SOME NOTABLE FEATURES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION REGULATION ACT (RA 10591)

Introduction

On May 29, 2013, the President of the Philippines approved into law Republic Act No. 10591 otherwise known as the “Comprehensive
Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act.” The law recognizes the right of its qualified citizens to self-defense through the use of firearms
and regulates the ownership, possession, carrying, manufacture, dealing in and importation of firearms, ammunition, or parts thereof, in
order to provide legal support to law enforcement agencies in their campaign against crime, stop the proliferation of illegal firearms or
weapons and the illegal manufacture of firearms or weapons, ammunition and parts thereof.

Some Notable Features of the New Law

Some of the notable features of the new firearms law are: (1) it classified the firearms according to power, and increased the penalties
for offenses relative thereto; (2) it provides separate and lighter penalties for offenses pertaining to ammunition; (3) it likewise provides a
separate and lighter penalties for offenses pertaining to major parts of firearms; (4) it defines and punishes new offenses relating to
firearms and ammunition; (5) it provides for qualifying circumstances for the offense of possession or acquisition of firearms, and
aggravating circumstances for the use of loose firearms in the commission of a crime; (6) it regulates ownership and possession of
firearms and ammunition by qualified citizens; (7) it regulates the registration and licensing of firearms; (8) it treats use of an imitation
firearm in the commission of a crime as a real firearm; and (9) subject to an exception, it limits the registration of small arms only to
licensed citizens or juridical entities for ownership, possession and concealed carry.

Classification of firearms.

Under the new firearms law, firearms are classified into: (1) Small arms; (2) Class—A Light Weapons; and (3) Class—B Light Weapons.
Parenthetically, under the old law, firearms are classified as low-powered and high-powered, in addition to explosives, and providing
single penalties for each.

Small arms refer to firearms intended to be or primarily designed for individual use or that which is generally considered to mean a
weapon intended to be fired from the hand or shoulder, which are not capable of fully automatic bursts of discharge such as: (1) handgun,
which is a firearm intended to be fired from the hand, and it includes a pistol and a revolver;
(2) rifle, which is a shoulder firearm or designed to be fired from the shoulder that can discharge a bullet through a rifled barrel by different
actions of loading, which may be classified as lever, bolt, or self-loading; and (3) shotgun, which is a weapon designed, made or intended
to fire a number of ball shots or a single projectile through a smooth bore by the action or energy from burning gunpowder.

Class—A Light Weapons refer to self-loading pistols, rifles and carbines, submachine guns, assault rifles and light machine guns not
exceeding calibre 7.62MM which have fully automatic mode.

Class—B Light Weapons refer to weapons designed for use by two (2) or more persons serving as crew, or rifles and machine guns
exceeding calibre 7.62MM such as heavy

machine guns, handheld underbarrel and mounted grenade launchers, portable anti- aircraft guns, prortable anti-tank guns, recoilless
rifles, portable launchers of anti-tank missiles and rocket systems, portable launchers of anti-aircraft missile systems, and mortars of a
calibre of less than 100MM.

Offenses Punished.

While the old law punished basically two (2) offenses relating to firearms and explosives, without regard to the nature of the offense
whether it be possession, disposition, acquisition, manufacture or sale, the new law separated the offenses of acquisition or possession
from the offenses of manufacture, importation, or sale of firearms and ammunition and provides a higher penalty to the latter.

The following are the offenses punished under the new law:

A—Offenses relating to acquisition or possession:

(1) Unlawful acquisition or possession of firearms;

(2) Unlawful acquisition or possession of ammunition;

(3) Unlawful acquisition or possession of major parts of a firearm;

(4) Buying or possession of stolen part or material from a company engaged in the manufacture and sell of firearms and ammunition,
when the buyer or possessor is aware that such part or material was stolen (Sec. 32, par. 3);

It must be noted that the offense of unlawful possession or acquisition of ammunition of Class—A Light Weapon punished under Sec. 28
(i) was repeated under paragraph (g), which provide a lighter penalty therefor.

