(oses in the stabilit/ an commercial .al"e of checks as c"rrenc/ s"bstit"tes, an bring abo"t ha.oc in tra e an in banking comm"nities. (#aras .s. #o"rt of A((eals, 0.1. 2o. 324455, 2 'ctober 2553) %ection 3. Checks without sufficient funds . - An/ (erson who makes or raws an iss"es an/ check to a((l/ on acco"nt or for .al"e, knowing at the time of iss"e that he oes not ha.e s"fficient f"n s in or cre it with the rawee bank for the (a/ment of s"ch check in f"ll "(on its (resentment, which check is s"bse6"entl/ ishonore b/ the rawee bank for ins"fficienc/ of f"n s or cre it or wo"l ha.e been ishonore for the same reason ha not the rawer, witho"t an/ .ali reason, or ere the bank to sto( (a/ment, shall be ("nishe b/ im(risonment of not less than thirt/ a/s b"t not more than one (3) /ear or b/ a fine of not less than b"t not more than o"ble the amo"nt of the check which fine shall in no case e*cee Two 7"n re Tho"san Pesos, or both s"ch fine an im(risonment at the iscretion of the co"rt. The same (enalt/ shall be im(ose "(on an/ (erson who, ha.ing s"fficient f"n s in or cre it with the rawee bank when he makes or raws an iss"es a check, shall fail to kee( s"fficient f"n s or to maintain a cre it to co.er the f"ll amo"nt of the check if (resente within a (erio of ninet/ (45) a/s from the ate a((earing thereon, for which reason it is ishonore b/ the rawee bank. $here the check is rawn b/ a cor(oration, com(an/ or entit/, the (erson or (ersons who act"all/ signe the check in behalf of s"ch rawer shall be liable "n er this Act. Annotation)%ection 3 of the Bo"ncing #hecks -aw (enalizes two istinctacts (Ba"tista .s. #o"rt of A((eals, 0.1. 2o. 3899:;,< ="l/ 2553)) (3) Making or rawing an iss"ing an/ check to a((l/ on acco"nt or for .al"e, knowing at the time of iss"e that the rawer oes not ha.e s"fficient f"n s in or cre it with the rawee bank. (2) 7a.ing s"fficient f"n s in or cre it with the rawee bank shall fail to kee( s"fficient f"n s or to maintain a cre it to co.er the f"ll amo"nt of the check if (resente within a (erio of 45 a/s from the ate a((earing thereon, for which reason it is ishonore b/ the rawee bank. !n the first (aragra(h, the rawer knows that he oes not ha.e s"fficient f"n s to co.er the check at the time of its iss"ance,while in the secon (aragra(h, the rawer has s"fficient f"n sat the time of iss"ance b"t fails to kee( s"fficient f"n s or maintain cre it within ninet/ (45) a/s from the ate a((earingon the check. !n both instances, the offense is cons"mmate b/ the ishonor of the check for ins"fficienc/ of f"n s or cre it.The check in.ol.e in the first offense is worthless at the time of iss"ance since the rawer ha neither s"fficient f"n s innor cre it with the rawee bank at the time, while thatin.ol.e in the secon offense is goo when iss"e as rawerha s"fficient f"n s in or cre it with the rawee bank wheniss"e . >n er the first offense, the 45- a/ (resentment (erio is not e*(ressl/ (ro.i e , while s"ch (erio is an e*(ress element of the secon offense. Elements: GeneralThe elements of the offense "n er %ection 3 of B.P. Blg. 22 are) (3) rawing an iss"ance of an/ check to a((l/ on acco"nt or for .al"e+ (2) knowle ge b/ the maker, rawer, or iss"er that at the time of iss"e he i not ha.e s"fficient f"n s in or cre it with the rawee bank for the (a/ment of s"ch check in f"ll "(on (resentment+ an (9) sai check is s"bse6"entl/ ishonore b/ the

