Case Digest:

People of the Philippines vs. Roger P. Tulin et, al.

[GR No. 111709, August 30, 2001]

FACTS:
In the evening of March 2, 1991, M/T Tabangao, a cargo vessel owned by the PNOC Shipping and
Transport Corporation, loaded with 2,000 barrels of kerosene, 2,600 barrels of regular gasoline, and
40,000 barrels of diesel oil, with a total value of P40,426,793,87, was sailing off the coast of Mindoro near
Silonay Island. Midway in its journey, seven fully armed pirates (accused in the case – Emilio Changco,
Cecilio Changco, Tulin, Loyola, Infante, etc.) boarded the ship, detained its crew and took control of the
vessel. The name “MT Tabangao” and the PNOC logo were painted over with black, then replaced with
the name “Galilee”. The ship crew was forced to sail to Singapore, where they waited for another vessel
that did not arrive. The ship went back to the port of Batangas and remained there. Eight days later, it
went back to Singapore where it met another vessel called the “Navi Pride”. Another accused, Cheong San
Hiong, supervised the Navi’s crew and received the cargo on board the MT Tabango. After the transfer of
goods were completed, MT Tabangao went back to the Philippines and the original crew members were
released by the pirates in batches. The crew was ordered not to tell the authorities about what happened.
The chief engineer of the crew, however, reported the incident to the coast guard. Afterwards, a series of
arrests took place in different parts of the Philippines. The accused that were captured are as follows:
ROGER P. TULIN, VIRGILIO I. LOYOLA, CECILIO O. CHANGCO, ANDRES C. INFANTE, and CHEONG SAN
HIONGA. An information charging the accused with Qualified piracy or Violation of the PD 532 – or the
Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law of 1974 – was filed against the accused.

ISSUE: Whether or not the accused are guilty of the crime qualified piracy.

RULING:
The accused are guilty of the crime of Qualified Theft.
Art. 122 of the Revised Penal Code, or the Piracy in General and Mutiny on the High Seas or in
Philippine Waters” provides that piracy must be committed in the high seas by any person not a member
of its complement nor a passenger thereof. It was amended by RA 7659, which broadened the law to
include offenses committed in Philippine waters. PD 532, or the Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery
Law of 1974, on the other hand, embraces any person, including a passenger or member of the
complement of said vessel in the Philippine waters. Passenger or not, member of the complement or not,
any person is covered by the law. No conflict exists among the mentioned laws. They all exist harmoniously
as separate laws. The attack on and the seizure of MT Tabangao and its cargo were committed in
Philippine waters, although the captive vessel was later brought by the pirates to Singapore, where its
cargo was off-loaded, transferred and sold. Although the disposition by the pirates of the vessel and its
cargo was not done in Philippine waters, it is still deemed part of the same act. Piracy falls under Title 1 –
Crimes against National Security and the Law of Nations of Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code. It is an
exception to the rule on territoriality in criminal law, as provided for by Article 2, Paragraph 5 of the
Revised Penal Code, which covers the scope and limitation of the effect of penal laws. Regardless of the
law penalizing the act of piracy, it remains to be a reprehensible crime against the whole world and thus,
a legitimate court of any country can have jurisdiction regarding the matter.