B—Offenses relating to manufacture, importation or sale:

(1) Unlawful manufacture, importation, sale or disposition of firearms, ammunition, major part of a firearm or ammunition, or
machinery, tool or instrument used or intended to be used in the manufacture of a firearm, ammunition or major part thereof (Sec. 32);

(2) Arms smuggling (Sec. 33);

(3) Unlawful taking, sale or disposition by labourer, worker or employee of a licensed firearms dealer parts of firearms or ammunition
which the company manufactures and sells, and other materials used by the company in the manufacture or sale of firearms or
ammunition (Sec. 32);

It is worthy of note that the possession of any machinery, tool or instrument used directly in the manufacture of firearms, ammunition, or
major parts thereof by any person whose business, employment or activity does not lawfully deal with the possession of such article shall
be prima facie evidence that such article is intended to be used in the unlawful or illegal manufacture of firearms, ammunition or parts
thereof. It is doubtful, however, whether possession of such machinery, tool or instrument is punished by the first paragraph of Section
32. What is punished by said paragraph is the unlawful manufacture, importation, sale or disposition of machinery, tool or instrument. It
hardly includes as punishable intent to use machinery, tool or instruments intended to be used for the manufacture of firearms and
ammunitions.

C—Other related offenses:

(1) Carrying of firearms outside of residence without legal authority (Sec. 31);

(2) Tampering, Obliteration or Alteration of Firearms Identification (Sec. 34);

(3) Planting of firearms, ammunition or parts thereof as evidence (Sec. 38);

(4) Failure to notify lost or stolen firearm (Sec. 40);

(5) Illegal transfer or registration of firearm (Sec. 41); and

(6) Fraudulent facilitating the registration of a firearm by a public officer (Sec. 41, 2nd par.).

Qualifying or Aggravating Circumstances.

Circumstances relating to possession. — The offenses of acquisition or possession of short arms and/or Class—A Light Weapons may
be qualified by the possession of three or more short arms or Class—A Light Weapons, in which case the penalty shall be reclusion
temporal to reclusion perpetua.

Illegal possession of short arms or Class—A Light Weapons may also be qualified by any or combination of the following conditions
namely:

(1) When the firearm is loaded with ammunition or inserted with a loaded magazine;

(2) When the firearm is fitted or mounted with laser or any gadget used to guide the shooter to hit the target such as thermal weapon
sight (TWS) and the like;

(3) When it is fitted with sniper scopes, firearm muffler or firearm silencer;
(4) When it is accompanied with an extra barrel; and

(5) When it is converted to be capable of firing full automatic bursts.

In such cases, the penalty shall be one (1) degree higher than that provided for offense, and the offense may be called Qualified Illegal
Possession of Firearms.

Circumstances relating to use.—The use of a loose firearm, when inherent in the commission of a crime punishable under the Revised
Penal Code or other special laws, such as, for example, murder or homicide, shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance.
However, if the crime committed is penalized by law with a maximum penalty lower than the penalty for illegal possession of firearm, the
penalty for the latter shall be imposed in lieu of the penalty for the crime charged. On the other hand, if the penalties are equal, the penalty
of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed in addition to the penalty imposed against the offender for the crime committed
(Sec. 29).

Notably, if the firearm used in the commission of a crime is licensed, the use of such firearm shall not be considered as an aggravating
circumstance. If there be any violation of the law, it shall be treated as a distinct and separate offense (Sec. 29), as, for instance, carrying
of the firearm outside of residence without authority therefor.

Penalties.

The penalties for the various offenses punished by the law are as follows:

A.As to simple possession or acquisition of:

1. Small arms- Prision mayor in its medium period.

2. Class—A light weapon- Prision mayor in its maximum period.
3. Class—B light weapon- Reclusion perpetua.
4. Major part of small arm- Prision mayor in its minimum period.
5. Major part of Class—A light weapon- Prision mayor in its medium period.
6. Major part of Class—B light weapon- Prision mayor in its maximum period.
7. Ammunition of small arm- Prision mayor in its minimum period.
8. Ammunition of Class—A light weapon- Prision mayor in its medium period.
9. Ammunition of Class—B light weapon- Prision mayor in its maximum period.

Note must be taken of the fact that possession or acquisition of ammunition of Class— A light weapon was twice mentioned in the law,
that is, Sec. 28(g) and Sec. 28(i). It is,
however, believed that the insertion of the words “Class—A light weapon” in par. (g) is a clerical error.

