Art. 134; Rebellion vs.

Coup d'etat (2004)

Distinguish clearly but briefly: Between rebellion and coup d'etat, based on their constitutive
elements as criminal offenses.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: REBELLION is committed when a multitude of persons rise publicly in arms for
the purpose of overthrowing the duly constituted government, to be replaced by a government of the
rebels. It is carried out by force and violence, but need not be participated in by any member of the
military, national police or any public officer.

COUP D'ETAT is committed when members of the military, Philippine National Police, or public officer,

46 of 86 acting as principal offenders, launched a swift attack thru strategy, stealth, threat, violence or
intimidation against duly constituted authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, military camp or
installation, communication networks, public facilities or utilities needed for the exercise and continued
possession of governmental powers, for the purpose of seizing or diminishing state powers.

Unlike rebellion which requires a public uprising, coup d'etat may be carried out singly or simultaneously
and the principal offenders must be members of the military, national police or public officer, with or
without civilian support. The criminal objective need not be to overthrow the existing government but
only to destabilize or paralyze the existing government.

Complex Crime; Direct Assault with murder (2000)

Because of the approaching town fiesta in San Miguel, Bulacan, a dance was held in Barangay Camias.
A, the Barangay Captain, was invited to deliver a speech to start the dance. While A was delivering his
speech. B, one of the guests, went to the middle of the dance floor making obscene dance
movements, brandishing a knife and challenging everyone present to a fight. A approached B and
admonished him to keep quiet and not to disturb the dance and peace of the occasion. B, instead of
heeding the advice of A, stabbed the latter at his back twice when A turned his back to proceed to the
microphone to continue his speech. A fell to the ground and died. At the time of the incident A was
not armed. What crime was committed? Explain. (2%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER: The complex crime of direct assault with murder was committed. A, as a
Barangay Captain, is a person in authority and was acting in an official capacity when he tried to
maintain peace and order during the public dance in the Barangay, by admonishing B to keep quiet and
not to disturb the dance and peace of the occasion. When B, instead of heeding A's advice, attacked the
latter, B acted in contempt and lawless defiance of authority constituting the crime of direct assault,
which characterized the stabbing of A. And since A was stabbed at the back when he was not in a
position to defend himself nor retaliate, there was treachery in the stabbing. Hence, the death caused
by such stabbing was murder and having been committed with direct assault, a complex crime of direct
assault with murder was committed by B.
. Art 148; Direct Assault with murder (1995)

Pascual operated a rice thresher in Barangay Napnud where he resided. Renato, a resident of the
neighboring Barangay Guihaman, also operated a mobile rice thresher which he of- ten brought to
Barangay Napnud to thresh the palay of the farmers there. This was bitterly resented by Pascual, one
afternoon Pascual, and his two sons confronted Renato and his men who were operating their mobile
rice thresher along a feeder road in Napnud. A heated argument ensued. A barangay captain who was
fetched by one of Pascual's men tried to appease Pascual and Renato to prevent a violent
confrontation. However, Pascual resented the intervention of the barangay captain and hacked him to
death. What crime was committed by Pascual? Discuss fully.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: Pascual committed the complex crime of homicide with assault upon a person in
authority (Arts. 148 and 249 in relation to Art, 48, RPC). A barangay chairman, is in law (Art. 152), a
person in authority and if he is attacked while in the performance of his official duties or on the occasion
thereof the felony of direct assault is committed.

Art. 48, RPC, on the other hand, provides that if a single act produces two or more grave or less grave
felonies, a complex crime is committed. Here, the single act of the offender in hacking the victim to
death resulted in two felonies, homicide which is grave and direct assault which is less grave.

When the accused, with his hand or fist, hit

a policeman who was in the performance of his duty, in the breast and nothing more, no direct
assault is committed because the victim is only an agent of a
person in authority, the employment of force must be of serious character to show defiance of the law a
nd its representative of all hazards. However, if the victim
is a person in authority, not a mere agent, the force necessary to constitute the crime need not be serio
us, as the law with respect to the person in authority uses
the phrase “lays hands upon a person in authority.”
(U.S v. Tabiana, 37 Phil. 51; U.S. v. Gumban, 39 Phil. 76)

Q: Can the crime of direct assault be complexed with the material consequence of the unlawful
act? A: Yes, as a rule, where the spirit of the contempt or lawlessness is present, it is always
complexed with the material consequences of the unlawful act. If the unlawful act was murder or
homicide committed under circumstance of lawlessness or
contempt of authority, the crime would be direct assault with murder or homicide, as the case may be.
Illustration: Thus, if A would attack a policeman while engaged in the performance of his duties,
that of maintaining peace and order during a barangay fiesta, the crime would be murder of
homicide with direct assault depending on the presence of qualifying
circumstances in killing the victim. (People v. Abalos, 258 SCRA 253)
In one case, when the victim intervened to prevent a
violent encounter between the accused and the Ramos group, he was discharging his duty as
Barangay Captain to protect life and property and enforce law
 and order in the barrio, thus, the assault resulting in his death is homicide with direct assault.
(People v. Rillorta, 180 SCRA 102) Note: Under Art. 152 of the RPC and P.D. 299, a Barangay
Chairman is a person in authority. If only serious physical injuries have been inflicted, the crime
would be direct assault with serious physical injuries. If
the shot directed against a public officer did not hit him but he is in actual performance of duty,
the offense is attempted homicide with direct assault.