Fundamentals of Criminal Law Principles

okay so uh good afternoon everyone so we will be discussing on uh general principles of criminal law we'll start with criminal law so what is criminal law criminal law what is criminal law criminal law is the rancho public willow which number one it defines a crime number two uh it trades up its nature and number three it provides punishment so how would you how would you know that one is a penal law or not if it has these three elements it defines what is a crime it breaks of its nature and provides spanish so there may be a law which i you you all the while you have this mistaken belief that it's a penal law but actually it's not epinephrine because it does not provide for any punishment what is the significance why we define one as a criminal law or not because if it is a criminal law or a penal law then it is entitled to what to a liberal interpretation of the law liberal interpretation in favor of the accused and strictly against the government so if you're the council for the news and there is doubt okay so it's strictly against the government so if you're the council for the abuse and there is doubt in so far as the interpretation or construction of a specific penal law you can argue that issue it should be interpreted in favor of your client that use and strictly against the government now if if it's not a penal though then uh you cannot argue unless the law provides that it should be interpreted no in favor of your client okay next let's go to characteristics of flamingo number one this is a favorite bark question generality territoriality and prospectivity when you talk about generality is the first and the second is use entertain interchangeably by student or by a buyer candidate which should not be the case when you talk about generality the first thing that should be in your mind is that it refers to persons so that will be your guide uh generality pero young definition and territoriality no so to clarify this one just remember that generality you know in generality it refers to persons and territoriality refers to a place now we start with first so all persons but i became confused all persons living or so joining in the philippines are subject to a philippine criminal jurisdiction so all persons living or so journey in the philippines are subject to our philippine criminal jurisdiction so here comes an american uh who's an american in uh living in new york who visited the philippines only he was arrested for carrying marijuana no you cannot arrest me because i am the citizen of the usa and also under our state law in new york no we are perfectly allowed to carry marijuana so since i am an american a new yorker no you cannot charge me of that question can he is his argument correct or not of course not because in criminal law remember this criminal jurisdiction the nationality law is not uh material we refer to it adhere to the generality territoriality and prospectivity ruling so even if he's a visitor of the philippines he's subject to our penal law national law no subject to generality territoriality as well now question is this an absolute rule or not this is just a general rule always class whenever you study you have to know what is the general rule and what is the exception or rx exceptions a common problem of uh some students is that they enter they do not have the concept of what the general rule is and they are making the exception as a general rule and that's wrong except when uh under the laws of preferential application and when there is a 3p stipulation so we when the philippines uh enter into a tree care with another nation what should having a loss of preferential application what does it mean no it means that it gives preference to a particular class of person so that we begin a preference to a particular uh preference to a particular class of persons so that if you belong to this particular class of person then uh philippine courts have no jurisdiction to try the case so what could be an example of that under public international law bill so number one is the sovereigns ambassadors sovereigns our heads of faith ministers residents charge the affairs diplomats are included no but not consul but not consumed so assuming that she uh president biden president of the united states visited the philippines and he went to the u.s embassy assuming from picc so he drove this car going towards united states embassy in manila a lagrange bollywood and he hit a pedestrian unfortunately the pedestrian died so can you file a criminal case against president biden for reckless influence resulting to homicide not because of this exception loss of preferential application he being the head of the state of the united states next treaty treaty stipulation so sample could be the bfa when an american citizen u.s military personnel u.s military personnel commits a crime against a fellow u.s military personnel we do not have jurisdiction to try the case but it will be the america the united states we'll try the case but if it is within uh if if it involves a a filipino and an american u.s military personnel catholic pemberton then um you can try the case if it's a criminal case it can be tried in the philippines or if it involves if it involves a crime committed against the national security of the united states committed by a uh a us military personnel then we do not also have jurisdiction to buy the case okay so let's go now to before we go into territoriality that you have to remember what is the general rule in the exception exception exception then you apply the general rule so something you you can conclude in your answer uh it being does not uh fall under any of the exceptions other the uh generality rule hence a is criminally liable because the general rule provides that all persons living or surgery in the philippines are subject to our criminal courts reality rule uh simply means that when a diamond perspective if the crime is committed all crimes have been attained so for generality all persons saving all crimes committed within the philippine territory then we have jurisdiction to try the case philippine has jurisdiction to try the case ergo and this general rule therefore all crimes committed outside la bas philippines outside the philippines then we have no jurisdiction to so that's a general rule all crimes committed within the philippine territory philippine courts have no jurisdiction courts have jurisdiction to try the case plans committed outside the philippine territory no jurisdiction ex except that this being a general rule there is an exception to this exception that which is provided under article 2 of the revised penal code so these are instances where although it's outside the philippine jurisdiction committed outside the philippine jurisdiction yet we have a philippine territory yet philippine courts have jurisdiction to try the case okay and there's follows so exception number one should commit an offense while on a philippine ship or airship should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency notes and obligations and securities issued by the government of the philippines so the second paragraph refers to a forger and counterfeiter number three is should be liable for the introduction of the obligations and securities mentioned in the preceding article it simply means that it refers to a smuggler who smuggled the obligations and securities which was forged and counterfeited outside the philippines though and while being a public officer should commit an accredit in relation to his office and number five he should commit a crime against the law of nations against national security and the law of nations remember these exceptions there are particular also other rule other laws that uh express state that it has an extra extra territorial application that will now the anti-terrorism law that will be one now if it is not stated then if it does not fall under any of the exceptions then you apply the general rule which is uh we do not have jurisdiction to try the case just allow me to i know to share my cool um rpc total okay look at this one you should commit an offense while on a philippine oops sorry extra territorial application or if it's being crimes committed outside the philippine territory should commit an offense while on a philippine ship or airship so how would you know that that particular uh vessel is a philippine ship or a ship so here comes a situation where perhaps latino color here comes the situation where we have the philippines and we have vietnam course we don't adhere to the nine dash roll by china or here comes a vessel on the high seas i say it's neither in within the territory of uh either of any nation normally we do not have jurisdiction to try the case right but if it is a philippine ship then we have jurisdiction to try the case so what the term means whether it's a philippine ship or airship it is the registration if it is registered in the philippines then it's a philippine ship if it is not registered in the philippines it's not it's not if that's registered in the philippines it's not a philippine ship so pelagon is the app of registration and that will be before the bureau of customs so for example a crime was committed inside the vessel so basically though the crew are malaysians we have also the owner and we have also where the vessel is registered the crew are malaysians the owner is a singaporean registered in indonesia filipinos uh the owner is also a filipino but the the registered in indonesia so question do we have jurisdiction to notify the case they killed b a fellow crew inside this vessel you know oh we can try the case national because what matters is where it is registered since it's registered outside the philippines in indonesia then we do not have jurisdiction to try the case next next uh in this in this vessel no the crew are malaysians the owner is a singaporean and registered in the philippines crew a a malaysian killed kruby a fellow malaysian the vessel is in the highest do we have jurisdiction in the case yes because number one uh it's that it's not the nationality of the crew nor the nationality of the owner but it is where the vessel is registered and since registered in the philippines and it is outside the philippine territory it being the highest end capture station to try the case no problem with that [Music] filipino no order is a filipino crew is a filipino registered in the philippines but it is within the jurisdiction of the philippines a killed b what do we have jurisdiction to try the case here applying the no the art of exception under our under article 2 we have jurisdiction to try the case because it's registered in the philippines and it is outside the philippines but it's not entirely correct because if the vessel is within the jurisdiction of vietnam [Music] reality principle since it is within the territory of another country then vietnam has jurisdiction to try the case that then refuses to exercise its jurisdiction then that's the time we can do so okay so if it's a very nito why on the philippines ship or hershey it connects a situation eating daniels and fraps of the west number one the patang vessel is in the high seas not within the jurisdiction of another country number two registered in the philippines if these two requirements for my these two must concur if this any of these requirements is not present then we cannot exercise the restriction if it is not registered registered in the philippines if it is not if it is within the jurisdiction of another state then we are entitled okay and what if the vessel is in the philippines is it within or outside the philippines it is within the philippines so we apply what the general rule so all crimes committed within the philippine territory now philippine called some jurisdiction to try the things when it's it's within the uh territory of the philippines you apply already the general rule if it is registered in the philippines or not important is this second situation registered in the philippines as well as uh uh it should be in the highest place registered in the philippines and in the highest if it is within the jurisdiction of another country we do not have jurisdiction to fight the case hey i hope it's clear to you next should forge or counters with any coin organization [Music] uh and as well as obligations and securities here comes a situation where see s1 s2 singaporeans forged and counterfeited our coin or fantasy notes and it was done in their country in singapore so the