G.R. No.

L-38511 October 6, 1933

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
FRANCISCO CAGOCO Y RAMONES (alias FRANCISCO CAGURO, alias FRANCISCO
ADMONES, aliasBUCOY, alias FRISCO GUY), defendant-appellant.
W.A. Caldwell and Sotto and Astilla for appellant.
Office of the Solicitor-General Bengzon for appellee.
VICKERS, J.:
The accused was charged in the Court of First Instance of Manila with the crime of asesinato, committed as follows:
That on or about the 24th day of July, 1932, in the City of Manila, Philippine Islands, the said accused did then and there
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, without any just cause therefor and with intent to kill and treachery, assault and attack
one Yu Lon by suddenly giving him a fist blow on the back part of the head, under conditions which intended directly and
especially to insure, the accomplishment of his purpose without risk to himself arising from any defense the victim Yu Lon
might make, thus causing him to fall on the ground as a consequence of which he suffered a lacerated wound on the scalp
and a fissured fracture on the left occipital region, which were necessarily mortal and which caused the immediate death of
the said Yu Lon.
After hearing the evidence, Judge Luis P. Torres found the defendant guilty as charged, and sentenced him to
suffer reclusion perpetua, with the accessory penalties of the law, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased Yu Lon in the sum
of P1,000, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay the costs.
Appellant's attorney de oficio makes the following assignments of error:
1. The trial court erred in finding that the appellant the person who committed the assault on Yu Lon, the victim to the crime
charged in the information.
2. Assuming that the appellant is the person who committed the assault on Yu Lon (a fact which we specifically deny), the
trial court erred in finding that the appellant struck his supposed victim.
3. Assuming that the appellant is the person who committed the assault on Yu Lon, and that the appellant did strike his
supposed victim (facts which we specifically deny) the trial court erred in finding that the blow was dealt from the victim's
rear.
4. The trial court erred in finding that the identity of the appellant was fully established.
5. Assuming that the four preceding errors assigned are without merit, the trial court erred in convicting the appellant of the
crime of murder, under article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, instead of convicting him of the crime of maltreatment, under
article 266 of the said Code.
It appears from the evidence that about 8:30 on the night of July 24, 1932 Yu Lon and Yu Yee, father and son, stopped to
talk on the sidewalk at the corner of Mestizos and San Fernando Streets in the District of San Nicolas Yu Lon was standing
near the outer edge of the sidewalk, with his back to the street. While they were talking, a man passed back and forth behind
Yu Lon once or twice, and when Yu Yee was about to take leave of his father, the man that had been passing back the forth
behind Yu Lon approached him from behind and suddenly and without warning struck him with his fist on the back part of
the head. Yu Lon tottered and fell backwards. His head struck the asphalt pavement; the lower part of his body fell on the
sidewalk. His assailants immediately ran away. Yu Yee pursued him through San Fernando, Camba, and Jaboneros Streets,
and then lost sight of him. Two other Chinese, Chin Sam and Yee Fung, who were walking along Calle Mestizos, saw the
incident and joined him in the pursuit of Yu Lon's assailant. The wounded man was taken to the Philippine General Hospital,
were he died about midnight. A post-mortem examination was made the next day by Dr. Anastacia Villegas, who found
that the deceased had sustained a lacerated wound and fracture of the skull in the occipital region, and that he had died from
cerebral hemorrhage; that he had tuberculosis, though not in an advanced stage, and a tumor in the left kidney.
Yu Yee promptly reported the incident to the police, and about 3 o'clock the next morning Sergeant Sol Cruz and other
detectives, accompanied by Yu Yee, went to the scene of the crime and found blood stains in the street. Yu Yee said that he
could recognize his father's assailant, and described him as being about five feet in height, 25 or 30 years old, with long hair
and wearing a suit of dark clothes. After Sergeant Sol Cruz had been working on the case for three or four days he received
information that the accused might be the person that had assaulted Yu Lon, and on August 4th the accused was arrested by
detectives Manrique and Bustamante. He was wearing a dark wool suit. Yu Yee was immediately called to the police station.
The accused was placed near the middle of a line of some eleven persons that had been detained for investigation. They
were wearing different kinds of clothes. Yu Yee without hesitation pointed out the defendant as the person that had assaulted
Yu Lon. He identified him not only by his long hair combed towards the back and worn long on the sides in the form of
side-whiskers (patillas), but also by his high cheek-bones and the fact that his ears have no lobes. The defendant was
identified at the trial not only by Yu Yee, but also by Chin Sam and Yee Fung.
With respect to the first four assignment of error, which raise questions of fact as to the identification of the accused, and
whether or not be struck the deceased, and if he did assault the deceased, whether he did so in a treacherous manner, we see
no sufficient reason, after considering the evidence and arguments of counsel, to doubt the correctness of the findings of the
trial judge. The accused was identified by Yu Yee and two other Chinese, and although Yu Yee may have overstated at the
trial some of the facial peculiarities in the defendant that he claimed to have observed at the time of the incident, it must be
remembered that Yu Yee without hesitation picked the defendant out of a group of eleven persons as his father's assailant,
and that he had exceptional opportunities for observing his father's assailant, because while that person was walking back
and forth behind Yu Lon, Yu Yee was facing the assailant.
We find the testimony of the defendant and his witnesses as to the whereabouts of the defendant on the night in question
unworthy of credit.1awphil.net
The testimony of the three Chinese that a man struck the deceased and then ran away is corroborated by the testimony of a
15-year old boy, Dominador Sales.
As to the contention that the deceased would have fallen on his face if he had been struck on the back of the head, the expert
testimony shows that in such a case a person instinctively makes an effort to preserve or regain his balance, and that as
result thereof the deceased may have fallen backwards. Another consideration is that sidewalks almost invariably slope
towards the pavement, and this being true, when the deceased straightened up, he naturally tended to fall backwards. The
evidence leaves no room for doubt that the accused struck the deceased on the back of the head, because when the deceased
was assaulted he and Yu Yee were standing on the sidewalk, facing each other, and if the accused had not struck the deceased
on the back of the head, it would have been necessary for him to go between the deceased and Yu Yee. Since the accused
struck the deceased from behind and without warning, he acted with treachery. "There is treachery when the offender
commits any of the crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof which tend
directly and especially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party
might make." (Article 14, No. 16, of the Revised Penal Code.)
The fourth assignment of error is a repetition of the first.
In the fifth assignment of error it is contended that the appellant if guilty at all, should be punished in accordance with article
266 of the Revised Penal Code, or for slight physical injuries instead of murder.
Paragraph No. 1 of article 4 of the Revised Penal Code provide that criminal liability shall be incurred by any person
committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended; but in order that a
person may be criminally liable for a felony different from that which he proposed to commit, it is indispensable that the
two following requisites be present, to wit: (a) That a felony was committed; and (b) that the wrong done to the aggrieved
person be the direct consequence of the crime committed by the offender. U.S. vs. Brobst, 14 Phil., 310; U.S. vs. Mallari,
29 Phil., 14 U.S. vs. Diana, 32 Phil., 344.)
In the Brobst case, supra, it was held that death may result from a blow over or near the heart or in the abdominal region,
notwithstanding the fact that the blow leaves no outward mark of violence; that where death result as the direct consequence
of the use of illegal violence, the mere fact that the diseased or weakened condition of the injured person contributed to his
death, does not relieve the illegal aggressor of criminal responsibility; that one is not relieved, under the law in these Islands,
from criminal liability for the natural consequences of one's illegal acts, merely because one does not intend to produce such
consequences; but that in such cases, the lack of intention, while it does not exempt from criminal liability, is taken into
consideration as an extenuating circumstance. (U.S. vs. Luciano, 2 Phil., 96.)
The reasoning of the decisions cited is applicable to the case at bar. There can be no reasonable doubt as to the cause of the
death of Yu Lon. There is nothing to indicate that it was due to some extraneous case. It was clearly the direct consequence
of defendants felonious act, and the fact that the defendant did not intend to cause so great an injury does not relieve him
from the consequence of his unlawful act, but is merely a mitigating circumstance (U.S. vs. Rodriguez, 23 Phil., 22).
The next question is whether the crime committed by the defendant should be classified as homicide or murder. Can the
defendant be convicted of murder when he did not intend to kill the deceased?
We have seen that under the circumstances of this case the defendant is liable for the killing of Yu Lon, because his death
was the direct consequence of defendant's felonious act of striking him on the head. If the defendant had not committed the
assault in a treacherous manner. he would nevertheless have been guilty of homicide, although he did not intend to kill the
deceased; and since the defendant did commit the crime with treachery, he is guilty of murder, because of the presence of
the qualifying circumstance of treachery.
The Supreme Court of Spain has held that there is no incompatibility, moral or legal, between alevosia and the mitigating
circumstance of not having intended to cause so great an injury:
Considering that there is no moral or legal incompatibility between treachery and the mitigating circumstance No. 3 of
article 9 of the Penal Code, because the former depends upon the manner of execution of the crime and the latter upon the
tendency of the will towards a definite purpose, and therefore there is no obstacle, in case treacherous means, modes or
forms are employed, to the appreciation of the first of said circumstances and simultaneously of the second if the injury
produced exceeds the limits intended by the accused; and for that reason it cannot be held in the instant case that this
mitigating circumstances excludes treachery, or that the accused, being chargeable with the death of the offended party,
should not be liable due to the voluntary presence of treachery in the act perpetrated, although with mitigation corresponding
to the disparity between the act intended and the act consummated, etc. (Decision of May 10, 1905, Gazette of April 20,
906; Viada: 5th edition, Vol. 2, p. 156.)