Moreover, if the violation on possession or acquisition of ammunition is committed by the same person charged with unlawful possession
or acquisition of firearm, the possession of ammunition is absorbed in the unlawful possession of the firearm.

B.As to qualified possession or acquisition of:

1. Three or more small arms or Class—A light weapon- Reclusion temporal to Reclusion perpetua.

C. As to manufacture, importation, sale or disposition of firearms, etc.:

1. Unlawful manufacture, importation, sale or disposition of firearm, ammunition, or major part of firearm or ammunition, or machinery,
tool or instrument intended to be used for in the
manufacture of firearm, ammunition or major part thereof- Reclusion temporal to Reclusion perpetua.
2. Unlawful taking, sale, or disposal by labourer, worker, or employee of licensed firearms dealer of parts of firearms or ammunition which
the company manufactures and sells, and other materials used by the company in the manufacture and
sale of firearms and ammunition- Prision mayor in its minimum period to prision mayor in its medium period.
3. Arms smuggling- Reclusion perpetua.

D.As to other offenses:

1. Carrying of firearms outside of residence without legal authority- Prision correccional and fine of P10,000.00
2. The buyer or possessor of such stolen part or material who is aware of the fact of stealing- Prision mayor in its minimum period to
prision mayor in its medium period.
3. Tampering, obliterating or Altering of Firearms Identification- Prision correccional to Prision mayor in its minimum period.
4. Planting of evidence by ordinary person- Prision mayor in its maximum period.
5. Planting of evidence by public officer- Reclusion perpetua.
6. Failure to notify lost or stolen for firearm or light weapon- 10,000.00 pesos
7. Illegal transfer/registration of firearms- Prision correccional.
8. Facilitating registration of firearm through fraud, deceit or misrepresentation or submission of falsified documents- Prision correccional.

Other Matters.

The other notable features of the new law are the following:

1. Use of imitation firearm. An imitation firearm used in the commission of a crime shall be considered a real firearm and the offender
shall be punished in accordance with the new law. An imitation firearm refers to a replica of a firearm, or other device that is so
substantially similar in coloration and overall appearance to an existing firearm as to lead a reasonable person to believe that such
imitation firearm is a real firearm (Sec. 3(q)).
2. Custodia legis. During the pendency of any case filed in violation of the Act, seized firearm, ammunition, or parts thereof, machinery,
tool or instruments shall remain in the custody of the court (Sec. 36). This provision runs afoul with ordinary criminal procedure in which
object evidence shall remain under the custody of the prosecution until it is offered in evidence after the termination of its presentation of
testimonial evidence.

Registration of firearms.

Only small arms may be registered by licensed citizens or licensed juridical entities for ownership, possession and concealed carry.
However, private individuals who already have licenses to possess Class—A light weapons upon the effectivity of the Act shall not be
deprived of the privilege to continue possessing the same and renewing the licenses therefor (Sec. 10). The licensed citizen or juridical
entity shall register his purchased firearms with the Firearms and Explosive Office of the Philippine National Police (Sec. 11). The license
granted shall include the license to possess ammunition with a maximum of fifty (50) rounds for each registered firearms (Sec. 12).
Except a certified gun collector, the maximum number of registered firearms a qualified citizen may own and possession is fifteen (15)
(Sec. 9).

Qualifications for the issuance of firearms license.

In order to qualify and acquire a license to own firearms and ammunition, the applicant must be: (1) Filipino citizen; (2) at least twenty-
one (21) years old; and (3) has gainful work, occupation or business or has filed an Income Tax Return (ITR) for the preceding year.

In addition, the applicant shall submit various certifications from the appropriate authorities (see Sec. 4).

Conditions for the issuance of permit to carry firearms.

A permit to carry firearms outside of residence shall be issued by the Chief of the PNP or his duly authorized representative to any
qualified person whose life is under actual threat or his life is in imminent danger due to the nature of her profession, occupation of
business.
The burden of proving actual threat lies with the applicant by submitting a threat assessment certificate from the PNP.