forger are singaporeans committed in singapore because of doing that they became wealthy rich so they decided to visit the philippines but they were arrested we cannot under the generality principle because it was committed outside the philippine territory and we are foreign are the argument raised by these two s1 and s2 cannibal of course not nationality is immaterial as we have discussed a while ago and secondly secondly because it falls squarely under the second exception where their forge or counter created corner currency notes issued by the philippine government so they can be unliable so again second is forger and counterfeit the third third speaks about the smuggler of what of the obligations and securities which was forged encountered s1 and s2 okay [Music] after they forge or counters you can s [Music] s3 s3 is a smuggler in addition that you did not counterfeit you get that counterfeited account forge but they smuggled these obligations and securities uh mentioned in the preceding article so it's it's not corner currency note under the third paragraph no it already deleted coin in cars you know so it's only applicable to obligations and securities i obligations and securities so we are we have here in the high seas [Music] [Music] which was forged and counterfeited in my country so mankind [Music] you have no juristic jurisdiction to try me in the philippines because no i never entered the philippine territory it was our uh transaction took place in the isis is that then a wall or not it's not because it happened it was clearly under the third paragraph because he opted to introduce to smuggle this obligation insecurities which was forged by his friend application a third paragraph now a philippine charities of state pcs or issued [Music] [Music] number four while being a public officer should commit or employees should commit an opinion in the exercise of your faction so antano um does it follow that any crime committed by a public officer of god can be tried in the philippines no not every crime committed by a public officer or employee can be tried in the philippines why because it's very clear that their paragraph 4 should commit an offense in the exercise of their function so in a big subject the client that they committed should be connected in the exercise of their function so this is what this material what is material so if the crime is not in the exercise of their function then we apply the general rule crimes committed outside the philippine territory we do not have jurisdiction to try the case but if the crime is connected in the exercise of their duties or functions then we have an extra extra territorial application they can be tried in the philippines so this can be viewed if for example in in a particular embassy abroad a disbursing officer was a singapore cb is a dispersing officer in other words and he misappropriated this public funds independent as salaries of his co-employees can he be tried in the philippines if that act of bull bursting misappropriating happened outside the philippine territory no uh yes because the app is committed with the exercise of their functions december 4 philippine courts have jurisdiction to try the case [Music] withdraw i know five thousand singapore dollars because i need that secretary is seven thousand pesos seven thousand singaporean dollars she pocketed [Music] the crime is staffan okay is it in the exercise of their function no no it's it's not pertussis ambassador so in that case she uh she cannot be tried in the philippines because the app that she performed you know was committed not in the exercise of her function number five to commit an offense against national security and the law of nations [Music] okay so limbaugh we have uh hong kong china then we have the philippines now assuming that there is a rebellion an ongoing rebellion in the philippines so here comes a sympathizer by the name of x people chase arms in hong kong to be delivered in the philippines to support what to support um the rebellion being committed in the philippines now he was apprehended and firearms though he sent firearms are sent in the philippines so he was when he went back to the philippines he was arrested now he was selected for obstacle making in hong kong for chasing firearms and to support rebellion in front of the charge was actually rebellion [Music] yes sir because rebellion now is a crime against national security is that correct because if it's not a crime against national security and the lost nations then we apply the general rule what is that outside the philippines then we have no jurisdiction to fight the case now rebellion is not a crime against national security it is a claim against public order so since if a crime against public order then we do not have jurisdiction to try the case the same national security and the law of nation you've got to memorize plans classified against national security and the law of nations so if the crime committed abroad would be uh piracy mutiny a tree zone then playable in the philippines because those cries would fall under the fifth paragraph remember that okay let's go let's let's go back to the third principle which is prospectivity women uh criminal laws or pain alone should be applied respectively or it looks forward [Music] so it cannot be given a retroactive application no retroactive application it's not punishable and subsequently there is a law that punishes the app then it cannot be given a retroactive application no that person should not be liable now can it be given a reproactive application so there's again an exception so this is the general rule no reproductive application there's also the exception or exception where it can be thinner loss can be given a retroactive application and what are those instances number one exception the only one exception is if it is a boy that's only an exception this one so if before he was convicted for 10 years 10 years already serving the same for three years but subsequently a law that was passed you know uh shortening the uh the penalty to be imposed instead of 10 years when he began a london two years at oca the next servant in three years can be can now ask to be released no because what it's fabulous favorable to the accused if you can remember the case of robin padilla uh he was uh convicted of illegal possession of fire so subjectively there was a loan penalty for illegal possession specifically for that that he was tried and convicted so he was released but uh there is false there are exceptions to the exception i know even so quite shy even if if the law is fair valuable favorable to the abuse but if number one [Music] he is a habitual delinquent and number two if the law provides otherwise then it cannot be given reproductive application no application to him now let's go to um beauties of criminal law number one is classical number two is possibilities okay classical yes freedom he is responsible in exercising that freedom and if in the exercising such freedom he committed the crime then you have to be responsible so the there's a specific punishment if we committed the crime the purpose of the punishment is for retribution so but this is this is the classical and so first positive is cute is concerned no uh mandau is imbued with a strange overpowered by a strange morbid phenomenon which compels him to do something which is against his own volition and what is the purpose of punishment in positivities the purpose is for platform reformation so on a question to what purely we basically no we adhere to the classical theory but in some provisions that we have we adhere to we adopted the positive visibility like what um the mitigating circumstances right mitigator mitigating circumstances if present would lessen the penalty to its low minimum period divide there's one theory also which is the mixed theory which is the combination of the classical as well as the positivistic let's discuss about uh vessel in the philippines we're talking about when a philippine ship are registered in the philippines but outside the philippines so number one if it's a pouring a foreign vessel but not registered in the philippines so we have a foreign warship and we have a foreign version special okay let's put this in a particularly so this is the philippines okay this is the territory of the philippines down here is australia so there's a specific uh private cargo ship from hong kong ordered to be delivered the car goes to be delivered in australia is [Music] that's one scenario the other scenario would be uh the car goes coming from hong kong and where the port of destination is manila okay there is a crime committed within that foreign merchant vessel now if if the philippines is [Music] then uh we apply uh since it's it's it's within the philippine territory we apply the the territoriality rule where crimes committed within the philippines we have jurisdiction to try the case now in the first scenario it's only in transit it will only pass through the philippines and the port of destination is another country which is australia so the vessel is in transit in the philippines so what is the rule you go for a suffering merchant vessel is concerned so we could either apply the english rule or the french rule now under those into instances general rule up and there's also an exception general rule in english rule no the host country has jurisdiction the host country has jurisdiction to try the things except one involves purely internal management purely internal management then we did not have jurisdiction but the general rule is you the host country has jurisdiction to try the case and french rule no jurisdiction host country has the jurisdiction except one involves uh what uh bridge bridge of public you know and the vessel is in transit in the philippines applying the english rule do we have jurisdiction to try the case country has unless it falls the exception so they let's determine if it falls under the exception then we have no juris host country has no jurisdiction if it does not fall under the exception no if it does that fall under the exception then we apply the general rule in which case the host country has jurisdiction acp antano uh will fall under the exception is does it truly involve do you consider that as purely internal management indeed so in which case we will apply the uh english rule the general rule of the english rule so we have jurisdiction to try the case applying the general rule of the english rule french rule host country no jurisdiction except it involves rich of public safety or order yes at stake so we have jurisdiction to try the crime applying the exception to the french rule so whether it's the english rule friendship we will arrive at the same conclusion except that we arrive at the uh that we have jurisdiction in english rule because we're applying its general rule applying the french rule we have the jurisdiction but because of the exception provided during philippines at the adhere to the english rule hello guys is the port of destination so we don't have to we have jurisdiction to try the case applying the territoriality principles landed in the philippines so illegal importation here from under comprehensive drugs now but if it's uh passing through the philippines no we have no jurisdiction to try it now if it is being smoked young pernicious effect [Music] military vessel is done in in in uh so big do we have jurisdiction to tie the case well you can argue about the exception on the bfa gritty and you can also provide for this one a warship is an extension of the flag it carries since it's there is the u.s flood and it is a warship no it's an extension of the u.s and we do not have uh therefore jurisdiction to fly the case okay thanks let's go to constitutional limitation once the tuition and limitation so we all know that congress is just a creation of our constitution so all those enacted whether it's a penal law or any other law like an admin law a commercial lawsuit below should conform to the provision of our fundamental fundamental law which is the constitution so it cannot congress cannot enact a law that violates the provision of the constitution so what what are those guaranteed under the bill of rights no process the right to be heard so individual bill of attenders no bill of attenders also a limitation will have a tender just membership in the communist party would already entail punishment without any judicial trial another limitation is uh of course this one exposed below when it punishes enough it