In the case of the United States vs. Candelaria (2 Phil., 104), this court speaking through Chief Justice Arellano said:
In trying Jacinto to a tree the three defendants acted treacherously (alevosamente). Whether it was to prevent him from
making resistance, whether it was to torture him for the purpose of making him give information, or whether it was for the
purpose of inflicting further punishment, the fact is that by this means the defendants secured themselves against any risk
which might have arisen from an attempt at self-defense on the part of the victim. We are of opinion that they had no
intention to cause so great an evil as that which resulted, but this does not neutralize that other qualifying circumstance of
the resulting death, because if there was no alevosia for the purpose of killing there was alevosia for the purpose of the
illtreating. The means employed were not made use of for the precise purpose of making certain the death of Jacinto de
Jesus but as a safe means of illtreating him without risk to the persons who were doing so. If by this means the ill treatment
was aggravated, it follows that it is a qualifying circumstances in the death which resulted. It was not a condition of the
purpose, but it was a condition of the criminal act itself, in whatever sense this be taken.
The penalty of murder (article 248 of the Revised Penal Code) is reclusion temporal in its maximum period to death, and
there being present in this case one mitigating and no aggravating circumstance the prison sentence of the appellant is
reduced to seventeen years, four months, and one day of reclusion temporal. As thus modified, the decision appealed from
is affirmed, with the costs against the appellant.
G. R. L-37400 April 15,1988
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee.
vs.
SABANGAN CABATO, accused-appellant.
The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.
Reubin L. Maraon for accused-appellant.

CORTES, J.:
Accused-appellant Sabangan Cabato appeals from the judgment of the Court of First Instance (now Regional Trial Court)
of Zamboanga del Norte finding him guilty of the crime of ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE in Criminal Case No. 307.
The facts of the case are as follows:
In an INFORMATION dated February 12,1971, the Provincial Fiscal of Zamboanga del Norte accused Sabangan Cabato
of ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE committed as follows:
That in the evening on or about the 25th day of January, 1971, ... the said accused SABANGAN CABATO, conspiring,
confederating and working together with two (2) other DOES who are stin at large, all armed with firearms and stones and
with intent of illicit gain by means of force, violence and intimidation against persons, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully
and feloniously enter the dwelling house of one VICTOR GUINIT and once inside attack, hold tight and squeeze the mouth
of Id Victor Guinit, and hug his wife Herminia Ames Guinit, and then rob them of cash money (coins) in the amount of
P300.00; ... that in pursuance to (sic) their evil motives, during and on the occasion of said robbery, the above-named
accused taking advantage of their superior strength and of the darkness of the night to better accomplish their purpose and
with intent to kill by means of treachery and evident premeditation, did there and then willfully, unlawfully and feloniously
attack, strike with stones for several times said HERMINIA AM-ES GUINIT thereby inflicting upon her several abrasions
and contusions... which caused her death on the spot;. .
xxx xxx xxx
CONTRARY TO LAW with the aggravating circumstances of treachery and evident premeditation, dwelling, superior
strength, and without respect due to ages of the victims (spouses) and due to the sex of Herminia Ames Guinit [Rollo, pp.
9-101.
Upon arraignment, the accused, assisted by counsel, pleaded NOT GUILTY.
During the hearings in the Trial Court, the prosecution, relying heavily on the eyewitness account of Victor Guinit,
established that:
xxx xxx xxx
Offended party Victor Guinit, 69 years old, widower, testified that he knows accused Sabangan Cabato personally; that
witness pointed to accused in open court, that on January 25, 1971, his wife was his only companion in their house; that at
around 7:30 p.m., three persons came to their house while they were taking supper; that his wife brought food to their dog;
that they have two lamps in the house, one lamp near the bed, and another lamp brought by his wife; that the two persons
[who] hugged him covered his mouth; that the robber hit his mouth with a stone causing s tooth to fell out (sic); that one of
the robbers grappled with his wife, and the mask covering the face fell out (sic) and his wife recognized accused Sabangan
Cabato; that his wife shouted. 'Sabangan, do not kill us, we will give you the money,- that the accused was at a distance of
three meters from him; that accused Sabangan Cabato said: "Get your money; that she (deceased) said: "Victor, we will give
the money in the piggy bank"; that his wife went down; that later the deceased said: "Victor I do not know where you put
the money; that the robbers untied him and he went downstairs; that he got the money and gave the same to one of the
bandits; that one of the bandits said, let us go upstairs, and got (sic) the paper bills, we want P3,000.00; that the money given
to the bandits were their saving (sic) for five years consisting of coins which were proceeds from the sale of the bananas;
that the deceased and accused Cabato went to the kitchen; that they told the bandits that we do not have paper bills an of the
bandits struck d that they do not have P3,000.00; that one of the bandits struck him with a pistol while the other boxed him
that one of the bandits struck the back of his head with a stone and his teeth fell out that the accused and his companions
left the house; that he noticed that wife was already dead; that he gave the stones to the police (Exh. C, C-1, C-2); that after
the bandits left, he untied himself, that he called for held but nobody came; that he went to his two married sons who were
living uphill; that the land owned by them is two hectares; that the two bandits wore masks. [CFI Decision, pp. 5-6,]
(Emphasis supplied.)
xxx xxx xxx
On the other hand, the accused vehemently denied his alleged participation in the gruesome crime and testified to the effect
that:
xxx xxx xxx
...he [Cabato] knew offended party Victor Guinit and his wife since he was young; that the home of the Guinit is one
kilometer away from his house; that he visited them before as a neighbor; that the Guinit has (sic) children named Felix and
Isco who are living at tambalang ; that he never committed the crime of robbery with homicide attributed to him; that on
January 25, 1971, he was gathering corn in their farm in the interior at Balatan, Salug together with his father-in-law; that
he left Tambalang bound for Balatan at 6:00 A.M., the same day; that he gathered corn and returned to Tambalang at 5:00
P.M. and then pastured his carabao and stayed in his house the whole night; that on January 25, 1971, in the evening, he did
not know of any robbery; that on January 26, 1971, he was informed by their neighbors of the robbery; that he was Hold
that the victims were the Guinits; that as a moslem he did not go to the Guinit to give alms as they are prohibited; that be
met the son of Guinit named Felix Guinit in the house of Isco; that he went Isco Guinit to find out if the report of the robbery
of the parents of Isco is true; that Isco Guinit told him that the robbers were not Identified; that the amount taken was P80.00;
that on January 29th, he was arested at the market of Tambalang;...[CFI Decision, pp. 12-13].
xxx xxx xxx
Faced with the issue of whether or not the accused was guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime-barged, the Trial Court
had to first settle the question concerning the positive Identification of Sabangan Cabato as one of the robbers who killed
the deceased Herminia Ames Guinit.
Weighing and evaluating the evidence on record, the Trial Court rendered the following decision:
xxx xxx xxx
There exists no doubt that accused Sabangan Cabato was clearly Identified as one of the participants in the gruesome
crime that took place in the residence of Victor Guinit on January 25, 1971. By his own admission, accused Sabangan
Cabato is well-known to the Guinit family for their houses are only one kilometer apart. Accused Cabato visited the house
of the deceased at least two times. Besides, during the incident in question, there were two kerosene lamps in the house of
Victor Guinit which illuminated their home such that the solicitors were clearly seen. Another factor that clinched the
Identification of the accused, Sabangan Cabato, is the fact that when the deceased, Herminia Guinit grappled with the
accused Cabato, the mask woman by the accused Cabato fell so much so that the deceased exclaimed, "Sabangan do not
kill us, we will give you the money.
According to the evidence, accused Sabangan Cabato brought the deceased to the kitchen in order to compel her to divulge
the whereabouts of the P3,000.00 paper bills. But the deceased denied they had any other money except the coins inside the
bamboo tube in the approximate sum of P300.00, which led the accused, Cabato, to strike the deceased with the stone in the
head which caused cerebral hemorrhage (Exh. A) leading to her death.
From the findings of the Sanitary Inspector who examined the injury suffered by deceased Herminia Guinit, the cerebral
hemorrhage was caused by hitting the head with a hard object presumably a stone (Exh. C, C-1, C-2) which were (sic) found
in the kitchen near the dead body.
The contention of the defense that Victor Guinit was unable to Identify any of the perpetrators for the police blotter (Exh.
1) is devoid of merit.
According to Patrolman Mananguil and Llenes, they were informed by Victor Guinit on January 28,1971, that accused
Cabato was one of the robbers who perpetrated the crime. The investigation was conducted in the Office of the Chief of
Police and on the 29th day of January, 1971, accused Cabato was brought for Identification in the Municipal Building of
Salug. Although accused Cabato was together with-any persons, Victor Guinit pinpointed him as one of the robbers.
The accused defense is alibi, claiming that he was in Barrio Balakan, in the house of his in-laws gathering corn. But his
testimony must be rejected for lack of sufficient corroboration. Outside of his lone testimony, no other witness was presented
to substantiate his alibi. [CFI Decision, pp. 15-17.] (Emphasis supplied.)
xxx xxx xxx
Maintaining his innocence, accused appeals the decision assetting that his guilt has not been proven beyond reasonable
doubt. His Identification by the prosecution witness Victor Guinit allegedly lacked definiteness and concreteness not to
mention that it was tainted with serious inconsistencies [Brief for the Accused, p. 1]. These alleged. inconsistencies
painstakingly narated by accused.-appellant cannot overturn the finding of guilt by the Trial Court.
Accused-appellant alleged that Victor Guinit, in his cross-examination, declared that he recognized the accused when the
place of cloth which covered the latter's mouth fell down as a result of the grappling by the deceased [TSN, June 8, 1972,
p. 2]1. But in his examination in chief, he testified that he recognized the, accused as early as when the robbers were still at
the recognized the accused as early as when the robbers were still at the door [TSN, Jure 8, 1972, p, 14]. This is allegedly
incredible because when the robbers were at the door, they still had their marks on Brief for Accused, p, 4].
A close perusal of the direct examination of Victor Guinit would show that the Identification of Cabato was indeed made
when the latter's mask fell down.
xxx xxx xxx
Q Now, what did you do when you noticed that after your wife opened the door, Sabangan Cabato bumped your wife with
two (2) other persons?
A The two (2) other persons passed towards me and hugged me; one of them covered my mouth with his palm and I was
hit by a piece[of stone] on my nape and one of my teeth fell down.
Q Now what about this Sabangan Cabato, what did he do?