For purposes of the Act, the following professionals are considered to be in imminent danger due to the nature of their profession,
occupation or business: (a) Members of the Philippine Bar; (b) CPAs; (c) Accredited Media Practitioners; (d) Cashiers, Bank Tellers; (e)
Priests, Ministers, Rabbi, Imams; (f) Physicians and Nurses; (g) Engineers; and (h) Businessmen,

who by the nature of their business or undertaking are exposed to high risk of being targets of criminal elements.
ARTICLE 3 SECTION 2 OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION

The right of a man, together with his love-ones, is protected by the Bill of Rights under Article 3, Section 2 of the Philippine Constitution.
It states that,

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever
nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be
determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce,
and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

As a general rule, before a police officer can arrest or search a person, he must validly first secure a warrant of arrest or search warrant.
Without it, any evidence that can be obtained by such shall become inadmissible evidence in court.

Elements of a good evidence

• It must be relevant
• It must be material
• It must be competent
Requisites for a valid warrant of arrest or search warrant

1. There should be probable cause

2. It must be personally determined by a judge
3. It should be examined under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witness he may produce.
4. Place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized should be particular, not general.

Only party affected may contest legality of seizure effected by search warrants.—Officers of certain corporations, from which documents,
papers and things were seized by means of search warrants, have no cause of action to assail the legality of the seizures because said
corporations have personalities distinct and separate from those of said officers. The legality of a seizure can be contested only by the
party whose rights have been impaired thereby. The objection to an unlawful search is purely personal and cannot be availed of by third
parties.

When illegally seized evidence is admissible.—Officers of certain corporations cannot validly object to the use in evidence against them
of the documents, papers and things seized from the offices and premises of the corporations since the right to object to their admission
in evidence belongs exclusively to the corporations, to which the seized effects belong, and may not be invoked by the corporate officers
in proceedings against them in their individual capacity.

Requisites for issuing search warrants.—The Constitution provides that no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause, to be determined
by the judge, and that the warrant shall particularly describe the things to be seized.

General search warrants.—Search warrants, issued upon applications stating that the natural and juridical persons therein named had
committed a violation of Central Bank laws, tariff and customs laws, Tax Code and Revised Penal Code do not satisfy the constitutional
requirements because no specific offense had been alleged in said applications. It was impossible for the judges, who issued the
warrants, to have found the existence of probable cause, which presupposes the introduction of competent proof that the party against
whom it is sought has performed particular acts or committed specific omissions in violation of a specific penal provision.

Why general warrants are outlawed.—General search warrants are outlawed because they place the sanctity of the domicile and the
privacy of communication and correspondence at the mercy of the whims, caprice or passion of peace officers.

Provision of Revised Rules of Court.—To prevent the issuance of general warrants, the Supreme Court amended the Old Rules of Court
by providing in the Revised Rules of Court that “no search warrant shall issue for more than one specific offense”.

Warrants not describing particularly the things to be seized.—Search warrants authorizing the seizure of books of accounts and records
“showing all the business transactions” of certain persons, regardless of whether the transactions were legal or illegal, contravene the
explicit command of the Bill of Rights that the things to be seized should be particularly described and defeat its major objective of
eliminating general warrants. [Stonehill vs. Diokno, 20 SCRA 383(1967)]
Warrant-less Arrests

1. In flagrante delicto
2. Hot pursuit
3. Escapee
Warrant-less Searches

1. Search incident to lawful arrest

2. Arrest precedes search
3. Consented Search
4. Plain-view search
5. Checkpoints
6. Administrative Searches
7. At airports

ISSUANCE OF SEARCH WARRANT

The requisites for the issuance of a search warrant are:

(1) probable cause is present;
(2) such probable cause must be determined personally by the judge;
(3) the judge must examine, in writing and under oatn or affirmation, the complainant and the witnesses he or she may produce;
(4) the applicant and the witnesses testify on the facts personally known to them; and
(5) the warrant specifically describes the place to be searched and the things to be seized.

Necessarily, a motion to quash a search warrant may be based on grounds extrinsic of the search warrant, such as (1) the place searched
or the property seized are not those specified or described in the search warrant; and (2) there is no probable cause for the issuance of
the search warrant.

ARBITRARY DETENTION

Arbitrary or unlawful detention occurs when an individual is arrested and detained by a government without due process and without the
legal protections of a fair trial, or when an individual is detained without any legal basis for the deprivation of liberty.