punishes a person who committed an app which at the time that he committed the same is not punishable so we also have a presumption of innocence all of use is presumed to be imogen now notice that let me just drive the point perception is just a presumption which can be reported enjoys the presumption of innocence so the prosecution has the duty to rebut and how do you rebut them by addressing evidence of quantum of evidence which is proof beyond reasonable health the goal of the prosecution is to rebuttal presumption by presenting proof by quantum of evidence of proof beyond reasonable doubt destroying presumption and then he's guilty now if you are the accused what will be your anonymous uh if you're the council productions you're the defense so inject a reasonable doubt like adulthood prosecution evidentiary not evidential but it is not properly unreasonable now there is reasonable doubt so for medicinal doubt the presumption stands for so what else uh of course other consequences limitation the right to a council and the right to and of course it can be ex cross examined by the accused and a lot of other [Music] constitutional limitation under the bill of rights so we're true with the general provisions so we would proceed now to felonies let's go to felons let me switch here calories are completed not only by visit punishable by law are felonies the law this is not anti-local knowledge but you see the law referred to here is the device speed and group [Music] apps and omissions punishable by their vice pedal code are felonies so special though we don't call it as a felony call it as an offense or a crime in general when you talk about any bodily movement that which produces effect in the external world but auditions by doing nothing you can convey the crime yes if you hit a pedestrian by accident you have the duty under the rpc to render assistance if you fail to render assistance to your to the victim then you can make life health liable because there can be a felony by omission when you talk about omission what are the requisites there must be a law that requires the performance of property particular app under a particular circumstance number two there is failure to perform so there is a law that mandates or requires to perform and have to perform a particular act so remember that now remember in the in the philippines we have we uh have this principle that there is no crime when there is no law that punishes the same you remember this one um [Music] why there are cases where you will be asked you will be thinking [Music] then you can use it as your answer he is not criminally liable no because his app was not punished by any other law because we followed the rule that the men [Music] there's no crime when there is punishing the act x on june 1 and to be executed on june 10 when june 10 comes it was only b who appeared they did not appear so b killed x pursuant to their conspiracy now b was arrested and subsequently was charged and they discovered you know upon investigation that uh a was also acting in conspiracy with the person with b so they also charge a is a criminally like so the only participation of a is by agreeing on june 1 and they starting to commit the same so is that punishable in other words is there a claim of conspiracy to commit murder [Music] okay let's go dolo and culpa so there is the zip and there is there is the seat and there is a how do we differentiate one from the other so we have dolo we have kulpa common element is freedom intelligence and third intent when you talk about internet what do you mean that means it could be malice evil intent [Music] there's also freedom intelligence but they differ on the third element in that menu improves negligence lack of foresight and lack of skill so antanang if you are the prosecution it is your duty to prove this element especially if it's you have to prove the [Music] criminal intent the element of elements of the crime and that they accuse intelligence and also freedom now what is the duty of the prosecutor the defense for defense i will negate any one of this element of history right no criminal negative how do you indicate freedom uh it is instable first alumni irresistible force is what it is an exempting circumstance if present there's no criminal label intelligence a 10 year old child who stabbed his classmate no and died young is there a crime committed yes because somebody died is there criminal ability on the part of 8 no because he's 10 year old child he lacks intelligence under the juvenile ingest justice welfare up if the age of the child is 15 or below there is no criminal liability in 10 how do i negate intent as a public attorney's office how do you i dispute malice evil intent but in that very specific intent class [Music] is [Music] there is a deprivation of one's liberty or freedom now how do i negate bad faith so initiate collato [Music] good faith is a proper defense in somebody was charged of murder and i am now claiming that he is acting to defend himself self-preservation so what does it mean no self-defense no criminal ability now when it's culpa the same two elements except that there's improvements languages lack of foresight and lack of skill when you talk about negligence there is it refers to perception deficiency of perception you talk about importance deficiency of action now how a proper defense in reckless improvements so here comes a person driving acting in good faith the speed limit is 20 but his speed at that time while he was driving his motor vehicle 35 kilometers per hour and he hit a pedestrian uh is he criminally liable servant defense counsel acting in good faith not criminally liable okay a person may be acting in good faith but he can be negligent a person has no intention to kill another person not to run over a particular pedestrian but he is negligent obviously his negligence he is overspeeding the speed limit is 25 and this is driving around 35 kilometers per hour [Music] good faith is not a proper defense [Music] so what could the gate impedance languages and levels improve the opposite of dangling these things animal opposite that exercise one exercise of do diligence [Music] exercise caution on an extra flex yeah okay so uh that's a proper defense salvenia no i dispute that my speed [Music] foreign and he appeared so sudden because he was touching his ball was going after the ball that went out so it was not the fault of the driver okay next we also should discuss on [Music] uh article 3 which is mistake of the case of people versus actions mistake of there is no criminal liability in this case now there's no criminal liability in this case so you can raise that as a proper defense as opposed to that of mistake in identity where it falls under article four paragraph one for there is criminal liability [Music] [Music] which is empty somebody was uh banging on the door this person was banging on this door so action was afraid because there were incidents already a friend communicated in the neighborhood in the vicinity so he asked him who are you but the question left unanswered [Music] is an intruder so fearful for his life now what he did is to stop this person it turned out that that person is his friend his roommate playing jokes on him but unfortunately he died so much again a normal defense of this type of fight and he will actually was acquitted actually because of this one so anu that erased number three requisite which you need to memorize this app would have been lawful this app would have been lawful had the facts being as they accuse believe it to be this axe would have been lawful had the facts been as that is believed to be what does it mean if indeed x is an intruder just as uh thought about this person then his act of stabbing him this egg would have been no food second his intent is lawful as well so there was no intent to kill actually x the only was sleeping so it was only defending himself so it's a self-defense on the part of acho and thirdly is without negligence or carelessness on his part carelessness and without negligence how was it shown he was having action he asked question who are you but the question was left unanswered so with these three requisites present then there is the sake of fact then there is no criminal [Music] player when you talk about venezuela what does it [Music] up okay criminal mind and criminal out if there is only a criminal mind without claiming no criminal ability if there's only a criminal act without criminal uh mind then no criminal ability in other words that what these two must concur comments real criminal mind without criminal you can think of any crime so he knews but if it stays in the mind there is no overcloud not even a preparatory no criminal ability criminal up parabola criminal mind yes you know example that i gave you young minor when the minor 10 year old child stabbed and killed his fellow classmate is there why because he's less than 15 years of age so going for the prosecution so let's go to another topic which is uh article 4 article 4 speaks about how criminal liability is concurred how is criminal liability incurred criminal liability is called [Music] under uh article for two success which is by committing a felony although the wrongful have done be different from that which intended the second one is what when the when a person has performed an act which would be an offense against persons or property or if not for its inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of employment of inadequate and [Music] in effectual means i'm looking for another mind another slide okay good i'm so i'm saying sorry to you my book so this is intended again to supplement because sabokuli justice is unknown substantive law but it doesn't show how many times a particular question was asked in the workshop it does not show also an example of a bar question and it does that show how uh the suggested answer should be uh how the answer should be given i'll take the new zero one zero zero three four five six eleven thirteen fifteen so today is twenty twenty one uh [Music] most probably this can be asked many times this was asked so put a circuit with a star on this one now since this is a favorite question did not know how many [Music] so one problem no how are felonies committed 2015 no problem google provision memorize that you have already points there are also other questions standing for the night let's go to article 4 how many times you can see that 99 blah blah blah 9 11 12 13 14 15 18 and the opinion if this is 17 19 18 21 21 most probably foreign no problem with uh [Music] just uh you should know this already because aberrations and or personally better intentions all uh come from article 4 paragraphy by committing a felony what kind of a felony we know that there is dolo and there's pulpa which one one of them to apply a paragraph one of article four i mean although they're all wrongful death done be different from that which intended for the intention ergo this is applicable to only to not kulpa so applicable anxiety so n a not applicable to number one [Music] not applicable to spl not applicable to if a person is performing a no full out panel [Music] a was after the wall so he has to face age and there are so many bystanders so luckily for big uh we thought no he got hold of the knife to defend himself but instead of stabbing him away to be so he threw that knife away unfortunately there was a bystander by the name of x is this applicable well under the present circumstance that any person committing a felony uh should be liable although the wrongful app done be different from that which up only intended of throwing the knife to stop the aggression a climb no it's not a plan it's perfectly what defending himself so if a person is exercising a lawful act then he's not liable even if x is tight such an accident well i should be assuming that there's kulfa why because he knew that there are a lot of people and getting through this knife yet this is still not okay so careful with that [Music] now out of out of this would uh come mistake of mistake [Music] in identity one question differentiate mistaken identity from mistake of fact mistake of identity there is criminal ability in mistake of fact there is no clinical legality basis of mistaken identity is article 4 paragraph 1 this is of a mistake of is in the blog mistake in identity is uh error in person name now remember that there are two persons only at the scene of the time she is because he usually uh goes into that it passes through this