A He grappled with my wife.
Q And what happened while [he was.] grappling with your -wife?
A During the course of the grappling, my wife happened to scratch Sabangan Cabato's face and the piece of cloth used as
mask fell
Q Now, how far were you from your wife and Sabangan Cabato, while the two (2) were grappling each other?
A About three (3) meters.
Q Now, from that distance, were you able to recognize and Identify the person grappling with your wife?
A Yes.
Q How were you able to recognize him?
A Because his mask fell down. [TSN, June 8, 1971, pp. 14-15.]
xxx xxx xxx
Accused-appellant further pointed out that Guinit, in his cross-examination, testified that he was unconscious for 20 minutes
after he was struck with a stone by one of the robbers [TSN, June 8, 1972, P. 24). Accused alleged that if Guinit was
unconscious, it was physically impossible for him to see what happened in the kitchen between the deceased and the accused
nor to see the falling down of the mask.
However, the Identification of the accused was made by Victor Guinit even before the former proceeded to the kitchen with
the deceased. The sequence of events as culled from the records would reveal that when the deceased was opening the door
to feed the dog, three masked men bumped her on their way into the house. Once inside, two of the masked men hugged
Victor Guinit while the third grappled with Herminia. During the course of the grappling, the wife happened to scratch the
face of the masked man as a result of which the mask fen down. This was when the Identity of the accused was revealed to
the couple with the wife exclaiming, "Sabangan, do not kill us. We will give you the money." [TSN, June 8,1972, p. 15.]
At that precise time, Guinit was only three meters away from his wife. Afterwards, Guinit proceeded to where the money
was hidden then he went back into the house to hand over the money. Not being satisfied, the robbers demanded for paper
bills which the couple denied possessing. This was when the two robbers whose Identities were not revealed, beat Guinit
while Cabato went to the kitchen with Herminia.
The other inconsistencies alleged by the accused to buttress his appeal centered on minor details.
Conceding that there may have been inconsistencies in the testimonies of the prosecution, these far from being badges of
fraud and fabrication, can justifiably be considered as a manifestation of good faith and a confirmation of the fact that the
witness was not a rehearsed witness. It is a truism that the most candid witness oftentimes makes mistakes but such honest
lapses do not necesssarily impair his intrinsic credibility. [People v. Alcantara, L-26967, 33 SCRA 812; People v. Canada,
G. R. No. 63728, Sept. 15, 1986, 144 SCRA 121]. Inconsistencies in the testimony of witnesses due only to inaccurate
expressions or honest mistake or observations are not fatal. [People v. Demalate, L-38960, March 30, 1982, 113 SCRA 353;
People vs. Delavin, G.R. Nos. 73762-63, Feb. 27, 1987, 148 SCRA 257]. When they lie.
Further, there was not even an iota of evidence presented by the accused-appellant ascribing to prosecution witness Guinit
any motive or intent to implicate the former as the person who killed his wife. The testimonies of both the prosecution and
the defense, in fact would picture the Guinits and the Cabatos as neighbors on good terms. As the accused himself narrated,
the Guinits were neighbors whom he used to visit since he was young. In this light, Guinit's testimony becomes more
credible. As was held in one recent case:
xxx xxx xxx
We have no doubt about the credibility of Rolando Blanco [the witness"). ... The recorda do not show any improper motive
on his part to falsely implicate the appellants in this diabolic crime. In fact, Antonio Guilbao is his first cousin. They were,
all positively identified by Blanco. [People v. Ladrera, G.R. 55339, May 21, 1987, 150 SCRA 113, 123-124.]
Accused's admissions would negate any improper motive for Guinit to testify falsely against him. In this
Summing up, the alleged inconsistencies brought forth by the accused boil down to the question of the eyewitness'
credibility.
Time and again, it has been held that the Supreme Court respects the trial court's findings on credibility of witnesses [People
v. Palon, L-33271, Feb. 20,1984,120 SCRA 529; People v. Dava Nos. L-41642-41645, May 15, 1987, 149 SCRA 582]. The
appellate court will not disturb the factual findings of the lower court for the latter is in a better position to gauge the
credibility of eyewitnesses. [People v. Mercado, G.R. No. 65152, Aug. 30,1984,131 SCRA 501] "The matter of assigning
value to declarations at the witness stand is best and most completely performed by a trial judge who, unlike appellate
magistrates can weigh such testimony in the light of the defendant's demeanor, conduct and attitude at the time and is thereby
placed in a more competent position to discriminate between the true and the false" [People v. Bermudez, L-30931, June
28, 1974, 57 SCRA 629, People v. Laganzon, L-47118, May 21, 1974, 129 SCRA 333, 347].
In this case, the decision of the trial court clearly outlined the evidence for both prosecution and defense. The trial judge
had observed the demeanor of both prosecution and defense witnesses on the witness stand and found nothing amiss with
the credibility of the prosecution witness.
Accused interposed alibi as his defense claiming that he was in Balakan gathering corn with his wife and in-law [TSN, Dec.
13,1972, PP. 10-11].
Considering however that the Identification of the accused was positively established, accused's defense of alibi becomes
weak.
Alibi is one of the weakest defenses by an accused especially if there is direct testimony of an eyewitness Identifying the
accused as the culprit. [U.S. v. Garcia, 9 Phil. 434 (1907); People v. Coronado, G.R. No. 68932, Oct. 28, 1986, 145 SCRA
250; People v. Inot, 36790, May 29, 1987, 150 SCRA 322]. It is rarely given credence because it is easily fabricated [People
v. Millarpe G.R. No. 69281, Feb. 25,1985,134 SCRA 555; People v. Petil, G.R. No. 70223, Mar. 31, 1987,149 SCRA 92].
Uncorroborated alibi, as in this case, is not credible against positive Identification (People v. Jones, G.R. No. 61165, June
24,1985, 134 SCRA 166; People v. Canturia, G.R. No. 67598, Oct. 11, 1985,139 SCRA 280]. Alibi does not deserve much
credit as it was established only by the accused himself without any corroboration from his wife or in-law.
xxx xxx xxx
Absence of such corroboration, in the light of the categorical statement of one of the victims, . . . , that he saw [accused]
stab Luisita Apostol because there was a lighted post at the place of the incident ... is fatal to the defense. [People v. dela
Cruz, G.R. Nos. 71044-45, Mar. 16,1987, 148 SCRA 582, 589].
xxx xxx xxx
The Court now addresses itself to the aggravating circumstances alleged by the plaintiff-appellee to have attended the
commission of the crime.
The prosecution argues that since "the attack was by a robust man of 29 years with a huge stone against an ageing defenseless
woman" (Brief for Plaintiff-Appellee, p. 15], abuse of supe prior strength should aggravate the crime.
The records of the case are bereft of any information with respect to the physical conditions of both the accused and the
victims. Thus, abuse of superior strength cannot be considered. This aggravating circumstance depends on the age, size and
strength of the parties. It is considered whenever there is a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the
aggressor, assessing a situation of superiority of strength notoriously advantageous for the aggressor which is selected or
taken advantage of by him in the commission of the crime. To take advantage of superior strength means to purposely use
excessive force out of proportion to the means of the defense available to the person attacked [People v. Cabiling, L-38091
Dec. 17, 1976, 74 SCRA 285, 303].
In this case, the prosecution failed to prove that there was indeed a notorious inequality between the ages, sizes and strength
of the antagonists and that these notorious advantages were purposely souhgt for or used by the accused to achieve his ends.
However, the Court considers dwelling as an aggravating circumstance since it has been proven that, indeed robbery with
homicide was committed inside the house of the offended parties. Dwelling is aggravating in robbery with violence or
intimidation because this class of robbery can be committed without the necessity of trespassing the sanctity of the offended
party's house [People v. Mercado, L-39511, April 28,1980, 97 SCRA 232; People v. Dajaresco, L-32701, June 19, 1984,
129 SCRA 576; People's vs. Gapasin, G.R. No. 52017, Oct. 27, 1986, 145 SCRA 178].
Likewise, the Court considers disguise as another aggravating circumstance. The accused, together with two others, wore
masks to cover their faces. There could have been no other purpose for this but to conceal their Identities particularly for
Cabato who was very much known to the offended parties. The fact that the mask subsequently fell down thus paving the
way for Cabato's Identification will not render this aggravating circumstance inapplicable. In a recent case, the Court held
'that Darwin Veloso and his five (5) companions wore masks [which eventually fell down] to conceal their Identities during
the commission of the crime constitutes disguise" [People v. Veloso, L-32900, Feb. 25, 1982, 112 SCRA 173, 182].
Robbery with homicide under Art. 294 (1) of the Revised Penal Code is punishable with reclusion perpetua to death.
However, in view of Sec. 19 (1), Art. III of the 1987 Constitution the supreme penalty of death can no longer be imposed.
WHEREFORE, the appealed judgment is hereby AFFIRMED insofar as the judgment sentenced the accused to suffer the
penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA but is MODIFIED insofar as the civil indemnity is concerned which is hereby
increased to P30,000.00.
SO ORDERED.
[G.R. No. 132470. April 27, 2000]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FERNANDO SULTAN y LATO, accused-appellant.
DECISION
BELLOSILLO, J.:
FERNANDO SULTAN y LATO appeals from the Decision of the trial court finding him guilty of the special complex
crime of robbery with rape, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering him to return to his victim one (1) wrist
watch, one (1) ring, one (1) pair of earrings, and one (1) necklace valued at P1,600.00, P850.00, P500.00, and P2,100.00,
respectively, and cash of P130.00; otherwise, to pay P5,180.00 if restitution be no longer feasible. He was further ordered
to pay P50,000.00 for moral damages.[1] Newmiso
The evidence for the prosecution was based principally on the testimony of complaining witness Juditha M. Bautista.