rawee bank for ins"fficienc/ of f"n s or cre it, or wo"l ha.e been ishonore for the same reason ha not the rawer, witho"t an/ .ali reason, or ere the bank to sto( (a/ment. (#aras .s. #o"rt of A((eals, supra.) The secon re6"isite or element is isc"sse in %ection 2 below, while the thir re6"isite is isc"se in %ection 9. Applicable penalties !n A.M. 2o. 55-33-53-%# (2553), the %"(reme #o"rt clarifie that the earlier circ"lar, A ministrati.e #irc"lar 32-2555, i notremo.e im(risonment as an alternati.e (enalt/ for .iolationsof B.P. Blg. 22. The =" ges ma/, "in the e*ercise of so"n iscretion, an taking into consi eration the (ec"liarcirc"mstances of each case, etermine whether the im(osition of a fine alone wo"l best ser.e the interests of ?"stice or whether forbearing to im(ose im(risonment wo"l e(reciate the serio"sness of the offense, work .iolence on the social or er, or otherwise be contrar/ to the im(erati.es of ?"stice." Also, "@sAho"l onl/ a fine be im(ose an the acc"se be "nable to (a/ the fine, there is no legalobstacle to the a((lication of the 1e.ise Penal #o e(ro.isions on s"bsi iar/ im(risonment." %B#. 2. Evidence of knowledge of insufficient funds . C The making, rawing an iss"ance of a check (a/ment of which is ref"se b/ the rawee bank beca"se of ins"fficient f"n s in or cre it with s"ch bank, when (resente within ninet/ (45) a/s from the ate of the check, shall be (rima facie e.i ence of knowle ge of s"ch ins"fficienc/ of f"n s or cre it, "nless s"ch maker or rawer (a/s the hol er thereof the amo"nt "e thereon, or makes arrangements for (a/ment in f"ll b/ the rawee of s"ch check within fi.e (;) banking a/s after recei.ing notice that s"ch check has not been (ai b/ the rawee. Annotation: The secon element of the offense is the knowle ge of the acc"se abo"t the ins"fficienc/ of f"n s. !t m"st be shown be/on reasonable o"bt that the acc"se knew of theins"fficienc/ of f"n s at the time the check was iss"e .%ection 2 (ro.i es that the acc"se m"st be notifie of the ishonor. The (rosec"tion m"st establish that the acc"se was act"all/ notifie that the check was ishonore , an that he or shefaile , within fi.e banking a/s from recei(t of the notice, to(a/ the hol er of the check the amo"nt "e thereon or to make arrangement for its (a/ment. The notice of ishonor of a checkto the maker m"st be in writing. A mere oral notice to the rawer or maker of the ishonor of his check is not eno"gh.!tDs tr"e that %ection 2 oes not state that the notice of ishonor be in writing. This, howe.er, sho"l be taken in con?"nction with %ection 9, which (ro.i es Ethat where there are no s"fficient f"n s in or cre it with s"ch rawee bank, s"ch fact shall alwa/s be e*(licitl/ state in the notice of ishonor or ref"sal.FThis is consistent with the r"le that (enalstat"tes ha.e to be constr"e strictl/ against the %tate an liberall/ in fa.or of the acc"se . $itho"t a written notice of ishonor of the checks, there is no wa/ of etermining when the ;- a/ (erio (rescribe in %ection 2 wo"l startan en . ( Bax vs. People, 0.1. 2o. 384G;G, ; %e(tember 255:,citing ico vs. People, 0.1. 2o. 39:343, 3G 2o.ember 2552,942 %#1A <3)!n other wor s, the (rima facie (res"m(tion arises when acheck is iss"e . B"t the law also (ro.i es that the (res"m(tion oes not arise when the iss"er (a/s the amo"nt of the checkor makes arrangement for its (a/ment "within fi.e banking a/s after recei.ing notice that s"ch check has not been (ai b/the rawee." Heril/, BP 22 gi.es the acc"se an o((ort"nit/ tosatisf/ the amo"nt in icate in the check an th"s a.ert(rosec"tion.( !ing vs. People, 0.1. 2o. 393;85, 2 December 3444)The foregoing isc"ssion ab"n antl/ shows that the noticem"st be in writing. A .erbal an in irect notice, howe.er,was fo"n to be s"fficient in the case of "ulo vs. People,0.1. 