street every night after office so he waited for b and he awakened to kill b so somebody passed through this street and a knowing believing it was b so stop this person unfortunately it was not be but another person cc so there are two persons present ca at cc but a believe that c at the beginning that it was b so there is mistake in identity and there is criminal ability [Music] because i was just intending to kill b is his argument uh correct or not no because when he waited he was planning to commit no he's planning to feel you know a person but it turned out that it was not give us another person when you talk about mistake in the blog there are three persons present at the scene of the flight ca cv they intended to kill me so he fired and shot at me it hit me the bullet passed through me to magos and hit another person too by the name by c so how what's the magic word in mistake in the blue a magic word yet is lack of precision because of black operations precision tomogram sir can it be a complex crime yes it can ripen into a complex crime if as a result there are two or more grave or less grave felonies which was produced okay so complex is the last where the injury went beyond what was intended the a his intention is only just unfortunately b fell down and died so the injury went or beyond or uh injury is greater than that or beyond that which was intended this will result into one a mitigating stats mitigating circumcision under paragraph three of article 13 which is mitigating lack of intent to commit or wrong no intent to commit so grave around so that's a mitigating circumstance when there is a notorious disparity between the app offender and the resulting felony so uh disparity which is total disparity the act of slapping and the resulting literally which is the death of me okay now and also uh under paragraph 3 let me continue i'm sorry paragraph a of arctic l4 it speaks about proximate cause sabina then he who is the cause of the boss is the cause of the evil cause so a person who is performing a dollar or a intentional felony a person who commits intentional felony is liable for what liable for dnl direct natural and logical consequences of his unknown fallout liable for the resulting injury and the person who commits intentional felony is liable for the direct natural and logical consequences with a resulting injury so [Music] passenger jeep prosecuted for the depth of x r1 and r2 said that they're not liable because they did that kill x they have no intention to kill ex in a person who is performing i don't know intellectual family all that is liable for its direct natural logical consequences so of that if there was no declaration of orgasm ex would not have been afraid and would not have come out of the passenger ship but remember that um us is a person liable for all the [Music] consequences of his unknown there's a person who commits an intentional felony liable for all the consequences of visa no no why he is only liable for dnl which is the direct natural logical consequences of islamophobia if the resulting injury is not from it's not the direct it's not that natural it's not the logical consequences of islam then there is no uh this is not applicable now if it is an intervening cause not liable only for the app or apps committed that's uh approximate cause applying dna beta 1 dnld a slab b i inflicted physical injury on the version of uh he deliberately immerses them on a poisonous water contaminated water knowing that the sand is uh wonder and because of that because of this app he died question piece question is a criminally liable for the death of me no it's got approximate cause there was an intervening cause c because b deliberately immerses sand on a poisonous water knowing that it's poisonous for any reason so not liable because it's not approximate because so does it follow that a is stat3 no it's reliable what will be the liability of a liability of a is for the up the tickle me that and what is that the up of slapping b that's it nothing more nothing less okay we will go to the last topic which is crime but before that that's why i want you to have a copy of my book it's because of this favorite topic again and yet and then at least you would know how to be familiar when this was asked you follow the form of free luck reply apply legal basis application conclusion okay again reply legal basis application and c stands for conclusion let's analyze bar question 2004 on his way home from b office disney road chimney grenade is xx liable for c system i will teach you on how to present your answer reply you always have to know what is the last question is extremely reliable for sisu's death okay so you reply directly to that okay yes xx is criminally liable for the death of jesus next legal basis article 44 paragraph 1 states that criminal law science ourselves also a valentine legal basis okay check out and declared the whole time it created an immediate sense of danger in the mind of syria that's the application lastly conclusion consequently the death of cc caused by fear from ceases out makes the latter criminally liable even if the result is different from that from his own intention that was we applied if you are used to this you will not even be thinking of what's next or next it will be automatic so you need to i know to practice now xx is criminally reliable because article 41 states that blah blah so you can already put these two into one sentence legal basis uh application up again conclusion is just a repetition of your apply coach in different terms minimum copy paste so xx yes xx is criminally liable for that of cc okay uh it makes the latter criminally reliable even if the result is different from that which is unintentional it's [Music] an application but if you have time if you want to impress the examiner then you will be given a full credit for this one take the last one by any person performing enough which would be an offensive this is impossible crime and which is also asked several times in the bar exams what are the requisites of impossible threat that's about the lien no performing enough which would benefit against persons or property ergo an impossible crime limited language a person's applying against persons or property if it is not a climb against persons of property do not apply our paragraph two so say hey yes is what crime napping is a crime against uh personal liberty and it's not a crime against persons of property so what are the crimes classified or falling under grabs against persons you also have to memorize memory strengths against proper dreams no what else against persons or property what other requisites there is inherent in possibility of its accomplishment or an account of employment of inadequate or ineffectual means when you talk about inherent impossibility there are two kinds legal impulsive legal impossibility as well as physical impossibility legal impossibility can you [Music] steal a watch that belongs to you no why because it's yours physical impossibility can you kill a person who's already dead no why because he's already dead but there is inherent impossibility so a intended to kill b it turned out that one hour before be suffered a heart attack and already died there is inherent impossibility if they knew at that time that he stopped and uh b that b was already there then forget about the application of this one it's not impossible right employment of inadequate or ineffectual means i'm sorry and that is unknown to a there is in this case okay employment of inadequate means if a knew at that time that it is an inadequate then forget about the application of impossible right employment of ineffectual means aggregation and substance he all the while thought that it was poison in impala it was only sugar it was only sugar so employment of ineffectual means but a should know that it's it's uh a poison if you knew it's it's it's only sugar then a possible crime is not applicable of course there's number four which is not included in the total provision so the app must not be punished not punished [Music] or not constitute as a crime uh it does not constitute as a crime uh under other provision of the rpc or it's not punished under other provision of the rpc if that app constitutes a supply then it's not impossible right of course there should be evil or criminal intent a intended to kill b nipah house language uh a week ago just to look for his mother but although he thought that he was in in his neighborhood so after a few days she planned on feeling big he burned his house off with the momentum bird but that and he does not know that he did not know at the time he was already in malaysia is there impossible question no why because that that app is already punished under other provision of the rpc the client that he committed is that impossible crime but his app is already arsenal so it's already arson so we have to be very careful in that um uh how do you differentiate the natanza by impossible crime from frustrated or attempted attempted at frustrated susceptible of being consummation how do you say that because um attempted no it can be consummated were it not for uh for reasons other than his own spontaneous desistance for instance other than his own spontaneous decisions the other one is what you really have to set aside the time you cannot drive you cannot go into the office and this is not for compliance purposes i just like to remind everyone okay number two sonata uh it can never be frustrated as well and it can never be frustrated frustrating so frustrated is susceptible of being questionated word that for uh acts independent of the will of the perpetrator it can never be consummated because of inherent impossibility or employment of inadequate or ineffectiveness [Music] so subjectively he is there's a crime is a criminal of objective leaders no crime to begin okay what else let's look on the wire questions the codal provision very good can there be an impossible crime of adultery if the elements are within your fingertips you can easily answer that of course uh there is uh no impossible crime of adultery why because adultery is a crime against chastity possible crime is only applicable to crimes against persons or property okay veterinarian to ask for a poison on the pretext that is going to kill us when actually unknown to him puti was intending to poison pula the vet gave a putty a non-toxic solution when mixed with uh oola's food did not kill pula but uh effect he believed that it was a poison it was done impala it was a non-toxic solution what kind of fanny did putti commit so he committed impossible crime of murder okay okay so what crime putin committed the crime of impossible crime a profitable crime of murder that's a reply legal basis article for paragraph two blah blah blah and then it provides for direct questions so we discussed this one in one so the app should not be constitute as a violation of other provision of the rpc of course there is inherent evil intent and then you discuss all the elements are present in this case okay why do you say that all the elements are present in this case for one put it up of mixing a poison with pulaski would have been murder a climb against persons or property it is a climb against person or property first one will i know kill check inherently impossible yes because it was it was non-toxic solution next it does not violate under other provision of the rpc so it will not follow any other violation of the rpc and wherever puti believed that it was in possession of a poison or in fact it isn't really a non-toxic solution that was would your answer be the same if as a result of the mixture got an upset stomach and had to be hospitalized for 10 days what's your answer this time it's no longer be the same it's different already why because he already committed the crime of less physical injuries less physical injuries if the victim was got an upset tomorrow and which necessitates for him to be confined at the hospital for 10 days so union in that case it will constitute as a kind of less serious physical injuries and the requirement is that you should not violate on any provision of the rpc a tongue requirement which is not present in this case because the hospitalization hospitalization physical injuries there would they would not be liable for impossible crime but they will be liable now for less serious physical injuries beyond okay so i think uh that will be for uh [Music] today you can already stop uh recording run