According to her, on 2 June 1997 at 9:00 oclock in the evening she was on her way home from a visit to her cousin Cristina
Mansilongan in Novaliches, Quezon City; when she passed the dark alley in her cousin's compound she was accosted by
someone, later identified as accused-appellant Fernando L. Sultan, who pointed a sharp instrument at her neck and
announcing it was a "hold-up." He grabbed her and brought her to a house along the alley which turned out to be his. Once
inside the house, he made her sit down. He offered her a drink; she refused it. Then he started divesting her of her watch,
ring, earrings, and necklace the values of which are now reflected in the Decision of the court a quo, and her cash of P130.00.
After taking her valuables, he started kissing her on the lips and cheeks. As if to discourage him from making further sexual
advances, she told him that she was married with two (2) children but accused-appellant was not dissuaded from pursuing
his intentions. While pointing an ice pick at her he ordered her to undress. She acceded for fear that he would kill her as she
was under constant threat. After she had completely undressed, accused-appellant ordered her to lie down on the floor. He
then kissed her again from head down. Still she could not resist him because of fear. He went on top of her, held her two
(2) hands on the level of her head, spread her thighs and inserted his penis into her vagina. The coital encounter lasted for
ten (10) to fifteen (15) minutes.[2]
After satisfying his lust, he ordered her to put on her bra and panty, tied her hands and went out of the room to smoke. After
ten (10) to fifteen (15) minutes, he came back, untied her, and once again with threat and intimidation sexually abused her.
Thereafter, he tied her hands to a protruding piece of wood in the room and held her in his arms. She cried. He told her that
he loved her and that he would answer for what he had done to her. They talked until noon the following day without
sleeping.[3]
In her effort to release herself from his clutches she "agreed" to elope with him. Perhaps convinced that she was going to
run away with him, he allowed her to go home at noon to get her things. She was then staying with her cousin Nita del
Rosario, at No. 9 Sta. Eleuteria Street, Gulod, Novaliches, Quezon City. He even accompanied her to the highway to get a
ride home.[4] Acctmis
When Juditha arrived home she saw her sister Antonette in the house. She was not actually residing there but went there
only that day. Juditha lost no time in narrating her harrowing experience to her sister. Immediately Antonette called her
brother SPO1 Fernando M. Bautista who resides in Bulacan.[5] SPO1 Bautista arrived at around 3:00 or 4:00 oclock in the
afternoon and was told about what happened.[6] He then advised Juditha to go back to the house of accused-appellant for the
"planned elopement" so that he and his two (2) companions[7] could stage an arrest.[8]
On their way to the house of accused-appellant, Juditha rode in a passenger jeep with her sister Antonette and cousin Nita
while her brother and his two (2) companions followed them on board an XLT Van. Juditha alighted near the house of
accused-appellant while her companions waited for her and accused-appellant along the highway. When she arrived at
accused-appellants place, he was already waiting for her outside the store nearby. They went inside his house and came out
twenty (20) minutes later. They boarded a passenger bus while SPO1 Bautista and his companions trailed them. When the
bus reached the corner of Forest Hill Subdivision, Gulod, Novaliches, it slowed down because of the traffic thus making it
easier for SPO1 Bautista and his companions to board the bus. Upon seeing her brother and his companions, Juditha
motioned to them. They immediately approached accused-appellant and boxed him before they could arrest him. The other
passengers of the bus joined in hitting accused-appellant. This caused a commotion in the bus. Some policemen who were
in the barangay hall across the street saw the disturbance. They boarded the bus to find out what happened. Then they
assisted in facilitating the arrest of accused-appellant and brought him to the barangay hall. He was later on transferred to
the police headquarters for further interrogation.
At the police station the authorities investigated Juditha who readily identified accused-appellant as her robber and rapist.
The police then requested for physical examination to find signs of sexual abuse. Medico-Legal Inspector Dr. Dennis G.
Bellin found no external signs of violence although there was a deep fresh laceration at 5 oclock position in Judithas hymen.
He also discovered other lacerations, deep healed, at 3, 7 and 9 oclock positions. Dr. Bellin also observed that Judithas
external vaginal orifice offered moderate resistance to his examining index finger and virgin-sized vaginal speculum. She
was no longer a virgin when the alleged rape transpired.[9]
On 5 June 1997 an Information[10] for the special complex crime of robbery with rape was filed against accused-appellant
Fernando Sultan y Lato, docketed as Crim. Case No. Q-97-71353. But accused-appellant brushed aside the charge and
claimed that it was simply a sexual congress of consenting adults.
Finding the complaining witness version more credible, the trial court, on 5 June 1998, found accused-appellant guilty as
charged and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. He was ordered to return to Juditha Bautista one (1) wrist watch valued
at P1,600.00, one (1) ring worth P850.00, one (1) pair of earrings worth P500.00, one (1) necklace worth P2,100.00 and
cash in the amount of P130.00, or the payment of P5,180.00 if return was not possible. Accused-appellant was further
directed to pay his victim P50,000.00 for moral damages.[11]Misact
In this appeal, accused-appellant submits that there is no convincing proof that he is guilty of the crime charged.
As to the robbery, he contends that the testimony of complainant that she was robbed of her personal valuables should not
be given weight and credence as (a) no evidence was presented in court to prove her claim and that (b) if he had really
robbed her, why did she not ask him for restitution of her valuables after the alleged threat had ceased, i.e., when there was
already an agreement between them to elope?
These arguments fail to persuade us. The testimony of complainant as to the taking of her cash and valuables is evidence
enough to sustain a conviction for robbery considering that we find no fault in the pronouncement of the trial court that her
testimony is credible. The persuasive value of the declaration of credibility is bolstered by our own scrutiny of the testimony
of complainant showing her answers to the incisive questions propounded to her to be firm and straightforward.
While there may have been no effort on the part of complainant to retrieve her personal belongings from accused-appellant
even after all threats had ceased, her failure to do so does not under the circumstances necessarily dispute the commission
of robbery. Article 293 of the Revised Penal Code provides that "[a]ny person who, with intent to gain, shall take any
personal property belonging to another, by means of violence against or intimidation of person, or using force upon anything,
shall be guilty of robbery." When accused-appellant divested complaining witness of her personal belongings he committed
the crime of robbery. All the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment were present, i.e., (a) personal
property belonging to another, (b) unlawful taking, (c) intent to gain, and (d) violence or intimidation. It is therefore
immaterial that she failed to ask for the return of her personal things. Moreover, her actuation could only be fairly interpreted
to mean that she did not want accused-appellant to be suspicious of her moves.
As for the charge of rape, accused-appellant maintains that the requisite force or intimidation was not proved by the
prosecution beyond reasonable doubt; that there was some form of consent to the sexual intercourse as complainant did not
put up tenacious resistance despite lack of threat on her life during the alleged rape; and, that complainant on cross-
examination was not certain whether accused-appellant was armed at the commencement of the rape. Sdjad
We likewise find these contentions of accused-appellant unconvincing. The prosecution for rape in the instant case is based
solely on the testimony of complaining witness. Thus, the basic issue that must be addressed is her credibility. Doctrinally,
the trial courts assessment of the credibility of witnesses is accorded the highest respect and weight by the appellate courts.
It is normally sustained unless material facts and circumstances have been overlooked, misunderstood or
misapplied.[12] There is no such showing in this case.
Accused-appellant might not have employed force in committing the rape but he definitely used intimidation which was
sufficient to make complainant submit herself to him against her will for fear of life and personal safety. Accused-appellant
grabbed her and dragged her to his house. He was armed with an ice pick and threatened to kill her with it if she did not
follow his wishes. She was naturally intimidated and her intimidation started from that moment on, and subsisted in her
mind when the rape was started until its consummation. Intimidation is subjective so it must be viewed in the light of the
victims perception and judgment at the time of the commission of the crime, and not by any hard and fast rule. It is enough
that it produces fear, as in the present case, fear that if the complainant does not yield to the bestial demands of accused-
appellant something would happen to her at that moment or even thereafter. Thus, it is irrelevant that she was not certain
when cross-examined that accused-appellant was armed with an ice pick when the rape commenced; it was enough that he
was holding something that looked like an ice pick which engendered fear in her. With fear instilled in her mind, it is
understandable that she did not offer any resistance since any attempt to do so would only be futile. Such failure on her part
should not be taken to mean consent so as to make her a willing participant in the sexual confrontation.
The Information charges accused-appellant with the special complex crime of robbery with rape. The record shows that the
prosecution has established that he committed both robbery and rape with the intent to take personal property of another
preceding the rape. Under Art. 294, par. (1), of the Revised Penal Code, "x x x [a]ny person guilty of robbery with the use
of violence against or intimidation of persons shall suffer: 1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death, x x x when the
robbery shall have been accompanied by rape x x x x" Complaining witness Juditha Bautista was raped twice on the occasion
of the robbery. In this regard, this Court had declared in some cases that the additional rapes committed on the same occasion
of robbery would not increase the penalty.[13] There were also cases, however, where this Court ruled that the multiplicity
of rapes committed could be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance.[14] Finally, in the recent case of People v.
Regala,[15] the Court held that the additional rapes committed should not be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance
despite a resultant "anomalous situation" wherein robbery with rape would be on the same level as robbery with multiple
rapes in terms of gravity.[16] The Court realized that there was no law providing for the additional rape/s or homicide/s for
that matter to be considered as aggravating circumstance. It further observed that the enumeration of aggravating
circumstances under Art. 14 of the Revised Penal Code is exclusive, unlike in Art. 13 of the same Code which enumerates
the mitigating circumstances where analogous circumstances may be considered, hence, the remedy lies with the legislature.
Consequently, unless and until a law is passed providing that the additional rape/s or homicide/s may be considered
aggravating, the Court must construe the penal law in favor of the offender as no person may be brought within its terms if
he is not clearly made so by the statute. Under this view, the additional rape committed by accused-appellant is not
considered an aggravating circumstance. Applying Art. 63, par. (2), of the Revised Penal Code which provides that "(i)n all
cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of two indivisible penalties, the following rules shall be observed in
the application thereof x x x x 2. (w)hen there are neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstances in the commission of
the deed, the lesser penalty shall be applied," the lower penalty of reclusion perpetua should be imposed on accused-
appellant. Sppedsc
As to the award of damages to the complaining witness, an additional amount of P50,000.00 may be given as damages ex
delicto in line with recent jurisprudence.[17]
WHEREFORE, the Decision of the court a quo finding accused-appellant FERNANDO SULTAN Y LATO GUILTY of
the special complex crime of robbery with rape and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua, to pay Juditha M.