2o. 382:<2, 8 March 255;. The (ertinent fin ing of factin this case is as follows) As M/rna @the com(lainantA i not know (etitionerIs @the acc"se A a ress, she imme iatel/ informe =osefina @the "best frien of the acc"se A abo"t the ishonore checks. The latter tol M/rna not to worr/ an re(eate her ass"rance that (etitioner is her best frien an a goo (a/er. M/rna trie to get (etitionerIs a ress from =osefina, b"t the latter ref"se an instea ma e the ass"rance that she will inform (etitioner that the checks were ishonore . !t is clear from these fin ings that there was no written notice gi.en to the acc"se . !t is also clear that no notice, e.en a .erbal notice, was gi.en irectl/ to the acc"se . %till, the %"(reme #o"rt concl" e that)

$e likewise fin no reason to s"stain (etitionerIs contention that she was not gi.en an/ notice of ishonor. M/rna ha no reason to be s"s(icio"s of (etitioner. !t will be recalle that =osefina Dimalanta ass"re M/rna that (etitioner is her "best frien " an "a goo (a/er." #onse6"entl/, when the checks bo"nce , M/rna wo"l nat"rall/ t"rn to =osefina for hel(. $e note that =osefina ref"se to gi.e M/rna (etitionerIs a ress b"t (romise to inform (etitioner abo"t the ishonore checks. This r"ling wo"l a((ear to be inconsistent with the re6"ire b"r en of (roof an the r"le of inter(retation of (enal laws, s"ccinctl/ note in !ing vs. People, th"s) $e m"st stress that BP 22, like all (enal stat"tes, is constr"e strictl/ against the %tate an liberall/ in fa.or of the acc"se . -ikewise, the (rosec"tion has the b"r en to (ro.e be/on reasonable o"bt each element of the crime. 7ence, the (rosec"tionIs case m"st rise or fall on the strength of its own e.i ence, ne.er on the weakness or e.en absence of that of the efense. %ection 9. #ut$ of drawee% rules of evidence . - !t shall be the "t/ of the rawee of an/ check, when ref"sing to (a/ the same to the hol er thereof "(on (resentment, to ca"se to be written, (rinte , or stam(e in (lain lang"age thereon, or attache thereto, the reason for raweeDs ishonor or ref"sal to (a/ the same) Pro.i e , That where there are no s"fficient f"n s in or cre it with s"ch rawee bank, s"ch fact shall alwa/s be e*(licitl/ state in the notice of ishonor or ref"sal. !n all (rosec"tions "n er this Act, the intro "ction in e.i ence of an/ "n(ai an ishonore check, ha.ing the raweeDs ref"sal to (a/ stam(e or written thereon or attache thereto, with the reason therefor as aforesai , shall be (rima facie 2ot with stan ing recei(t of an or er to sto( (a/ment, the rawee shall state in the notice that there were no s"fficient f"n s in or cre it with s"ch bank for the (a/ment in f"ll of s"ch check, if s"ch be the fact. Annotation) The thir element of the offense is the ishonor of the check.>n er %ection 9, "the intro "ction in e.i ence of an/ "n(ai an ishonore check, ha.ing the raweeIs ref"sal to (a/ stam(e orwritten thereon, or attache thereto, with the reason thereforas aforesai , shall be (rima facie e.i ence of the making oriss"ance of sai check, an the "e (resentment to the raweefor (a/ment an the ishonor thereof, an that the same was(ro(erl/ ishonore for the reason written, stam(e , or attache b/ the rawee on s"ch ishonore check." &orinstance, in the case of !ing vs. People (supra), the (rosec"tion(resente the checks which were stam(e with the wor s EA##'>2T #-'%BD,F s"((orte b/ the ret"rne check tickets iss"e b/ the e(ositor/ bank stating that the checks ha been ishonore . The oc"ments constit"te (rima facie e.i ence that the rawee bank ishonore the checks, an no no e.i ence was (resente to reb"t the claim. %ection 8. Credit construed. - The wor "cre it" as "se herein shall be constr"e an arrangement or "n erstan ing with the bank for the (a/ment of s"ch check. to mean