okay so uh good afternoon everyone so we will be discussing on uh general principles of criminal law we'll start with criminal law so what is criminal law criminal law what is criminal law criminal law is the rancho public willow which number one it defines a crime number two uh it trades up its nature and number three it provides punishment so how would you how would you know that one is a penal law or not if it has these three elements it defines what is a crime it breaks of its nature and provides spanish so there may be a law which i you you all the while you have this mistaken belief that it's a penal law but actually it's not epinephrine because it does not provide for any punishment what is the significance why we define one as a criminal law or not because if it is a criminal law or a penal law then it is entitled to what to a liberal interpretation of the law liberal interpretation in favor of the accused and strictly against the government so if you're the council for the news and there is doubt okay so it's strictly against the government so if you're the council for the abuse and there is doubt in so far as the interpretation or construction of a specific penal law you can argue that issue it should be interpreted in favor of your client that use and strictly against the government now if if it's not a penal though then uh you cannot argue unless the law provides that it should be interpreted no in favor of your client okay next let's go to characteristics of flamingo number one this is a favorite bark question generality territoriality and prospectivity when you talk about generality is the first and the second is use entertain interchangeably by student or by a buyer candidate which should not be the case when you talk about generality the first thing that should be in your mind is that it refers to persons so that will be your guide uh generality pero young definition and territoriality no so to clarify this one just remember that generality you know in generality it refers to persons and territoriality refers to a place now we start with first so all persons but i became confused all persons living or so joining in the philippines are subject to a philippine criminal jurisdiction so all persons living or so journey in the philippines are subject to our philippine criminal jurisdiction so here comes an american uh who's an american in uh living in new york who visited the philippines only he was arrested for carrying marijuana no you cannot arrest me because i am the citizen of the usa and also under our state law in new york no we are perfectly allowed to carry marijuana so since i am an american a new yorker no you cannot charge me of that question can he is his argument correct or not of course not because in criminal law remember this criminal jurisdiction the nationality law is not uh material we refer to it adhere to the generality territoriality and prospectivity ruling so even if he's a visitor of the philippines he's subject to our penal law national law no subject to generality territoriality as well now question is this an absolute rule or not this is just a general rule always class whenever you study you have to know what is the general rule and what is the exception or rx exceptions a common problem of uh some students is that they enter they do not have the concept of what the general rule is and they are making the exception as a general rule and that's wrong except when uh under the laws of preferential application and when there is a 3p stipulation so we when the philippines uh enter into a tree care with another nation what should having a loss of preferential application what does it mean no it means that it gives preference to a particular class of person so that we begin a preference to a particular uh preference to a particular class of persons so that if you belong to this particular class of person then uh philippine courts have no jurisdiction to try the case so what could be an example of that under public international law bill so number one is the sovereigns ambassadors sovereigns our heads of faith ministers residents charge the affairs diplomats are included no but not consul but not consumed so assuming that she uh president biden president of the united states visited the philippines and he went to the u.s embassy assuming from picc so he drove this car going towards united states embassy in manila a lagrange bollywood and he hit a pedestrian unfortunately the pedestrian died so can you file a criminal case against president biden for reckless influence resulting to homicide not because of this exception loss of preferential application he being the head of the state of the united states next treaty treaty stipulation so sample could be the bfa when an american citizen u.s military personnel u.s military personnel commits a crime against a fellow u.s military personnel we do not have jurisdiction to try the case but it will be the america the united states we'll try the case but if it is within uh if if it involves a a filipino and an american u.s military personnel catholic pemberton then um you can try the case if it's a criminal case it can be tried in the philippines or if it involves if it involves a crime committed against the national security of the united states committed by a uh a us military personnel then we do not also have jurisdiction to buy the case okay so let's go now to before we go into territoriality that you have to remember what is the general rule in the exception exception exception then you apply the general rule so something you you can conclude in your answer uh it being does not uh fall under any of the exceptions other the uh generality rule hence a is criminally liable because the general rule provides that all persons living or surgery in the philippines are subject to our criminal courts reality rule uh simply means that when a diamond perspective if the crime is committed all crimes have been attained so for generality all persons saving all crimes committed within the philippine territory then we have jurisdiction to try the case philippine has jurisdiction to try the case ergo and this general rule therefore all crimes committed outside la bas philippines outside the philippines then we have no jurisdiction to so that's a general rule all crimes committed within the philippine territory philippine courts have no jurisdiction courts have jurisdiction to try the case plans committed outside the philippine territory no jurisdiction ex except that this being a general rule there is an exception to this exception that which is provided under article 2 of the revised penal code so these are instances where although it's outside the philippine jurisdiction committed outside the philippine jurisdiction yet we have a philippine territory yet philippine courts have jurisdiction to try the case okay and there's follows so exception number one should commit an offense while on a philippine ship or airship should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency notes and obligations and securities issued by the government of the philippines so the second paragraph refers to a forger and counterfeiter number three is should be liable for the introduction of the obligations and securities mentioned in the preceding article it simply means that it refers to a smuggler who smuggled the obligations and securities which was forged and counterfeited outside the philippines though and while being a public officer should commit an accredit in relation to his office and number five he should commit a crime against the law of nations against national security and the law of nations remember these exceptions there are particular also other rule other laws that uh express state that it has an extra extra territorial application that will now the anti-terrorism law that will be one now if it is not stated then if it does not fall under any of the exceptions then you apply the general rule which is uh we do not have jurisdiction to try the case just allow me to i know to share my cool um rpc total okay look at this one you should commit an offense while on a philippine oops sorry extra territorial application or if it's being crimes committed outside the philippine territory should commit an offense while on a philippine ship or airship so how would you know that that particular uh vessel is a philippine ship or a ship so here comes a situation where perhaps latino color here comes the situation where we have the philippines and we have vietnam course we don't adhere to the nine dash roll by china or here comes a vessel on the high seas i say it's neither in within the territory of uh either of any nation normally we do not have jurisdiction to try the case right but if it is a philippine ship then we have jurisdiction to try the case so what the term means whether it's a philippine ship or airship it is the registration if it is registered in the philippines then it's a philippine ship if it is not registered in the philippines it's not it's not if that's registered in the philippines it's not a philippine ship so pelagon is the app of registration and that will be before the bureau of customs so for example a crime was committed inside the vessel so basically though the crew are malaysians we have also the owner and we have also where the vessel is registered the crew are malaysians the owner is a singaporean registered in indonesia filipinos uh the owner is also a filipino but the the registered in indonesia so question do we have jurisdiction to notify the case they killed b a fellow crew inside this vessel you know oh we can try the case national because what matters is where it is registered since it's registered outside the philippines in indonesia then we do not have jurisdiction to try the case next next uh in this in this vessel no the crew are malaysians the owner is a singaporean and registered in the philippines crew a a malaysian killed kruby a fellow malaysian the vessel is in the highest do we have jurisdiction in the case yes because number one uh it's that it's not the nationality of the crew nor the nationality of the owner but it is where the vessel is registered and since registered in the philippines and it is outside the philippine territory it being the highest end capture station to try the case no problem with that [Music] filipino no order is a filipino crew is a filipino registered in the philippines but it is within the jurisdiction of the philippines a killed b what do we have jurisdiction to try the case here applying the no the art of exception under our under article 2 we have jurisdiction to try the case because it's registered in the philippines and it is outside the philippines but it's not entirely correct because if the vessel is within the jurisdiction of vietnam [Music] reality principle since it is within the territory of another country then vietnam has jurisdiction to try the case that then refuses to exercise its jurisdiction then that's the time we can do so okay so if it's a very nito why on the philippines ship or hershey it connects a situation eating daniels and fraps of the west number one the patang vessel is in the high seas not within the jurisdiction of another country number two registered in the philippines if these two requirements for my these two must concur if this any of these requirements is not present then we cannot exercise the restriction if it is not registered registered in the philippines if it is not if it is within the jurisdiction of another state then we are entitled okay and what if the vessel is in the philippines is it within or outside the philippines it is within the philippines so we apply what the general rule so all crimes committed within the philippine territory now philippine called some jurisdiction to try the things when it's it's within the uh territory of the philippines you apply already the general rule if it is registered in the philippines or not important is this second situation registered in the philippines as well as uh uh it should be in the highest place registered in the philippines and in the highest if it is within the jurisdiction of another country we do not have jurisdiction to fight the case hey i hope it's clear to you next should forge or counters with any coin organization [Music] uh and as well as obligations and securities here comes a situation where see s1 s2 singaporeans forged and counterfeited our coin or fantasy notes and it was done in their country in singapore so the forger are singaporeans committed in singapore because of doing that they became