Arbitrary arrests and detention are intimidation tactics used by governments to suppress dissent. Freedom from arbitrary detention is a
fundamental right enshrined in Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Arbitrary detention is the violation of the right to
liberty. It is defined as the arrest and deprivation of liberty of a person outside of the confines of nationally recognized laws or international
standards. International treaties may be implored to guarantee the right to liberty if national laws protect the individual in an incomplete
or partial manner.

Detention may be illegal without being arbitrary and vice-versa. Illegality simply means that the law has not be complied with, whereas
arbitrary refers to the inappropriate, unjust, unforeseeable or disproportionate nature of the detention.

Arbitrary detention exposes the victim to more human rights violations since they are deprived of means to defend themselves from
extrajudicial execution, enforced disappearances, torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, etc.

ILLEGAL DETENTION

KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION

I. Introduction: Art. 270 lays down the penalty for kidnapping and enumerates when the detention becomes serious. The concept is of
American origin

1. To kidnap is to forcibly take a person from he has a right to be ( such as his place of work, residence, rest and recreation, school,
street, park or public place) and bring him to another. The taking is always without the consent of the victim. Kidnapping need not be
followed by detention as where the talking was only to briefly restrain the victim. It is usually for ransom.

2. To “detain” is to deprive a person of his liberty or restrict his freedom of locomotion or movement, and may not involve a kidnapping.
This includes the following situations:

a). Lock up or actual physical deprivation of the personal liberty by confinement in an enclosure

b). immobilizing the victim though he has not been placed din an enclosure

c). by placing physical, moral or psychological restraint on his freedom of locomotion or movement

Example: The Mayor confronted a DENR Inspection team, calls for reinforcements, refuses their request to leave, orders them to go with
him and allows them to leave only the following day.

Held: “The curtailment of the victim’s liberty need not involve any physical restraint upon the victim’s persons. If the acts and actuations
of the accused produced such fear in the mind of the victim sufficient to paralyze the latter, to the extent that he victim is compelled to
limit his own actions and movements in accordance with the wishes of the accused, then the victim is detained against his will” ( Aslega
vs. People, Oct. 01, 2003)

d). The detention may either be Serious Art. 267 or Slight ( Art. 268)

II. Persons Liable.

A. An offender is a private person and not a Public Officer else the crime is Arbitrary Detention unless the latter has no duty to arrest or
order the detention of another.

B. One who furnished the place of detention is liable as an accomplice unless he was in conspiracy with the other accused.

III. The circumstances which make the detention serious are:

1. The kidnapping or detention shall have lasted more than 3 days

2. It is committed by simulating public authority

Example: a person represents himself to be a police investigator who tells the victim he will bring him to the police station, but brings him
elsewhere

3. If serious physical injuries were inflicted or threats to kill were made

4. If a victim is a minor, female or public officer. In the case of minors, the kidnapper should not be the parent.

IV.. Kidnapping for Ransom. The victim is held hostage until the demands of the kidnapper are met.

1. The penalty is death

2. Ransom is any consideration, whether in the form of money, articles of value, or services or favors, for the release of a person.

3. It need not be given or received it being sufficient that a demand was made

4..Examples: (i).The son of the Judge will be released if the Judge dismisses a case or allows the bail to be reduced (2) The grandson
of a physician will be released if the physician will perform an operation on the mother of a friend of the kidnappers (3) The wife of a
politician will be released if the husband makes a public apology (4) The pupils of a school will be released if the school lowers its tuition
fees.

V. New Special Complex/Composite Crimes

1. Kidnapping/Serious Illegal Detention with Homicide

a). The person killed is the victim of the kidnapping or illegal detention. If the person killed is a third person, such as the bodyguard, the
driver or an innocent person, it is article 48 which applies and the crime is an ordinary complex crime.
b). Hence previous decisions which say the crime is either murder or kidnapping depending on the intention of the accused do not
anymore hold water. It is enough the victim was killed whether the original intention was to kill or to detain.