Bautista P50,000.00 for moral damages, P5,180.00 for actual damages representing the value of the personal properties plus
the cash amount of P130.00 taken from her is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that the amount of P50,000.00 be
added as civil indemnity in conformity with prevailing jurisprudence. Costs against accused-appellant.
SO ORDERED.
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 533 August 8, 1974
THE ANTI-CATTLE RUSTLING LAW OF 1974
WHEREAS, large cattle are indispensable to the livelihood and economic growth of our people, particularly the agricultural
workers, because such large cattle are the work animals of our farmers and the source of fresh meat and dairy products for
our people, and provide raw material for our tanning and canning industries;
WHEREAS, reports from the law-enforcement agencies reveal that there is a resurgence of thievery of large cattle,
commonly known as "cattle rustling", especially in the rural areas, thereby directly prejudicing the livelihood of the
agricultural workers and adversely affecting our food production program for self-sufficiency in rice, corn and other staple
crops, as well as in fresh meat;
WHEREAS, there is an urgent need to protect large cattle raising industry and small time large cattle owners and raisers
from the nefarious activities of lawless elements in order to encourage our hardworking cattle raisers and farmers to raise
more cattle and concentrate in their agricultural works, thus increasing our source of meat and dairy products as well as
agricultural production and allied industries which depend on the cattle raising industry;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, President of the Republic of the Philippines, by virtue of the powers
vested in me by the Constitution and pursuant to Proclamations No. 1081, dated September 21, 1972 and No. 1104, dated
January 17, 1973 and General Order No. 1 dated September 22, 1972, do hereby order and decree as part of the law of the
land, the following:
Section 1. Title. This Decree shall be known as the "Anti-Cattle Rustling Law of 1974."
Section 2. Definition of terms. The following terms shall mean and be understood to be as herein defined:
a. Large cattle as herein used shall include the cow, carabao, horse, mule, ass, or other domesticated member of the bovine
family.
b. Owner/raiser shall include the herdsman, caretaker, employee or tenant of any firm or entity engaged in the raising of
large cattle or other persons in lawful possession of such large cattle.
c. Cattle rustling is the taking away by any means, method or scheme, without the consent of the owner/raiser, of any of the
above-mentioned animals whether or not for profit or gain, or whether committed with or without violence against or
intimidation of any person or force upon things. It includes the killing of large cattle, or taking its meat or hide without the
consent of the owner/raiser.
Section 3. Duty of owner/raiser to register. The owner/raiser shall, before the large cattle belonging to him shall attain the
age of six months, register the same with the office of the city/municipal treasurer where such large cattle are raised. The
city/municipality concerned may impose and collect the fees authorized by existing laws for such registration and the
issuance of a certificate of ownership to the owner/raiser.
Section 4. Duty of city/municipal treasurers and other concerned public officers and employees. All public officials and
employees concerned with the registration of large cattle are required to observe strict adherence with pertinent provisions
of Chapter 22, Section 511 to 534, of the Revised Administrative Code, except insofar as they may be inconsistent with the
provisions of this Decree.
Section 5. Permit to buy and sell large cattle. No person, partnership, association, corporation or entity shall engage in the
business of buy and sell of large cattle without first securing a permit for the said purpose from the Provincial Commander
of the province where it shall conduct such business and the city/municipal treasurer of the place of residence of such person,
partnership, association, corporation or entity. The permit shall only be valid in such province.
Section 6. Clearance for shipment of large cattle. Any person, partnership, association, corporation or entity desiring to
ship or transport large cattle, its hides, or meat, from one province to another shall secure a permit for such purpose from
the Provincial Commander of the province where the large cattle is registered. Before issuance of the permit herein
prescribed, the Provincial Commander shall require the submission of the certificate of ownership as prescribed in Section
3 hereof, a certification from the Provincial Veterinarian to the effect that such large cattle, hides or meat are free from any
disease; and such other documents or records as may be necessary. Shipment of large cattle, its hides or meat from one
city/municipality to another within the same province may be done upon securing permit from the city/municipal treasurer
of the place of origin.
Section 7. Presumption of cattle rustling. Every person having in his possession, control or custody of large cattle shall,
upon demand by competent authorities, exhibit the documents prescribed in the preceding sections. Failure to exhibit the
required documents shall be prima facie evidence that the large cattle in his possession, control or custody are the fruits of
the crime of cattle rustling.
Section 8. Penal provisions. Any person convicted of cattle rustling as herein defined shall, irrespective of the value of the
large cattle involved, be punished by prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its medium period if the
offense is committed without violence against or intimidation of persons or force upon things. If the offense is committed
with violence against or intimidation of persons or force upon things, the penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum
period to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed. If a person is seriously injured or killed as a result or on the occasion of the
commission of cattle rustling, the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall be imposed.
When the offender is a government official or employee, he shall, in addition to the foregoing penalty, be disqualified from
voting or being voted upon in any election/referendum and from holding any public office or employment.
When the offender is an alien, he shall be deported immediately upon the completion of the service of his sentence without
further proceedings.
Section 9. Rules and Regulations to be promulgated by the Chief of Constabulary. The chief of Constabulary shall
promulgate the rules and regulations for the effective implementation of this Decree.
Section 10. Repealing clause. The provisions of Articles 309 and 310 of Act No. 3815, otherwise known as the Revised
Penal Code, as amended, all laws, decrees, orders, instructions, rules and regulations which are inconsistent with this Decree
are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.
Section 11. Effectivity. This Decree shall take effect upon approval.
Done in the City of Manila, this 8th day of August, in the year of Our Lord, nineteen hundred and seventy-four.
REPUBLIC ACT No. 6539
AN ACT PREVENTING AND PENALIZING CARNAPPING
Section 1. This Act shall be known and may be cited as the "Anti-Carnapping Act of 1972."
Section 2. Definition of terms. The terms "carnapping", "motor vehicle", "defacing or tampering with", "repainting", "body-
building", "remodeling", "dismantling", and "overhauling", as used in this Act, shall be understood, respectively, to mean
"Carnapping" is the taking, with intent to gain, of a motor vehicle belonging to another without the latter's consent, or by
means of violence against or intimidation of persons, or by using force upon things.
"Motor vehicle" is any vehicle propelled by any power other than muscular power using the public highways, but excepting
road rollers, trolley cars, street-sweepers, sprinklers, lawn mowers, bulldozers, graders, fork-lifts, amphibian trucks, and
cranes if not used on public highways, vehicles, which run only on rails or tracks, and tractors, trailers and traction engines
of all kinds used exclusively for agricultural purposes. Trailers having any number of wheels, when propelled or intended
to be propelled by attachment to a motor vehicle, shall be classified as separate motor vehicle with no power
rating.lawphi1™
"Defacing or tampering with" a serial number is the erasing, scratching, altering or changing of the original factory-inscribed
serial number on the motor vehicle engine, engine block or chassis of any motor vehicle. Whenever any motor vehicle is
found to have a serial number on its motor engine, engine block or chassis which is different from that which is listed in the
records of the Bureau of Customs for motor vehicles imported into the Philippines, that motor vehicle shall be considered
to have a defaced or tampered with serial number.
"Repainting" is changing the color of a motor vehicle by means of painting. There is repainting whenever the new color of
a motor vehicle is different from its color as registered in the Land Transportation Commission.
"Body-building" is a job undertaken on a motor vehicle in order to replace its entire body with a new body.
"Remodeling" is the introduction of some changes in the shape or form of the body of the motor vehicle.lawphi1™
"Dismantling" is the tearing apart, piece by piece or part by part, of a motor vehicle.
"Overhauling" is the cleaning or repairing of the whole engine of a motor vehicle by separating the motor engine and its
parts from the body of the motor vehicle.
Section 3. Registration of motor vehicle engine, engine block and chassis. Within one year after the approval of this Act,
every owner or possessor of unregistered motor vehicle or parts thereof in knock down condition shall register with the
Land Transportation Commission the motor vehicle engine, engine block and chassis in his name or in the name of the real
owner who shall be readily available to answer any claim over the registered motor vehicle engine, engine block or chassis.
Thereafter, all motor vehicle engines, engine blocks and chassis not registered with the Land Transportation Commission
shall be considered as untaxed importation or coming from an illegal source or carnapped, and shall be confiscated in favor
of the Government.
All owners of motor vehicles in all cities and municipalities are required to register their cars with the local police without
paying any charges.
Section 4. Permanent registry of motor vehicle engines, engine blocks and chassis. The Land Transportation Commission
shall keep a permanent registry of motor vehicle engines, engine blocks and chassis of all motor vehicles, specifying therein
their type, make and serial numbers and stating therein the names and addresses of their present and previous owners. Copies
of the registry and of all entries made thereon shall be furnished the Philippine Constabulary and all Land Transportation
Commission regional, provincial and city branch offices: Provided, That all Land Transportation Commission regional,
provincial and city branch offices are likewise obliged to furnish copies of all registration of motor vehicles to the main
office and to the Philippine Constabulary.
Section 5. Registration of sale, transfer, conveyance, substitution or replacement of a motor vehicle engine, engine block
or chassis. Every sale, transfer, conveyance, substitution or replacement of a motor vehicle engine, engine block or chassis
of a motor vehicle shall be registered with the Land Transportation Commission. Motor vehicles assembled and rebuilt or
repaired by replacement with motor vehicle engines, engine blocks and chassis not registered with the Land Transportation
Commission shall not be issued certificates of registration and shall be considered as untaxed imported motor vehicles or
motor vehicles carnapped or proceeding from illegal sources.