wealthy rich so they decided to visit the philippines but they were arrested we cannot under the generality principle because it was committed outside the philippine territory and we are foreign are the argument raised by these two s1 and s2 cannibal of course not nationality is immaterial as we have discussed a while ago and secondly secondly because it falls squarely under the second exception where their forge or counter created corner currency notes issued by the philippine government so they can be unliable so again second is forger and counterfeit the third third speaks about the smuggler of what of the obligations and securities which was forged encountered s1 and s2 okay [Music] after they forge or counters you can s [Music] s3 s3 is a smuggler in addition that you did not counterfeit you get that counterfeited account forge but they smuggled these obligations and securities uh mentioned in the preceding article so it's it's not corner currency note under the third paragraph no it already deleted coin in cars you know so it's only applicable to obligations and securities i obligations and securities so we are we have here in the high seas [Music] [Music] which was forged and counterfeited in my country so mankind [Music] you have no juristic jurisdiction to try me in the philippines because no i never entered the philippine territory it was our uh transaction took place in the isis is that then a wall or not it's not because it happened it was clearly under the third paragraph because he opted to introduce to smuggle this obligation insecurities which was forged by his friend application a third paragraph now a philippine charities of state pcs or issued [Music] [Music] number four while being a public officer should commit or employees should commit an opinion in the exercise of your faction so antano um does it follow that any crime committed by a public officer of god can be tried in the philippines no not every crime committed by a public officer or employee can be tried in the philippines why because it's very clear that their paragraph 4 should commit an offense in the exercise of their function so in a big subject the client that they committed should be connected in the exercise of their function so this is what this material what is material so if the crime is not in the exercise of their function then we apply the general rule crimes committed outside the philippine territory we do not have jurisdiction to try the case but if the crime is connected in the exercise of their duties or functions then we have an extra extra territorial application they can be tried in the philippines so this can be viewed if for example in in a particular embassy abroad a disbursing officer was a singapore cb is a dispersing officer in other words and he misappropriated this public funds independent as salaries of his co-employees can he be tried in the philippines if that act of bull bursting misappropriating happened outside the philippine territory no uh yes because the app is committed with the exercise of their functions december 4 philippine courts have jurisdiction to try the case [Music] withdraw i know five thousand singapore dollars because i need that secretary is seven thousand pesos seven thousand singaporean dollars she pocketed [Music] the crime is staffan okay is it in the exercise of their function no no it's it's not pertussis ambassador so in that case she uh she cannot be tried in the philippines because the app that she performed you know was committed not in the exercise of her function number five to commit an offense against national security and the law of nations [Music] okay so limbaugh we have uh hong kong china then we have the philippines now assuming that there is a rebellion an ongoing rebellion in the philippines so here comes a sympathizer by the name of x people chase arms in hong kong to be delivered in the philippines to support what to support um the rebellion being committed in the philippines now he was apprehended and firearms though he sent firearms are sent in the philippines so he was when he went back to the philippines he was arrested now he was selected for obstacle making in hong kong for chasing firearms and to support rebellion in front of the charge was actually rebellion [Music] yes sir because rebellion now is a crime against national security is that correct because if it's not a crime against national security and the lost nations then we apply the general rule what is that outside the philippines then we have no jurisdiction to fight the case now rebellion is not a crime against national security it is a claim against public order so since if a crime against public order then we do not have jurisdiction to try the case the same national security and the law of nation you've got to memorize plans classified against national security and the law of nations so if the crime committed abroad would be uh piracy mutiny a tree zone then playable in the philippines because those cries would fall under the fifth paragraph remember that okay let's go let's let's go back to the third principle which is prospectivity women uh criminal laws or pain alone should be applied respectively or it looks forward [Music] so it cannot be given a retroactive application no retroactive application it's not punishable and subsequently there is a law that punishes the app then it cannot be given a retroactive application no that person should not be liable now can it be given a reproactive application so there's again an exception so this is the general rule no reproductive application there's also the exception or exception where it can be thinner loss can be given a retroactive application and what are those instances number one exception the only one exception is if it is a boy that's only an exception this one so if before he was convicted for 10 years 10 years already serving the same for three years but subsequently a law that was passed you know uh shortening the uh the penalty to be imposed instead of 10 years when he began a london two years at oca the next servant in three years can be can now ask to be released no because what it's fabulous favorable to the accused if you can remember the case of robin padilla uh he was uh convicted of illegal possession of fire so subjectively there was a loan penalty for illegal possession specifically for that that he was tried and convicted so he was released but uh there is false there are exceptions to the exception i know even so quite shy even if if the law is fair valuable favorable to the abuse but if number one [Music] he is a habitual delinquent and number two if the law provides otherwise then it cannot be given reproductive application no application to him now let's go to um beauties of criminal law number one is classical number two is possibilities okay classical yes freedom he is responsible in exercising that freedom and if in the exercising such freedom he committed the crime then you have to be responsible so the there's a specific punishment if we committed the crime the purpose of the punishment is for retribution so but this is this is the classical and so first positive is cute is concerned no uh mandau is imbued with a strange overpowered by a strange morbid phenomenon which compels him to do something which is against his own volition and what is the purpose of punishment in positivities the purpose is for platform reformation so on a question to what purely we basically no we adhere to the classical theory but in some provisions that we have we adhere to we adopted the positive visibility like what um the mitigating circumstances right mitigator mitigating circumstances if present would lessen the penalty to its low minimum period divide there's one theory also which is the mixed theory which is the combination of the classical as well as the positivistic let's discuss about uh vessel in the philippines we're talking about when a philippine ship are registered in the philippines but outside the philippines so number one if it's a pouring a foreign vessel but not registered in the philippines so we have a foreign warship and we have a foreign version special okay let's put this in a particularly so this is the philippines okay this is the territory of the philippines down here is australia so there's a specific uh private cargo ship from hong kong ordered to be delivered the car goes to be delivered in australia is [Music] that's one scenario the other scenario would be uh the car goes coming from hong kong and where the port of destination is manila okay there is a crime committed within that foreign merchant vessel now if if the philippines is [Music] then uh we apply uh since it's it's it's within the philippine territory we apply the the territoriality rule where crimes committed within the philippines we have jurisdiction to try the case now in the first scenario it's only in transit it will only pass through the philippines and the port of destination is another country which is australia so the vessel is in transit in the philippines so what is the rule you go for a suffering merchant vessel is concerned so we could either apply the english rule or the french rule now under those into instances general rule up and there's also an exception general rule in english rule no the host country has jurisdiction the host country has jurisdiction to try the things except one involves purely internal management purely internal management then we did not have jurisdiction but the general rule is you the host country has jurisdiction to try the case and french rule no jurisdiction host country has the jurisdiction except one involves uh what uh bridge bridge of public you know and the vessel is in transit in the philippines applying the english rule do we have jurisdiction to try the case country has unless it falls the exception so they let's determine if it falls under the exception then we have no juris host country has no jurisdiction if it does not fall under the exception no if it does that fall under the exception then we apply the general rule in which case the host country has jurisdiction acp antano uh will fall under the exception is does it truly involve do you consider that as purely internal management indeed so in which case we will apply the uh english rule the general rule of the english rule so we have jurisdiction to try the case applying the general rule of the english rule french rule host country no jurisdiction except it involves rich of public safety or order yes at stake so we have jurisdiction to try the crime applying the exception to the french rule so whether it's the english rule friendship we will arrive at the same conclusion except that we arrive at the uh that we have jurisdiction in english rule because we're applying its general rule applying the french rule we have the jurisdiction but because of the exception provided during philippines at the adhere to the english rule hello guys is the port of destination so we don't have to we have jurisdiction to try the case applying the territoriality principles landed in the philippines so illegal importation here from under comprehensive drugs now but if it's uh passing through the philippines no we have no jurisdiction to try it now if it is being smoked young pernicious effect [Music] military vessel is done in in in uh so big do we have jurisdiction to tie the case well you can argue about the exception on the bfa gritty and you can also provide for this one a warship is an extension of the flag it carries since it's there is the u.s flood and it is a warship no it's an extension of the u.s and we do not have uh therefore jurisdiction to fly the case okay thanks let's go to constitutional limitation once the tuition and limitation so we all know that congress is just a creation of our constitution so all those enacted whether it's a penal law or any other law like an admin law a commercial lawsuit below should conform to the provision of our fundamental fundamental law which is the constitution so it cannot congress cannot enact a law that violates the provision of the constitution so what what are those guaranteed under the bill of rights no process the right to be heard so individual bill of attenders no bill of attenders also a limitation will have a tender just membership in the communist party would already entail punishment without any judicial trial another limitation is uh of course this one exposed below when it punishes enough it punishes a person who committed an app which at the time that he committed the