2. Kidnapping/Serious Illegal Detention with Rape. The victim of rape is the victim of kidnapping and not a third person else the rape is a
separate offense.

a) Includes a situation where several rapes are committed

b) The taking way must not be with lewd designs

3. Kidnapping /Serious Illegal Detention with Physical Injuries as a result of torture or dehumanizing acts

(i). Question: A Woman was kidnapped, ransom was demanded, and then later was killed. What crime was committed? (Answer):
Kidnapping for Ransom with Murder. ( PP. vs. Ramos: Oct. 12, 1998)

(ii). Question: Suppose the victim was also raped before being killed? (Answer). It is still Kidnapping for ransom with Murder. The rape
will be considered as an aggravating circumstance

(iii). Question: The robbers held hostage the customers of a bank as human shield against the police. Are they also liable for detention?
(Answer) The detention in robbery is absorbed unless the victims are detained to compel delivery of money

VI. Distinguished from Other Crimes Which Involved Detention and Taking Away of a Person

1. From coercion- where there is no intent to detain or deprive a person of his liberty. Examples:

a). dragging a woman to a waiting car but was let go due to her remonstrations or because she was able to wrest herself free.

b). a debtor was forcible taken from his store and brought to a house to compel him to pay

c). A woman was taken to a house and kept there in order to break her will and agree to marry the accused

d). Where a woman was seen dragging along a missing boy who was crying and refusing to go with her

2. Abduction- where the taking away of the woman against her will (Forcible Abduction) or by artifice upon a minor girl (Consented
Abduction)) was with lewd designs, which was present at the very moment of the taking away, as it was the purpose thereof.

Art. 268. Slight illegal detention. – The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be imposed upon any private individual who
shall commit the crimes described in the next preceding article without the attendance of any of circumstances enumerated
therein. The same penalty shall be incurred by anyone who shall furnish the place for the perpetration of the crime.If the
offender shall voluntarily release the person so kidnapped or detained within three days from the commencement of the
detention, without having attained the purpose intended, and before the institution of criminal proceedings against him, the
penalty shall be prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods and a fine not exceeding seven hundred pesos.

SELF DEFENSE UNDER ARTICLE 11 OF REVISED PENAL CODE

Justifying Circumstances – where the act of a person is in accordance with law such that said person is deemed not to have violated the
law.

General Rule: No criminal and civil liability incurred.

Exception: There is civil liability with respect to par. 4 where the liability is borne by persons benefited by the act.
Par. 1 Self-defense
Elements:
1. Unlawful Aggression
- indispensable requirement
- There must be actual physical assault or aggression or an immediate and imminent threat, which must be offensive and positively
strong.
- The defense must have been made during the existence of aggression, otherwise, it is no longer justifying.
- While generally an agreement to fight does not constitute unlawful aggression, violation of the terms of the agreement to fight is
considered an exception.
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it

Test of reasonableness depends on:

(1) weapon used by aggressor
(2) physical condition, character, size and other circumstances of aggressor
(3) physical condition, character, size and circumstances of person defending himself
(4) place and occasion of assault

3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself

NOTE: Perfect equality between the weapons used, nor material commensurability between the means of attack and defense by the one
defending himself and that of the aggressor is not required
REASON: the person assaulted does not have sufficient opportunity or time to think and calculate.

Rights included in self-defense:

1. defense of person
2. defense of rights protected by law
3. defense of property (only if there is also an actual and imminent danger on the person of the one defending)
4. defense of chastity

Kinds of Self-Defense:
1. self-defense of chastity – there must be an attempt to rape the victim
2. defense of property – must be coupled with an attack on the person of the owner, or on one entrusted with the care of such property.
People v. Narvaez, (GR No. L-33466-67, April 20, 1983) Attack on property alone was deemed sufficient to comply with element of
unlawful aggression.
3. self-defense in libel – justified when the libel is aimed at a person’s good name.

“Stand ground when in the right” - the law does not require a person to retreat when his assailant is rapidly advancing upon him with a
deadly weapon.

NOTE: Under Republic Act 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004), victim-survivors who are found by the
Courts to be suffering from Battered Woman Syndrome (BWS) do not incur any criminal or civil liability despite absence of the necessary
elements for the justifying circumstance of self-defense in the RPC. BWS is a scientifically defined pattern of psychological and behavioral
symptoms found in women living in battering relationships as a result of cumulative abuse.

Par. 2 Defense of Relative

Elements:
1. Unlawful Aggression (indispensable requirement)
2. reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it
3. In case the provocation was given by the person attacked, the one making the defense had no part in such provocation.