Section 6. Original Registration of motor vehicles. Any person seeking the original registration of a motor vehicle, whether
that motor vehicle is newly assembled or rebuilt or acquired from a registered owner, shall within one week after the
completion of the assembly or rebuilding job or the acquisition thereof from the registered owner, apply to the Philippine
Constabulary for clearance of the motor vehicle for registration with the Land Transportation Commission. The Philippine
Constabulary shall, upon receipt of the application, verify if the motor vehicle or its numbered parts are in the list of
carnapped motor vehicles or stolen motor vehicle parts. If the motor vehicle or any of its numbered parts is not in that list,
the Philippine Constabulary shall forthwith issue a certificate of clearance. Upon presentation of the certificate of clearance
from the Philippine Constabulary and after verification of the registration of the motor vehicle engine, engine block and
chassis in the permanent registry of motor vehicle engines, engine blocks and chassis, the Land Transportation Commission
shall register the motor vehicle in accordance with existing laws, rules and regulations.
Section 7. Duty of Collector of Customs to report arrival of imported motor vehicle, etc. The Collector of Customs of a
principal port of entry where an imported motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, engine block chassis or body is unloaded,
shall, within seven days after the arrival of the imported motor vehicle or any of its parts enumerated herein, make a report
of the shipment to the Land Transportation Commission, specifying the make, type and serial numbers, if any, of the motor
vehicle engine, engine block and chassis or body, and stating the names and addresses of the owner or consignee thereof. If
the motor vehicle engine, engine block, chassis or body does not bear any serial number, the Collector of Customs concerned
shall hold the motor vehicle engine, engine block, chassis or body until it is numbered by the Land Transportation
Commission.
Section 8. Duty of importers, distributors and sellers of motor vehicles to keep record of stocks. Any person engaged in the
importation, distribution, and buying and selling of motor vehicles, motor vehicle engines, engine blocks, chassis or body,
shall keep a permanent record of his stocks, stating therein their type, make and serial numbers, and the names and addresses
of the persons from whom they were acquired and the names and addresses of the persons to whom they were sold, and
shall render an accurate monthly report of his transactions in motor vehicles to the Land Transportation Commission.
Section 9. Duty of manufacturers of engine blocks, chassis or body to cause numbering of engine blocks, chassis or body
manufactured. Any person engaged in the manufacture of engine blocks, chassis or body shall cause the numbering of every
engine block, chassis or body manufactured in a convenient and conspicuous part thereof which the Land Transportation
Commission may direct for the purpose of uniformity and identification of the factory and shall submit to the Land
Transportation Commission a monthly report of the manufacture and sale of engine blocks, chassis or body.
Section 10. Clearance and permit required for assembly or rebuilding of motor vehicles. Any person who shall undertake
to assemble or rebuild or cause the assembly or rebuilding of a motor vehicle shall first secure a certificate of clearance
from the Philippine Constabulary: Provided, That no such permit shall be issued unless the applicant shall present a
statement under oath containing the type, make and serial numbers of the engine, chassis and body, if any, and the complete
list of the spare parts of the motor vehicle to be assembled or rebuilt together with the names and addresses of the sources
thereof.
In the case of motor vehicle engines to be mounted on motor boats, motor bancas and other light water vessels, the applicant
shall secure a permit from the Philippine Coast Guard, which office shall in turn furnish the Land Transportation
Commission the pertinent data concerning the motor vehicle engines including their type, make and serial numbers.
Section 11. Clearance required for shipment of motor vehicles, motor vehicle engines, engine blocks, chassis or body. Any
person who owns or operates inter-island shipping or any water transportation with launches, boats, vessels or ships shall
within seven days submit a report to the Philippine Constabulary on all motor vehicle, motor vehicle engines, engine blocks,
chassis or bodies transported by it for the motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, engine block, chassis or body to be loaded
on board the launch, boat vessel or ship.
Section 12. Defacing or tampering with serial numbers of motor vehicle engines, engine blocks and chassis. It shall be
unlawful for any person to deface or otherwise tamper with the original or registered serial number of motor vehicle engines,
engine blocks and chassis.
Section 13. Penal Provisions. Any person who violates any provisions of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment for
not less than two years nor more than six years and a fine equal in amount to the acquisition cost of the motor vehicle, motor
vehicle engine or any other part involved in the violation: Provided, That if the person violating any provision of this Act
is a juridical person, the penalty herein provided shall be imposed on its president or secretary and/or members of the board
of directors or any of its officers and employees who may have directly participated in the violation.
Any government official or employee who directly commits the unlawful acts defined in this Act or is guilty of gross
negligence of duty or connives with or permits the commission of any of the said unlawful act shall, in addition to the
penalty prescribed in the preceding paragraph, be dismissed from the service with prejudice to his reinstatement and with
disqualification from voting or being voted for in any election and from appointment to any public office.
Section 14. Penalty for Carnapping. Any person who is found guilty of carnapping, as this term is defined in Section two
of this Act, shall, irrespective of the value of motor vehicle taken, be punished by imprisonment for not less than fourteen
years and eight months and not more than seventeen years and four months, when the carnapping is committed without
violence or intimidation of persons, or force upon things; and by imprisonment for not less than seventeen years and four
months and not more than thirty years, when the carnapping is committed by means of violence against or intimidation of
any person, or force upon things; and the penalty of life imprisonment to death shall be imposed when the owner, driver or
occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed in the commission of the carnapping.
Section 15. Aliens. Aliens convicted under the provisions of this Act shall be deported immediately after service of sentence
without further proceedings by the Deportation Board.
Section 16. Reward. Any person who voluntarily gives information leading to the recovery of carnapped vehicles and for
the conviction of the persons charged with carnapping shall be given as reward so much reward money as the Philippine
Constabulary may fix. The Philippine Constabulary is authorized to include in its annual budget the amount necessary to
carry out the purposes of this section. Any information given by informers shall be treated as confidential matter.
Section 17. Separability clause. If any provisions of this Act is declared invalid, the provisions thereof not affected by such
declaration shall remain in force and effect.
Section 18. Repealing clause. All laws, executive orders, rules and regulations, or parts thereof, inconsistent with the
provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or amended accordingly.
Section 19. Effectivity. This Act shall take effect upon its approval.
Approved: August 26, 1972
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 332 November 9, 1973
AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF REPUBLIC ACT NUMBERED SEVENTEEN HUNDRED AND
EIGHTY-NINE, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE REPARATIONS LAW
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the government to utilize all reparations payments from Japan in such manner as shall assure
the maximum possible economic benefit to the Filipino people;
WHEREAS, it has been shown that majority of reparations end-users in the private sector have failed to properly utilize he
reparations goods and/or services received by them, and to pay the amortizations thereon as they fall due, thus resulting in
huge arrearages to the detriment of the Philippine economy;
WHEREAS, such failure of the end-users in the private sector to comply with their obligations is mainly due to the very
low rates of interest being charged under the existing law;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, President of the Philippines, by virtue of powers vested in me by the
Constitution as Commander-in-Chief of all the Armed Forces of the Philippines, and pursuant to Proclamation No. 1081
dated September 21, 1972 and General Order No. 1 dated September 22, 1972, as amended, and in order to effect the desired
changes and reforms in the utilization and disposition of reparations so as to assure the maximum possible economic benefit
to the Filipino people, and in order to augment the limited government resources available for public projects, do hereby
order and decree the amendment of Republic Act Numbered 1789, as amended, as follows:
Section 1. Section two, paragraph (a) of Republic Act Numbered 1789, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 2. Implementation. To implement the policy declared in Section one hereof, the procurement, disposition and
utilization of all goods and services procured from Japan under the terms of the Reparations Agreement shall be carried out
as closely as possible to promote the economic rehabilitation and development of the country and in accordance with the
broad program, criteria and priorities established by the National Economic and Development Authority, in addition to the
following criteria:
(a) Capital goods and services. Pursuant to the policy declared in Section one hereof, the capital goods and services received
as reparations shall be made available only after due compliance with all the conditions specified in this Act to approved
government projects for each year included in the economic and social development program adopted by the National
Economic and Development Authority upon application from the agency concerned and duly endorsed by the proper
department head concerned and the National Economic and Development Authority, as well as to Filipino citizens and
entities wholly owned by Filipino citizens, whose applications must be accompanied in each case by the requisite project
study prepared in accordance with the form prescribed for the purpose by the Commission and approved by the National
Economic and Development Authority and a sworn statement as to whether the applicant has already been granted any
previous application and procurement order and the value of the reparations goods and/or services involved and actually
delivered, and who will themselves utilize such goods and/or services as bona fide producers or manufacturers: Provided,
That no private person, private company, establishment, or entity shall be granted more than one application for reparations
goods and services and in no case the aggregate total of reparations goods and services granted to any such private person,
private company, establishment, or entity shall be more than one and a half million dollars, except when a greater amount
is necessary for the realization of any project certified by the President of the Philippines after consultation with the National
Economic and Development Authority to be vital to the economic development of the country and except further that the
applicant may further apply for expansion or development purposes when so authorized by the President of the Philippines
after consultation with the National Economic and Development Authority: Provided, further, That where there are two
applicants for the same reparations goods, all other things being equal, the person who first applied shall be given preference:
Provided, finally, That reparations intended for electrification, educational material, equipment and machinery, including
those for fishery and vocational schools, cottage industries, fire-fighting equipment, telecommunications, railroad, base
metal mining, steel and cement manufacturing, logging and shipping shall be given top priority. The list of projects shall be
given the widest dissemination and publicity possible."
Section 2. Paragraphs (b) and (d) of Section 2 of the same Act are hereby amended to read as follows:
"(b) Goods other than capital goods. Goods other than capital goods that may be procured from reparations shall be limited
to such goods as may not be obtainable from normal sources of imports and to highly essential consumer goods and
construction materials not classified as capital goods, the total value and detailed listing of which shall be made by the
Commission created in section 5 hereof and approved by the President upon recommendation of the National Economic
and Development Authority. Such goods shall be procured for and sold through such agency selected by the Commission
only to bona fide retailers who are Filipino citizens or entities wholly owned by Filipino citizens who shall resell the same
directly to consumers or end-users."