%ection ;. &iabilit$ under the evised Penal Code . - Prosec"tion "n er this Act shall be witho"t (re?" ice to an/ liabilit/ for .iolation of an/ (ro.ision of the 1e.ise Penal #o e. Annotation) The act of iss"ing a bo"ncing check co"l "n er the1e.ise Penal #o e. gi.e rise to se(arate offenses ("nishable "n er BP 22 an sim"ltaneo"sl/

%ection <. 'eparabilit$ clause. - !f an/ se(arable (ro.ision of this Act be "nconstit"tional, the remaining (ro.isions shall contin"e to be in force. Annotation)

eclare

The attacks on the constit"tionalit/ of BP 22, as isc"sse in-ozano .s. Martinez (0.1. 2o. --<9834, 3G December 34G<),are the following) (3) it offen s the constit"tional (ro.isionforbi ing im(risonment for ebt+ (2) it im(airs free om ofcontract+ (9) it contra.enes the e6"al (rotection cla"se+(8) it "n "l/ elegates legislati.e an e*ec"ti.e (owers+an (;) its enactment is flawe in that "ring its (assagethe !nterim Batasan .iolate the constit"tional (ro.ision(rohibiting amen ments to a bill on Thir 1ea ing. >nlessotherwise in icate , the s"ccee ing isc"ssions are lifte from &o(ano.)on*imprisonment for debt!t ha been arg"e that BP 22 r"ns co"nter to the inhibitionin the Bill of 1ights which states, "2o (erson shall be im(risone for ebt or non-(a/ment of a (oll ta*." %ince the offense "n er BP 22 is cons"mmate onl/ "(on the ishonor or non-(a/ment of the check when it is (resente to the rawee bank, the stat"te is reall/ a "ba ebt law" rather than a "ba check law." $hat it ("nishes is the non-(a/ment of the check, not the act of iss"ing it. The stat"te, it is claime , is nothing more than a .eile e.ice to coerce (a/ment of a ebt "n er the threat of (enal sanction.The gra.amen of the offense ("nishe b/ BP 22 is theact of making an iss"ing a worthless check or a check thatis ishonore "(on its (resentation for (a/ment. !t is not the non-(a/ment of an obligation which the law ("nishes. The law is not inten e or esigne to coerce a ebtor to (a/ his ebt. The thr"st of the law is to (rohibit, "n er (ain of (enal sanctions, the making of worthless checks an ("tting them in circ"lation. Beca"se of its eleterio"s effects on the ("blicinterest, the (ractice is (roscribe b/ the law. The law ("nishes the act not as an offense against (ro(ert/, b"t an offense against ("blic or er.!t ma/ be constit"tionall/ im(ermissible for the legislat"re to (enalize a (erson for non-(a/ment of a ebt e* contract". B"t certainl/ it is within the (rerogati.e of the lawmakingbo / to (roscribe certain acts eeme (ernicio"s an inimicalto ("blic welfare. Acts mala in se are not the onl/ acts which the law can ("nish. An act ma/ not be consi ere b/ societ/ as inherentl/ wrong, hence, not mal"m in se b"t beca"se of the harm that it inflicts on the comm"nit/, it can be o"tlawe an criminall/ ("nishe as mal"m (rohibit"m. The state can o this in the e*ercise of its (olice (ower.The enactment of BP 22 is a eclaration b/ the legislat"rethat, as a matter of ("blic (olic/, the making an iss"ance of a worthless check is eeme ("blic n"isance to be abate b/ the im(osition of (enal sanctions. !t ha been re(orte thatthe a((ro*imate .al"e of bo"ncing checks (er a/ was closeto 255 million (esos.!t is not for the co"rt to 6"estion the wis om or (olic/ of the stat"te. !t is s"fficient that a reasonable ne*"s e*istsbetween means an en . #onsi ering the fact"al an legal antece ents that le to the a o(tion of the stat"te, it is not iffic"lt to "n erstan the ("blic concern which (rom(te its enactment.