same is not punishable so we also have a presumption of innocence all of use is presumed to be imogen now notice that let me just drive the point perception is just a presumption which can be reported enjoys the presumption of innocence so the prosecution has the duty to rebut and how do you rebut them by addressing evidence of quantum of evidence which is proof beyond reasonable health the goal of the prosecution is to rebuttal presumption by presenting proof by quantum of evidence of proof beyond reasonable doubt destroying presumption and then he's guilty now if you are the accused what will be your anonymous uh if you're the council productions you're the defense so inject a reasonable doubt like adulthood prosecution evidentiary not evidential but it is not properly unreasonable now there is reasonable doubt so for medicinal doubt the presumption stands for so what else uh of course other consequences limitation the right to a council and the right to and of course it can be ex cross examined by the accused and a lot of other [Music] constitutional limitation under the bill of rights so we're true with the general provisions so we would proceed now to felonies let's go to felons let me switch here calories are completed not only by visit punishable by law are felonies the law this is not anti-local knowledge but you see the law referred to here is the device speed and group [Music] apps and omissions punishable by their vice pedal code are felonies so special though we don't call it as a felony call it as an offense or a crime in general when you talk about any bodily movement that which produces effect in the external world but auditions by doing nothing you can convey the crime yes if you hit a pedestrian by accident you have the duty under the rpc to render assistance if you fail to render assistance to your to the victim then you can make life health liable because there can be a felony by omission when you talk about omission what are the requisites there must be a law that requires the performance of property particular app under a particular circumstance number two there is failure to perform so there is a law that mandates or requires to perform and have to perform a particular act so remember that now remember in the in the philippines we have we uh have this principle that there is no crime when there is no law that punishes the same you remember this one um [Music] why there are cases where you will be asked you will be thinking [Music] then you can use it as your answer he is not criminally liable no because his app was not punished by any other law because we followed the rule that the men [Music] there's no crime when there is punishing the act x on june 1 and to be executed on june 10 when june 10 comes it was only b who appeared they did not appear so b killed x pursuant to their conspiracy now b was arrested and subsequently was charged and they discovered you know upon investigation that uh a was also acting in conspiracy with the person with b so they also charge a is a criminally like so the only participation of a is by agreeing on june 1 and they starting to commit the same so is that punishable in other words is there a claim of conspiracy to commit murder [Music] okay let's go dolo and culpa so there is the zip and there is there is the seat and there is a how do we differentiate one from the other so we have dolo we have kulpa common element is freedom intelligence and third intent when you talk about internet what do you mean that means it could be malice evil intent [Music] there's also freedom intelligence but they differ on the third element in that menu improves negligence lack of foresight and lack of skill so antanang if you are the prosecution it is your duty to prove this element especially if it's you have to prove the [Music] criminal intent the element of elements of the crime and that they accuse intelligence and also freedom now what is the duty of the prosecutor the defense for defense i will negate any one of this element of history right no criminal negative how do you indicate freedom uh it is instable first alumni irresistible force is what it is an exempting circumstance if present there's no criminal label intelligence a 10 year old child who stabbed his classmate  no and died young is there a crime committed yes because somebody died is there criminal ability on the part of 8 no because he's 10 year old child he lacks intelligence under the juvenile ingest justice welfare up if the age of the child is 15 or below there is no criminal liability in 10 how do i negate intent as a public attorney's office how do you i dispute malice evil intent but in that very specific intent class [Music] is [Music] there is a deprivation of one's liberty or freedom now how do i negate bad faith so initiate collato [Music] good faith is a proper defense in somebody was charged of murder and i am now claiming that he is acting to defend himself self-preservation so what does it mean no self-defense no criminal ability now when it's culpa the same two elements except that there's improvements languages lack of foresight and lack of skill when you talk about negligence there is it refers to perception deficiency of perception you talk about importance deficiency of action now how a proper defense in reckless improvements so here comes a person driving acting in good faith the speed limit is 20 but his speed at that time while he was driving his motor vehicle 35 kilometers per hour and he hit a pedestrian uh is he criminally liable servant defense counsel acting in good faith not criminally liable okay a person may be acting in good faith but he can be negligent a person has no intention to kill another person not to run over a particular pedestrian but he is negligent obviously his negligence he is overspeeding the speed limit is 25 and this is driving around 35 kilometers per hour [Music] good faith is not a proper defense [Music] so what could the gate impedance languages and levels improve the opposite of dangling these things animal opposite that exercise one exercise of do diligence [Music] exercise caution on an extra flex yeah okay so uh that's a proper defense salvenia no i dispute that my speed [Music] foreign and he appeared so sudden because he was touching his ball was going after the ball that went out so it was not the fault of the driver okay next we also should discuss on [Music] uh article 3 which is mistake of the case of people versus actions mistake of there is no criminal liability in this case now there's no criminal liability in this case so you can raise that as a proper defense as opposed to that of mistake in identity where it falls under article four paragraph one for there is criminal liability [Music] [Music] which is empty somebody was uh banging on the door this person was banging on this door so action was afraid because there were incidents already a friend communicated in the neighborhood in the vicinity so he asked him who are you but the question left unanswered [Music] is an intruder so fearful for his life now what he did is to stop this person it turned out that that person is his friend his roommate playing jokes on him but unfortunately he died so much again a normal defense of this type of fight and he will actually was acquitted actually because of this one so anu that erased number three requisite which you need to memorize this app would have been lawful this app would have been lawful had the facts being as they accuse believe it to be this axe would have been lawful had the facts been as that is believed to be what does it mean if indeed x is an intruder just as uh thought about this person then his act of stabbing him this egg would have been no food second his intent is lawful as well so there was no intent to kill actually x the only was sleeping so it was only defending himself so it's a self-defense on the part of acho and thirdly is without negligence or carelessness on his part carelessness and without negligence how was it shown he was having action he asked question who are you but the question was left unanswered so with these three requisites present then there is the sake of fact then there is no criminal [Music] player when you talk about venezuela what does it [Music] up okay criminal mind and criminal out if there is only a criminal mind without claiming no criminal ability if there's only a criminal act without criminal uh mind then no criminal ability in other words that what these two must concur comments real criminal mind without criminal you can think of any crime so he knews but if it stays in the mind there is no overcloud not even a preparatory no criminal ability criminal up parabola criminal mind yes you know example that i gave you young minor when the minor 10 year old child stabbed and killed his fellow classmate is there why because he's less than 15 years of age so going for the prosecution so let's go to another topic which is uh article 4 article 4 speaks about how criminal liability is concurred how is criminal liability incurred criminal liability is called [Music] under uh article for two success which is by committing a felony although the wrongful have done be different from that which intended the second one is what when the when a person has performed an act which would be an offense against persons or property or if not for its inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of employment of inadequate and [Music] in effectual means i'm looking for another mind another slide okay good i'm so i'm saying sorry to you my book so this is intended again to supplement because sabokuli justice is unknown substantive law but it doesn't show how many times a particular question was asked in the workshop it does not show also an example of a bar question and it does that show how uh the suggested answer should be uh how the answer should be given i'll take the new zero one zero zero three four five six eleven thirteen fifteen so today is twenty twenty one uh [Music] most probably this can be asked many times this was asked so put a circuit with a star on this one now since this is a favorite question did not know how many [Music] so one problem no how are felonies committed 2015 no problem google provision memorize that you have already points there are also other questions standing for the night let's go to article 4 how many times you can see that 99 blah blah blah 9 11 12 13 14 15 18 and the opinion if this is 17 19 18 21 21 most probably foreign no problem with uh [Music] just uh you should know this already because aberrations and or personally better intentions all uh come from article 4 paragraphy by committing a felony what kind of a felony we know that there is dolo and there's pulpa which one one of them to apply a paragraph one of article four i mean although they're all wrongful death done be different from that which intended for the intention ergo this is applicable to only to not kulpa so applicable anxiety so n a not applicable to number one [Music] not applicable to spl not applicable to if a person is performing a no full out panel [Music] a was after the wall so he has to face age and there are so many bystanders so luckily for big uh we thought no he got hold of the knife to defend himself but instead of stabbing him away to be so he threw that knife away unfortunately there was a bystander by the name of x is this applicable well under the present circumstance that any person committing a felony uh should be liable although the wrongful app done be different from that which up only intended of throwing the knife to stop the aggression a climb no it's not a plan it's perfectly what defending himself so if a person is exercising a lawful act then he's not liable even if x is tight such an accident well i should be assuming that there's kulfa why because he knew that there are a lot of people and getting through this knife yet this is still not okay so careful with that [Music] now out of out of this would uh come mistake of mistake [Music] in identity one question differentiate mistaken identity from mistake of fact mistake of identity there is criminal ability in mistake of fact there is no clinical legality basis of mistaken identity is article 4 paragraph 1 this is of a mistake of is in the blog mistake in identity is uh error in person name now remember that there are two persons only at the scene of the time she is because he usually uh goes into that it passes through this street every night after office so he waited for b and he awakened to kill b so