Relative entitled to the defense:

1. spouse
2. ascendants
3. descendants
4. legitimate, natural or adopted brothers and sisters, or
relatives by affinity in the same degrees
 5. relatives by consanguinity within the 4th civil degree

NOTE: The relative defended may be the original aggressor. All that is required to justify the act of the relative defending is that he takes
no part in such provocation.

Par. 3 Defense of Stranger

Elements:
1. unlawful aggression (indispensable requirement)
2. reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it
3. person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment or other evil motive

2002 Bar Exam Question

A chanced upon three men who were attacking B with fist blows. C, one of the men, was about to stab B with a knife. Not knowing that
B was actually the aggressor because he had earlier challenged the three men to a fight. A shot C as the latter was about to stab B.

May A invoked the defense of a stranger as a justifying circumstance in his favor? Why?

Yes. A may invoke the justifying circumstance of defense of stranger since he was not involved in the fight and he shot C, when the latter
was about to stab B. There being no indication that A was induced by revenged, resentment or any other evil motive in shooting C, his
act is justified under paragraph 3, Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code as amended.

Par. 4 State of Necessity (Avoidance of Greater Evil or Injury)

Elements:
1. evil sought to be avoided actually exists
2. injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it
3. no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it

NOTE: The necessity must not be due to the negligence or violation of any law by the actor.

2004 Bar Exam Question

Par. 5 Fulfillment of Duty or Lawful Exercise of a Right or Office

Elements:
1. accused acted in the performance of duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office
2. the injury caused or offense committed be the necessary consequence of the due performance of the duty, or the lawful exercise of
such right or office.

NOTE: The accused must prove that he was duly appointed to the position claimed he was discharging at the time of the commission of
the offense. It must also be shown that the offense committed was the necessary consequence of such fulfillment of duty, or lawful
exercise of a right or office.

2000 Bar Examination Question (Fulfillment of Duty)

Lucresia, a store owner, was robbed of her bracelet in her home. The following day, at about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, a neighbor, 22-
year old Jun-Jun, who had an unsavory reputation, came to her store to buy bottles of beer.Lucresia noticed her bracelet around the right
arm of Jun-Jun. As soon as the latter left, Lucresia went to the nearby police stationand sought the help of a policeman on duty, Pat.
Willie Reyes. He went with Lucresia to the house of Jun-Jun to confront the latter. Pat. Reyes introduced himself as a policeman and
tried to get hold of Jun-Jun who resisted and ran away. Pat. Reyes chased him and fired two warning shots in the air. Jun-Jun continued
to run and when he was about seven meters away, Pat. Reyes shot him in the right leg. Jun-Jun was hit and he fell down but he crawled
towards a fence, intending to pass through an opening underneath. When Pat. Reyes was about 5 meters away, he fired another shot at
Jun-Jun hitting him at the right lower hip. Pat. Reyes brought Jun-Jun to the hospital, but because of profuse bleeding, he eventually
died. Pat. Reyes was subsequently charged with Homicide. During the trial, Pat. Reyes raised the defense, by way of exoneration, that
he acted in the fulfillment of a duty.

Is the defense tenable? Explain.

No, the defense of Pat.Reyes is not tenable. The defense of having acted in the fulfillment of a duty requires as a condition, inter alia,
that the injury or offense committed be the unavoidable or necessary consequence of the due performance of duty (People vs. Oanis, et.
al, 74 Phil. 257). It is not enough that the accused acted in the fulfillment of a duty.

After Jun-Jun was shot in the right leg and was already crawling, there was no need for Pat. Reyes to shoot him further. Clearly, Pat.
Reyes acted beyond the call of duty which brought about the cause of death of the victim.

Par. 6 Obedience to a Superior Order

Elements:
1. an order has been issued
2. order has a lawful purpose (not patently illegal)
3. means used by subordinate to carry out said order is lawful

NOTE: The superior officer giving the order cannot invoke this justifying circumstance. Good faith is
material, as the subordinate is not liable for carrying out an illegal order if he is not aware of its illegality and he is not negligent.

General Rule: Subordinate cannot invoke this circumstance when order is patently illegal.

Exception: When there is compulsion of an irresistible force, or under impulse of uncontrollable fear.