"(d) Cash payment. The twenty million dollars cash payment shall accrue to a Trust Fund to be used exclusively for the
benefit and rehabilitation of veterans of the Philippines in World War II, and their widows and orphans, as Congress may
from time to time provide: Provided, That the procurement of consumers goods intended to generate the trust fund for
veterans their orphans and widows of World War II shall be undertaken by the Commission upon the recommendation of
and in consultation with the National Economic and Development Authority and the same shall be disposed by the agency
selected by the Commission under paragraph (b) of this certified by the President of the Philippines after consultation with
the National Economic and Development Authority to be vital to the economic development of the country and except
further that the applicant may further apply for expansion or development purposes when so authorized by the President of
the Philippines after consultation with the National Economic and Development Authority: Provided, further, That where
there are two applicants for the same reparations goods, all other things being equal, the person who first applied shall be
given preference: Provided, finally, That reparations intended for electrification, educational material, equipment and
machinery, including those for fishery and vocational schools, cottage industries, fire-fighting equipment,
telecommunications, railroad, base metal mining, steel and cement manufacturing, logging and shipping shall be given top
priority. The list of projects shall be given the widest dissemination and publicity possible."
Section 2. Paragraphs (b) and (d) of Section 2 of the same Act are hereby amended to read as follows:
"(b) Goods other than capital goods. Goods other than capital goods that may be procured from reparations shall be limited
to such goods as may not be obtainable from normal sources of import and to highly essential consumer goods and
construction materials not classified as capital goods, the total value and detailed listing of which shall be made by the
Commission created in section 5 hereof and approved by the President upon recommendation of the National Economic
and Development Authority. Such goods shall be procured for and sold through such agency selected by the Commission
only to bona fide retailers who are Filipino citizens or entities wholly owned by Filipino citizens who shall resell the same
directly to consumers or end users."
"(d) Cash payment. The twenty million dollars cash payment shall accrue to a Trust Fund to be used exclusively for the
benefit and rehabilitation of veterans of the Philippines in World War II, and their widows and orphans, as Congress may
from time to time provide: Provided, That the procurement of consumers goods intended to generate the trust fund for
veterans, their orphans and widows, of World War II shall be undertaken by the Commission upon the recommendation of
and in consultation with the National Economic and Development Authority and the same shall be disposed by the agency
selected by the Commission under paragraph (b) of this Section and the proceeds thereof shall be deposited in accordance
with the provisions of this section. There shall be advanced from the Special Economic Development Fund created in
Section three of this Act such amounts as may be needed to complete the scheduled cash payments of four million United
States dollars every year for a period of five years in such a manner that the total cash payments of twenty million United
States dollars shall have been collected at the end of five years."
Section 3. Paragraphs (e) and (h) of Section 2 of the same Act are hereby repealed and paragraphs (f) and (g) of the same
Section are hereby amended to read as paragraphs (e) and (f), respectively.
Section 4. Special Economic Development Fund. The proceeds from the sale of reparations goods and utilization of
services, together with interests earned, shall be constituted into a Special Economic Development Fund out of which the
National Assembly may appropriate by special laws, from time to time, such amounts as may be necessary to constitute a
Special Trust Fund which shall be available to the Development Bank of the Philippines and the Philippine National Bank
for loans for economic and industrial development projects as well as for construction, reconstruction, repair and/or
improvement of public school buildings in amounts not exceeding eighty per cent of the value of the securities and payable
within a period not exceeding twenty years depending upon the kind of loan and with interest at a rate not exceeding four
per cent per annum: Provided, That the Development Bank of the Philippines and the Philippine National Bank shall charge
for their services only the actual cost thereof and shall not make any profit therefrom: Provided, further, That fifty per cent
of such Special Trust Fund shall be available for industrial loans, thirty per cent for agricultural loans (but not more than
twenty per cent of such agricultural loans may be granted on any single agricultural crop), and the remaining twenty per
cent, which shall be given top priority, for public school building construction, reconstruction, repair and/or improvement,
as the National Assembly may provide from time to time. The sum of twenty million pesos shall likewise be set aside from
the said Special Economic Development Fund to constitute a revolving fund which shall be used exclusively to aid in the
establishment of rural banks, subject to the provisions of Republic Act Numbered Seven hundred twenty, otherwise known
as the "Rural Banks Act," as amended, and the further sum of fifty million pesos for the purchase of landed estates as
provided for in the Land Tenure Act and such other landed estates provided for by other special Acts.
Section 5. Paragraphs (a) and (a-1) of Section 6 of the same Act are hereby amended to read as follows:
"(a) To prepare sufficiently in advance of need, on the basis of the previously approved reparations program and approved
applications for reparations goods and services, a tentative schedule of goods and services clearly indicating thereon the
name of the applicant end-user and the amount allocated for each project to be procured from Japan every year which, when
approved by the President of the Philippines upon recommendation of the National Economic and Development Authority,
shall form the basis of consultation between the Philippine and Japanese governments towards the formulation of the
schedule called for in Article four of the Reparations Agreement. A copy each, duly certified by the Commission, of the
approved applications and studies of the projects included in the tentative schedule shall be transmitted to the Mission
together with the tentative schedule. No additional project, and no change involving any item or project in a tentative or
agreed schedule, whether by addition, substitution or deletion, whether in kind, quantity, or value, whether partial or total,
shall be submitted to the Japanese Government until the same has been endorsed by the National Economic and
Development Authority and approved by the President in accordance with the foregoing, except in cases where the proposed
change involves only the increase or decrease in the amount allocated for a specific item or project listed in the tentative or
agreed schedule, and does not involve any addition of, or change in, any other item or project as provided above, and the
total of such increase or decrease, whether affected at one time or several time, does not exceed ten per cent of the amount
originally allocated for the corresponding item or project in the tentative schedule. The agreed schedule, and any addition,
substitution or deletion hereinabove referred to, as may thereafter be made in accordance with this Act and agreed to by the
Japanese Government, shall after its conclusion with the Japanese Government, be immediately published in full, indicating
clearly the name of the end-users concerned, for three consecutive times every other day in two newspapers of general
circulation, one in Tagalog and one in English by the Commission in the Philippines, and both in English by the Philippine
Reparations Mission in Japan.
"(a-1) To issue procurement orders for the acquisition of reparations goods and/or services on the basis of the agreed
schedule. The procurement order shall specify, among others, the following: (1) the name of the applicant end-user; (2) the
item in the agreed schedule; (3) the name of the project; (4) the amount of the procurement order; and (5) the date of issuance
of the procurement order. The amount of each procurement order shall be strictly in accordance with the allocation for each
project as agreed upon between the Philippine and Japanese Governments. The procurement orders for all the projects shall
be issued only after the conclusion of the agreed schedule. No procurement order for the acquisition of goods and/or services
intended for government agencies shall be issued by the Commission until after it shall have duly ascertained and verified
that the agencies concerned have (1) the capacity and have duly provided for the payment of the 2% service fee and all
incidental charges in connection with the procurement and delivery of the goods and/or services, and (2) the technical
capacity to take delivery and utilize efficiently the goods applied for, and unless all the following conditions shall have been
previously complied with: (1) the government agency concerned must have previously prepared and submitted to the
satisfaction of the Commission a financial, economic and technological study concerning the feasibility of the project
together with the complete plans and specifications thereof; and (2) the application must have been previously approved by
resolution of the Commission; (3) the project must be among those specifically included in the reparations schedule agreed
upon and effective between the Philippine and Japanese Governments at the time of the issuance of the procurement order;
and (4) the agreed schedule showing the names of the applicant end-users must have been published in accordance with this
Act. No procurement order for the acquisition of reparations goods and/or services intended for private parties shall be
issued by the Commission until after it shall have duly ascertained and verified that the applicant concerned (1) has enough
financial resources and capacity to pay and (2) has the technical capacity to take delivery and utilize efficiently the goods
applied for, and unless all the following conditions shall have been previously complied with: (1) the private applicant end-
user concerned must have previously prepared and submitted to the satisfaction of the Commission a financial, economic
and technological study of the project together with the complete plans and specifications thereof favorably endorsed as
prescribed in Section two of this Act, and a certification from the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Bureau of
Commerce, as the case may be, attesting that the applicant end-user concerned is qualified under this Act; (2) the application
must have been previously approved by resolution of the Commission; (3) the project concerned must be among those
specifically included in the reparations schedule agreed upon the effective between the Philippine and Japanese
Governments at the time of issuance of the procurement order: Provided, That no procurement order shall be issued until
after the private applicant end-user concerned shall have made a cash down payment for the project applied for which shall
be 10% of the value of the project computed at the current rate of exchange of the peso to the U.S. dollar prevailing at the
time of payment; and (4) the agreed schedule showing the names of the applicant end-user must have been published in
accordance with this Act. The private applicant shall be required to submit proof to substantiate that both his financial
resources and capacity to pay are commensurate with the value of the goods and/or services applied for, and that he has had
experience or has contracted an appropriate number of experts in the particular field. He shall also be required to put up
collaterals sufficient to cover the balance of the cost of the goods and/or services: Provided, further, That in the case of
corporations, the principal officers thereof shall be required to sign a guarantee contract whereby they shall be jointly and
severally liable with the corporation to answer for the obligation so contracted. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no
procurement order shall take effect until after the lapse of one week after its final publication indicating the name and
address of the applicant end-user, the name of the project subject of the procurement order, and the specific item in the
reparations schedule agreed upon and effective between the Philippine and Japanese Governments at the time of issuance
of the procurement order, three successive times every other day in two newspapers of general circulation, one in Tagalog
and one in English, in the Philippines, and both in English in Japan, by the Commission and the Mission, respectively. As
required herein, the Commission shall publish each and every procurement order within one week after its issuance, and the
Mission, within one week after receipt of the procurement order. Any procurement order which does not wholly comply
with all of the above requirements shall ipso facto be considered null and void, if such non-compliance has been through
the fault or negligence of the applicant end-user. After the procurement order for reparations intended for a specific end-
user has been properly issued in accordance with the foregoing, such procurement order may not be revoked or suspended
except when the end-user in whose favor the procurement order has been issued is adjudged, after due investigation wherein
he has been given the opportunity to be heard and represented by counsel, to be disqualified or found guilty of fraud in
connection with his application under this Act: Provided, That pending final decision, the procurement of the goods, except
actual delivery thereof to the end-user concerned, shall not be suspended: Provided, however, That an end-user who has
been found disqualified by the Commission may appeal to the President within thirty days from the receipt of the
Commission's decision. The decision of the President which must be made not later that thirty days after the submission of
the appeal to him, shall be final, and shall become effective upon receipt thereof by the end-user concerned. In case the end-
user fails to appeal, the decision of the Commission shall become final immediately after the lapse of the period for appeal.
