Description
ISSUE
Whether the armed men who, while posing as members of the Coast Guard, intercepted a tourist yacht within the municipal waters of Palawan and took cash and valuables from the passengers may be held liable for piracy under Article 122 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, despite being Filipinos and having targeted fellow Filipinos within Philippine territory, or whether the crime committed is merely robbery on a vessel.
RULING
Yes. The offenders are liable for piracy under Article 122 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659, notwithstanding that they are Filipinos, that the offense occurred within Philippine territorial waters, and that the victims were also Filipinos.
RATIO
1. Piracy under Article 122, as amended
Article 122 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659, provides that piracy is committed by any person who, on the high seas or in Philippine waters, attacks or seizes a vessel, or takes away the personal belongings of its passengers or crew by means of violence or intimidation.
Notably, the amendment removed the traditional limitations that piracy must be committed:
-
on the high seas only, and
-
by non-Filipinos.
Thus, under the present law, piracy may be committed:
-
within Philippine territorial or municipal waters, and
-
by Filipinos or foreigners alike.
2. Elements of piracy present
In this case, all the elements of piracy are present:
-
The offenders attacked and seized a vessel (a tourist yacht);
-
The act was committed in Philippine waters (municipal waters of Palawan);
-
The offenders used violence and intimidation, being armed and posing as Coast Guard personnel; and
-
They took cash and valuables belonging to the passengers.
The subsequent abandonment of the vessel does not negate piracy, as the crime is consummated upon the unlawful taking through violence or intimidation.
3. Piracy vs. Robbery on a Vessel
The defenseβs contention that the offense is merely robbery on a vessel is untenable.
| Piracy (Art. 122, RPC) | Robbery (Art. 293, RPC) |
|---|---|
| A special complex crime against public order and security | A crime against property |
| Committed on a vessel in Philippine or international waters | Generally committed on land or in places not covered by piracy laws |
| Requires an attack on a vessel or its passengers/crew | Requires only unlawful taking of property |
| Considered hostis humani generis (enemy of mankind) | No such characterization |
Where the object of the attack is the vessel itself or its passengers while navigating waters, the crime is piracy, not robbery. Jurisprudence consistently holds that robbery committed aboard a vessel in Philippine waters, accompanied by violence or intimidation, is absorbed in piracy.
4. Nationality and location are immaterial
The argument that piracy cannot exist because both the offenders and victims are Filipinos and the crime occurred within Philippine territory no longer holds water under Article 122, as amended. The law expressly punishes βany personβ, regardless of nationality, and covers offenses committed within Philippine waters.
CONCLUSION
The armed men are criminally liable for piracy under Article 122 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and not merely for robbery. Their Filipino citizenship, the Filipino nationality of the victims, and the commission of the offense within municipal waters do not negate criminal liability for piracy.
Reviews
There are no reviews yet.