People v.

Beronilla
February 28, 1955 | Reyes, J.B.L., J.
Justifying Circumstance  5. Obedience to a lawful order of a superior

Doctrine: Where the accused acted upon orders of superior officers that they, as military subordinates, could not question,
and obeyed in good faith, without being aware of their illegality & without any fault or negligence on their part, the act is not
accompanied by criminal intent. Accordingly, the accused cannot be held criminally liable.

Case Summary: Appointed Military Mayor of La Paz, Abra, Manuel Beronilla and other accused were charged with Murder for
conspiring & confederating in the execution of elected La Paz mayor Borjal, considering that it was driven via personal
motives. Beronilla contends that the arrest, prosecution, trial and execution of Borjal were all pursuant to orders and
memorandum issued by their superior, Lt. Col. Arnold, therefore, they should not be held criminally liable.

Facts:
 Manuel Beronilla was appointed as the Military Mayor of La Paz, Abra by Lt.Col. Arnold (regimental commander of the
15th infantry of PH Army), operating as a guerilla unit therein.
 Beronilla then received a Memorandum issued by Lt.Col. Arnold which authorized North Luzon military mayors “to appoint
a jury of 12 bolomen to try persons accused of treason, espionage or aiding/abetting the enemy.”
 A list of said persons included the then elected mayor of La Paz -- Arsenio Borjal.
 Pursuant to another memorandum with the list, Beronilla placed Borjal under custody and gathered complaints against
him. Borjal was eventually charged with espionage, aiding the enemy & abuse of authority. The appointed jury found
Borjal guilty and sentenced him to death penalty.

 Beronilla sent the records to Lt.Col. Arnold for review, which was returned on April 18, 1945 with a message stating:
“..whatever disposition you make of the case is hereby approved.”
 On the night of the same day, Borjal was executed upon Beronilla’s order, and reported the same afterwards to Lt.Col.
Arnold who complimented Beronilla’s “impartial but independent way of handling the case.”

 Two years later, Beronilla, along with the prosecutors, et al., was indicted for Murder, allegedly conspiring & confederating
in the execution of Borjal.
 It was then that President Roxas issued Exec. Proclamation No. 8 granting amnesty to all persons who committed
felonies in furtherance of resistance to the enemy.
 All the accused-appellant’s applications for amnesty were denied on the ff. grounds:
(1) that the crime was inspired by purely personal motives and (2) that the crime was committed after the expiration of the
time limit fixed by the amnesty proclamation (Borjal was executed after the liberation of La Paz)

 Accused-appellants argued that the arrest, prosecution and trial of Borjal were all done pursuant to the
orders/memorandum via Lt. Col. Arnold.
 A radiogram of overall commander Col. Volckmann to Lt. Col. Arnold then surfaced which called out the illegality of the
organized jury and trial & execution of Borjal. It was propositioned that if the radiogram was known to Beronilla, then his
order of Borjal’s execution cannot be justified.

Issue: Whether or not Beronilla (together with other accused-appellants) can be held criminally liable for the execution of Borjal.

Ruling:
 The Court found no sufficient proof that Beronilla knew about the radiogram. Furthermore, the allegation appears contrary
to Lt. Col. Arnold’s latter reply complimenting Beronilla for the case (instead of berating him for disobedience).

 Thus, given that the accused acted upon orders of superior officers that they, as military subordinates, could not question,
and obeyed in good faith, without being aware of their illegality, without any fault of negligence on their part, the Court
held that criminal intent was not established.

Disposition: Judgment reversed. Accused-appellants are acquitted.