+mpairment of freedom of contract Article !!!, %ection 35 of the #onstit"tion (ro.i es that) "2o law im(airing the obligation of contracts shall be (asse ." 7owe.er, the free om of contract which is constit"tionall/(rotecte is free om to enter into "lawf"l" contracts. #ontractswhich contra.ene ("blic (olic/ are not lawf"l. #hecks can notbe categorize as mere contracts. !t is a commercial instr"mentwhich, in this mo em a/ an age, has become a con.enients"bstit"te for mone/+ it forms (art of the banking s/stem an therefore not entirel/ free from the reg"lator/ (ower of the state. E,ual protection of the laws The challenge is to the effect that BP 22 is iscriminator/ or is .iolati.e of the e6"al (rotection of the laws since it (enalizes the rawer of the check, b"t not the (a/ee. !t ha been arg"e that the (a/ee is ?"st as res(onsible for the crime as the rawer of the check, since witho"t the in is(ensable (artici(ation of the (a/ee b/ his acce(tance of the check there wo"l be no crime. !t is settle , howe.er, that the cla"se "e6"al (rotection of the laws" oes not (recl" e classification of in i.i "als, who ma/ be accor e ifferent treatment "n er the law as long as the classification is no "nreasonable or arbitrar/. The arg"ment (remise on the e6"al (rotection of the law is tantamo"nt to sa/ing that, to gi.e e6"al (rotection, the law sho"l ("nish both the swin ler an the swin le . +mproper delegation of legislative powers!t ha been arg"e that the law .iolates the #onstit"tional (rohibition against the elegation of legislati.e (ower, on the theor/ that the offense is not com(lete b/ the sole act of the maker or rawer b"t is ma e to e(en on the will of the (a/ee -- if the (a/ee oes not (resent the check to the bank for (a/ment b"t instea kee(s it, there wo"l be no crime. This arg"ment, howe.er, stretches to abs"r it/ the meaning of " elegation of legislati.e (ower." $hat cannot be elegate is the (ower to legislate, or the (ower to make laws. which means, as a((lie to the (resent case, the (ower to efine the offense so"ght to be ("nishe an to (rescribe the (enalt/. B/ no stretch of logic or imagination can it be sai that the (ower to efine the crime an (rescribe the (enalt/ therefor has been in an/ manner elegate to the (a/ee. 2either is there an/ (ro.ision in the stat"te that can be constr"e , no matter how remotel/, as "n "e elegation of e*ec"ti.e (ower. #efect in the enactment of BP --!t is arg"e that %ection 4 (2) of Article H!! of the 34:9 #onstit"tion was .iolate b/ the legislati.e bo / when it enacte BP 22 into law. This constit"tional (ro.ision (rohibits the intro "ction of amen ments to a bill "ring the Thir 1ea ing. !t is claime that "ring its Thir 1ea ing, the bill which e.ent"all/ became BP 22 was amen e in that the te*tof the secon (aragra(h of %ection 3 of the bill as a o(te on %econ 1ea ing was altere or change in the (rinte te*tof the bill s"bmitte for a((ro.al on Thir 1ea ing. 7owe.er,it is clear from the recor s that the te*t of the secon (aragra(h of %ection 3 of BP 22 is the te*t which was act"all/a((ro.e b/ the bo / on %econ 1ea ing. %ection :. Bffecti.it/. - This Act shall take effect fifteen a/s after ("blication in the 'fficial 0azette. e.i ence of the making or iss"ance of sai check, an the "e (resentment to the rawee for (a/ment an the ishonor thereof, an that the same was (ro(erl/ ishonore for the reason written, stam(e or attache b/ the rawee on s"ch ishonore check.