People v. Pletcha, Jr.

No. 19029-CR, 27 June 1977

Presbitero, J.
FAC!"
In the morning of June 10, 1973, eight men (all workers of Radeco
Corporation were constructing a fence made of !am!oo poles and wires on
a piece of land in "acienda #aspit allegedl$ leased !$ the Radeco
Corporation from a certain %opinco&
Claiming actual possession and ownership, appellant 'ito (letcha, Jr&, asked
the group to desist from fencing pending resur)e$ of the land he proposed,
!ut he was totall$ ignored& 'he appellant came !ack with a !olo, without an$
chance, howe)er, to actuall$ use it or threaten them, !ecause as soon as the
group saw him the$ ran awa$&
'he eight men *led the complaint for gra)e coercion under +rticle ,-. of the
Re)ised (enal Code&
'ito (letcha, Jr&, in)oking /self0help1 under +rticle 2,9 of the Ci)il Code
(gi)ing him as the owner the right to use reasona!le force to e3clude an$
person threatening his peaceful ownership in defense of the land he owns
for 19 $ears, fought o4 and pre)ented the corporation5s crew of eight men
who without an$ court order was insisting to fence four hectares of his land,
as a result of which resistance he was prosecuted and con)icted of gra)e
coercion !$ the 6unicipal Court of 6urcia 7egros 8ccidental&
'he (eople asks for a9rmance on the ground that the appellant should not
ha)e done an$thing !$ himself to resist !ut should ha)e gone to court
instead to en:oin the group of eight men from distur!ing his ownership&
#!!$%"
;hether or not the court erred in concluding that the acts of the accussed in
defense of his propert$ constituted gra)e coercion&
R$&#N'"
(es. It is a well0settled rule that /ours is a go)ernment of laws and not of
men and no person ma$ take the law into his hands&1 <ut this principle is not
a!solute&
=nder +rticle 2,9 of the Ci)il Code>
he o)ner or la)*ul possessor o* a thin+ has the ri+ht to
e,clu-e an. person *ro/ the en0o./ent an- -isposal
thereo*. For this purpose, he /a. use such *orce as /a.
be reasonabl. necessar. to repel or prevent an actual or
threatene- unla)*ul ph.sical invasion or usurpation o*
his propert..
'he +!o)e0?uoted law con*rms the right of the appellant, an owner and
lawful possessor, to use reasona!le force to repel an in)asion or usurpation,
actual, threatened or ph$sical, of his propert$& 'he principle of self0defense
and the protecti)e measures related thereto, co)ers not onl$ his life, !ut also
his li!ert$ and propert$&
he principle o* sel*-help authori1es the la)*ul possessor
to use *orce, not onl. to prevent a threatene- unla)*ul
invasion or usurpation thereo*2 it is a sort o* sel*--e*ense.
#t is la)*ul to repel *orce b. *orce. 3e )ho /erel. uses
*orce to -e*en- his possession -oes not possess b. *orce.
he use o* such necessar. *orce to protect propriet. or
possessor. ri+ht constitutes 0usti*.in+ circu/stances
un-er our Penal Co-e. 4olentino, A., Civil Co-e o* the
Philippines, 5ol. ##, %-. 1972, pp. 67-698
+c?uitted&