somebody passed through this street and a knowing believing it was b so stop this person unfortunately it was not be but another person cc so there are two persons present ca at cc but a believe that c at the beginning that it was b so there is mistake in identity and there is criminal ability [Music] because i was just intending to kill b is his argument uh correct or not no because when he waited he was planning to commit no he's planning to feel you know a person but it turned out that it was not give us another person when you talk about mistake in the blog there are three persons present at the scene of the flight ca cv they intended to kill me so he fired and shot at me it hit me the bullet passed through me to magos and hit another person too by the name by c so how what's the magic word in mistake in the blue a magic word yet is lack of precision because of black operations precision tomogram sir can it be a complex crime yes it can ripen into a complex crime if as a result there are two or more grave or less grave felonies which was produced okay so complex is the last where the injury went beyond what was intended the a his intention is only just unfortunately b fell down and died so the injury went or beyond or uh injury is greater than that or beyond that which was intended this will result into one a mitigating stats mitigating circumcision under paragraph three of article 13 which is mitigating lack of intent to commit or wrong no intent to commit so grave around so that's a mitigating circumstance when there is a notorious disparity between the app offender and the resulting felony so uh disparity which is total disparity the act of slapping and the resulting literally which is the death of me okay now and also uh under paragraph 3 let me continue i'm sorry paragraph a of arctic l4 it speaks about proximate cause sabina then he who is the cause of the boss is the cause of the evil cause so a person who is performing a dollar or a intentional felony a person who commits intentional felony is liable for what liable for dnl direct natural and logical consequences of his unknown fallout liable for the resulting injury and the person who commits intentional felony is liable for the direct natural and logical consequences with a resulting injury so [Music] passenger jeep prosecuted for the depth of x r1 and r2 said that they're not liable because they did that kill x they have no intention to kill ex in a person who is performing i don't know intellectual family all that is liable for its direct natural logical consequences so of that if there was no declaration of orgasm ex would not have been afraid and would not have come out of the passenger ship but remember that um us is a person liable for all the [Music] consequences of his unknown there's a person who commits an intentional felony liable for all the consequences of visa no no why he is only liable for dnl which is the direct natural logical consequences of islamophobia if the resulting injury is not from it's not the direct it's not that natural it's not the logical consequences of islam then there is no uh this is not applicable now if it is an intervening cause not liable only for the app or apps committed that's uh approximate cause applying dna beta 1 dnld a slab b i inflicted physical injury on the version of uh he deliberately immerses them on a poisonous water contaminated water knowing that the sand is uh wonder and because of that because of this app he died question piece question is a criminally liable for the death of me no it's got approximate cause there was an intervening cause c because b deliberately immerses sand on a poisonous water knowing that it's poisonous for any reason so not liable because it's not approximate because so does it follow that a is stat3 no it's reliable what will be the liability of a liability of a is for the up the tickle me that and what is that the up of slapping b that's it nothing more nothing less okay we will go to the last topic which is crime but before that that's why i want you to have a copy of my book it's because of this favorite topic again and yet and then at least you would know how to be familiar when this was asked you follow the form of free luck reply apply legal basis application conclusion okay again reply legal basis application and c stands for conclusion let's analyze bar question 2004 on his way home from b office disney road chimney grenade is xx liable for c system i will teach you on how to present your answer reply you always have to know what is the last question is extremely reliable for sisu's death okay so you reply directly to that okay yes xx is criminally liable for the death of jesus next legal basis article 44 paragraph 1 states that criminal law science ourselves also a valentine legal basis okay check out and declared the whole time it created an immediate sense of danger in the mind of syria that's the application lastly conclusion consequently the death of cc caused by fear from ceases out makes the latter criminally liable even if the result is different from that from his own intention that was we applied if you are used to this you will not even be thinking of what's next or next it will be automatic so you need to i know to practice now xx is criminally reliable because article 41 states that blah blah so you can already put these two into one sentence legal basis uh application up again conclusion is just a repetition of your apply coach in different terms minimum copy paste so xx yes xx is criminally liable for that of cc okay uh it makes the latter criminally reliable even if the result is different from that which is unintentional it's [Music] an application but if you have time if you want to impress the examiner then you will be given a full credit for this one take the last one by any person performing enough which would be an offensive this is impossible crime and which is also asked several times in the bar exams what are the requisites of impossible threat that's about the lien no performing enough which would benefit against persons or property ergo an impossible crime limited language a person's applying against persons or property if it is not a climb against persons of property do not apply our paragraph two so say hey yes is what crime napping is a crime against uh personal liberty and it's not a crime against persons of property so what are the crimes classified or falling under grabs against persons you also have to memorize memory strengths against proper dreams no what else against persons or property what other requisites there is inherent in possibility of its accomplishment or an account of employment of inadequate or ineffectual means when you talk about inherent impossibility there are two kinds legal impulsive legal impossibility as well as physical impossibility legal impossibility can you [Music] steal a watch that belongs to you no why because it's yours physical impossibility can you kill a person who's already dead no why because he's already dead but there is inherent impossibility so a intended to kill b it turned out that one hour before be suffered a heart attack and already died there is inherent impossibility if they knew at that time that he stopped and uh b that b was already there then forget about the application of this one it's not impossible right employment of inadequate or ineffectual means i'm sorry and that is unknown to a there is in this case okay employment of inadequate means if a knew at that time that it is an inadequate then forget about the application of impossible right employment of ineffectual means aggregation and substance he all the while thought that it was poison in impala it was only sugar it was only sugar so employment of ineffectual means but a should know that it's it's uh a poison if you knew it's it's it's only sugar then a possible crime is not applicable of course there's number four which is not included in the total provision so the app must not be punished not punished [Music] or not constitute as a crime uh it does not constitute as a crime uh under other provision of the rpc or it's not punished under other provision of the rpc if that app constitutes a supply then it's not impossible right of course there should be evil or criminal intent a intended to kill b nipah house language uh a week ago just to look for his mother but although he thought that he was in in his neighborhood so after a few days she planned on feeling big he burned his house off with the momentum bird but that and he does not know that he did not know at the time he was already in malaysia is there impossible question no why because that that app is already punished under other provision of the rpc the client that he committed is that impossible crime but his app is already arsenal so it's already arson so we have to be very careful in that um uh how do you differentiate the natanza by impossible crime from frustrated or attempted attempted at frustrated susceptible of being consummation how do you say that because um attempted no it can be consummated were it not for uh for reasons other than his own spontaneous desistance for instance other than his own spontaneous decisions the other one is what you really have to set aside the time you cannot drive you cannot go into the office and this is not for compliance purposes i just like to remind everyone okay number two sonata uh it can never be frustrated as well and it can never be frustrated frustrating so frustrated is susceptible of being questionated word that for uh acts independent of the will of the perpetrator it can never be consummated because of inherent impossibility or employment of inadequate or ineffectiveness [Music] so subjectively he is there's a crime is a criminal of objective leaders no crime to begin okay what else let's look on the wire questions the codal provision very good can there be an impossible crime of adultery if the elements are within your fingertips you can easily answer that of course uh there is uh no impossible crime of adultery why because adultery is a crime against chastity possible crime is only applicable to crimes against persons or property okay veterinarian to ask for a poison on the pretext that is going to kill us when actually unknown to him puti was intending to poison pula the vet gave a putty a non-toxic solution when mixed with uh oola's food did not kill pula but uh effect he believed that it was a poison it was done impala it was a non-toxic solution what kind of fanny did putti commit so he committed impossible crime of murder okay okay so what crime putin committed the crime of impossible crime a profitable crime of murder that's a reply legal basis article for paragraph two blah blah blah and then it provides for direct questions so we discussed this one in one so the app should not be constitute as a violation of other provision of the rpc of course there is inherent evil intent and then you discuss all the elements are present in this case okay why do you say that all the elements are present in this case for one put it up of mixing a poison with pulaski would have been murder a climb against persons or property it is a climb against person or property first one will i know kill check inherently impossible yes because it was it was non-toxic solution next it does not violate under other provision of the rpc so it will not follow any other violation of the rpc and wherever puti believed that it was in possession of a poison or in fact it isn't really a non-toxic solution that was would your answer be the same if as a result of the mixture got an upset stomach and had to be hospitalized for 10 days what's your answer this time it's no longer be the same it's different already why because he already committed the crime of less physical injuries less physical injuries if the victim was got an upset tomorrow and which necessitates for him to be confined at the hospital for 10 days so union in that case it will constitute as a kind of less serious physical injuries and the requirement is that you should not violate on any provision of the rpc a tongue requirement which is not present in this case because the hospitalization hospitalization physical injuries there would they would not be liable for impossible crime but they will be liable now for less serious physical injuries beyond okay so i think uh that will be for uh [Music] today you can already stop uh recording run

Transcript for:Fundamentals of Criminal Law Principles

Transcript for:
Fundamentals of Criminal Law Principles