A party who has been adjudged disqualified shall forfeit the down payment without prejudice to any action, criminal or
otherwise, which may be taken against him by the proper government agency. The Commission is hereby required to render
a decision on any complaint submitted to it regarding the qualifications of an end-user within ninety days from the date of
the formal submission of such complaint in writing."
Section 6. Section 10 of the same Act is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 10. Operating Funds. The funds for the approved budget of the Commission shall be provided for in the annual General
Appropriation Acts. All the warehousing charges, other charges and/or expenses paid and advanced by the Commission
from the Special Economic Development Fund (reparations proceeds) as authorized in the General Appropriation Acts for
reparations goods repossessed by it shall be considered part of the operating expenditures of the Commission in the particular
fiscal years when they were paid as authorized. Likewise, all service fees and incidental charges collected by the
Commission pursuant to this Act shall form part of its operating funds."
Section 7. Section 12 of the same Act is hereby further amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 12. Terms of Sale. Capital goods and complementary services intended for government projects, irrespective of the
classification of the project, shall be transferred to the agencies concerned without cost: Provided, That said agencies shall
pay in cash a service fee of two (2) per cent of the cost of the goods and/or services, and all incidental charges incurred in
connection with the procurement and delivery of such goods and/or services, computed at the current rate of exchange of
the peso to the U.S. dollar prevailing at the time of payment. The government agencies concerned shall enter in their books
of accounts the peso F.O.B. value of the goods and/or services received by them computed at the current rate of exchange
of the peso to the U.S. dollar prevailing at the time of delivery, as follows:
1. National government offices, agencies, institutions and/or instrumentalities depending solely on appropriations from the
National Assembly for their operating expenses shall enter the peso F.O.B. value as additional appropriation for them.
2. National government offices, agencies, institutions and/or instrumentalities with revolving funds provided by law shall
enter the peso F.O.B. value as additional appropriation for said revolving fund.
3. National government offices, agencies, institutions and/or instrumentalities with capital stock provided by law shall enter
the peso F.O.B. value as subscription of the Government to such capital stock.
4. Government-owned or controlled corporations shall enter the peso F.O.B. value as subscription of the Government to
their capital stock.
5. Provincial, city and municipal governments shall enter the peso F.O.B. value as contribution of the National government
to their operating expenses.
The foregoing provisions shall also apply to all government projects, irrespective of the classification of the projects, the
reparations goods and/or services of which have already been procured and delivered to the government end-users
concerned, and the contracts for the transfer thereof shall be modified accordingly: Provided, That whatever amount or
amounts that may have already been paid by said government end-users for service fee, incidental charges and/or the peso
F.O.B. value of the reparations goods and/or services, including interest thereon, if any, shall not be refunded.
Capital goods and complementary services disposed of to private parties as provided for in subsection (a) of Section two
hereof shall be sold on cash or credit basis under rules and regulations as may be determined by the Commission. All private
end-users shall pay the peso F.O.B. value of reparations goods and/or services received by them plus a service fee of 2% of
the value of such goods and/or services, and all incidental charges in connection with the procurement and delivery thereof,
all computed at the current rate of exchange of the peso to the U.S. dollar prevailing at time of delivery under the terms and
conditions provided herein. Sales on credit basis shall be payable on installments: Provided, That the deposit or down
payment required to be paid under subsection (a-1) of Section 6 hereof shall be applied as first payment without interest on
the F.O.B. value on the date of delivery of the reparations goods and/or services: Provided, further, That in case of capital
goods for the utilization of which an initial investment before operation of not more than twenty per cent of the cost of such
goods is required, the first installment with interest shall be paid on the third month after delivery of the goods, and in the
case of capital goods for the utilization of which an initial investment before operation of more than twenty per cent of the
cost of such goods is required, and also in the case of ocean-going vessels, the first installment with interest shall be paid
on the twelfth month after delivery of the goods, extendible when deemed to be justified by the Commission not exceeding
one year. The balance, in both cases, shall be paid in equal annual installments within a period to be fixed by the Commission
considering the life expectancy of the goods but in no case exceeding ten years from the date of the first installment falls
due, with interest at twelve (12) per cent per annum and an additional interest of one and one-half (1-1/2) per cent per month
for delinquency in the payment of installments: Provided, That in the case of vessels, the procurement cost thereof shall be
paid within the period provided for in Republic Act Numbered Fourteen hundred and seven, as amended. Goods other than
capital goods procured as reparations shall be sold for cash only at prevailing prices for similar goods.
In all transactions involving the transfer of capital goods and services from reparations to the authorized private parties
specified in this Act, the sale shall be directly to end-users and not through middlemen. The contract of sale and the
corresponding schedule of payment shall be executed upon delivery of the reparations goods and/or services pertaining to
each allocation in a particular agreed schedule irrespective of whether or not the project has been given a complete
allocation, or needs an additional allocation for completion or expansion, or has an additional allocation in the succeeding
annual reparations schedule or schedules. All reparations machinery and equipment in the possession of private end-users,
whether utilized or not, shall be declared "Completely delivered" unless within 30 days from date of receipt of instructions
to end-users, they shall file with the Commission their respective written proofs justifying their alleged claims.
The contract of sale shall bear the conditions that no capital goods thus acquired shall be resold, leased or in any other
manner disposed of except of Filipino citizens or to entities wholly owned by Filipino citizens who shall continue the
utilization thereof in the projects for which the goods were originally intended or in similar projects included in the economic
development program of a similar priority, subject, however, to the further condition that groups, associations and
corporations which are recipient of such goods shall not permit any subsequent change in ownership or control as shall at
any time thereafter change the control or ownership wholly held therein by Filipino citizens. It shall further contain a
provision that any transfer of ownership, whether by virtue of a private contract or through court proceedings, shall be to
Filipino citizens who shall begin utilizing them in such projects as the National Economic and Development Authority shall
determine within one year from notice of the Authority's decision."
Section 8. To Section 12 of the same Act, there are hereby added paragraphs (a-1) and (a-2) to read as follows:
"(a-1) The foregoing provisions of this Section, insofar as it relates to the computation of the peso F.O.B. value of the
reparations goods and/or services, the execution of the sales contract and corresponding schedule of payments, the time of
application of the deposit or down payment as first payment without interest and the due date of the first installment with
interest on the balance, and the imposition of interest of 12% per annum on the balance and an additional 1-1/2 per month
for delinquency, shall also apply to all projects of private end-users in the current 17th year reparations schedule and to all
other projects of private end-users where the reparations goods and/or services have already been delivered but the contracts
and corresponding schedules of payment have not as yet been executed at the time of the issuance of this decree, in which
case, said private end-users shall, within a period of three months from issuance of this decree, execute the sales contracts
and corresponding schedules of payments, otherwise the sanction provided for under paragraph (a-2) of this Section shall
be taken against them."
"(a-2) All private end-users with pending accounts with the Commission at the time of the issuance of this Decree shall be
allowed to restructure their accounts beyond the maximum allowable period of amortization as provided for under this Act:
Provided, That said end-users shall first be required to pay 10% of the total accrued accounts at the time of the issuance of
this Decree: Provided, further, That interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum shall be imposed on the restructured yearly
amortization with an additional monthly interest of 1-1/2 per cent for delinquency and said end-users shall be required to
put up additional collaterals sufficient to cover the value of the restructured account, and in the case of corporations, the
principal officers thereof shall be required to sign the contract of restructuring jointly and severally with the corporation:
Provided, finally, That all delinquent private end-users of reparations goods and/or services are hereby given a period of
three (3) months within which to restructure or update their accounts with the Commission otherwise, the latter, with the
assistance of the Armed Forces of the Philippines shall extrajudicially repossess said reparations goods and attach all other
assets of said private end-users and shall sell, transfer, or otherwise dispose of the same in a manner as provided for herein,
without prejudice to such civil and/or criminal action that may be taken against them under this Act and/or other existing
laws. All reparations goods so repossessed and/or to be repossessed shall be sold through public bidding, or through
negotiation if the public bidding will fail, either by lot or by piece, at such price and under such terms and conditions as
may be determined reasonable by the Commission upon the recommendation of an appraisal committee to be constituted
by the Commission and in which at least one (1) member each must come from the office of the Commission Auditor and
the National Economic and Development Authority: Provided, That government instrumentalities will be given the first
option to acquire the reparations goods which they may need or can utilize, in which case said reparations goods shall be
transferred to them without cost and the appraised value thereof as determined by the Commission shall be entered in their
books of accounts in accordance with this Section. All expenses incurred in connection with the transfer of said goods shall
be borne by the government agencies concerned.
The Commission is hereby authorized to pay out of the Special Economic Development Fund such amount or amounts as
may be necessary for all the expenses and/or charges in connection with the repossession of reparations goods and
attachment of other assets of private end-users and the sale thereof through public bidding or negotiations as hereinabove
provided."
Section 9. All reference to the National Economic Council in Republic Act Numbered 1789, as amended, shall be
understood to mean the National Economic and Development Authority.
Section 10. All provisions of Republic Act Numbered 1789, as amended, the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder,
and all other laws, executive orders, or parts thereof, inconsistent with this Decree are hereby repealed, modified and/or
amended accordingly.
Section 11. This Decree shall take effect immediately.