What is Criminal Law

It is the branch or division of law which defines crimes, treats, of their

nature, and provides for their punishment.

Criminal law refers to a body of laws that apply to criminal acts. The main
theories for criminal law include: to deter crime, to reform the perpetrator, to
provide retribution for the act, and to prevent further crimes. There are two types
of criminal laws: misdemeanors and felonies.

What is Crime
the intentional commission of an act usually deemed socially harmful or
dangerous and specifically defined, prohibited, and punishable under criminal
law.

crime is defined as the act and omission punishable by law; it is also referred to as
felony. (Source: The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines. Chapter 1, Article 3 of
Act No. 3815, “An Act Revising the Penal Code and Other Penal Laws”. 1930).

What are the General Principles of criminal law

Innocent until proven guilty (the presumption of innocence)

The basis of our system of criminal justice is that a person, although charged with
an offence, is considered innocent until proved guilty of the offence. The
magistrate, judge or jury, as the case may be, must be satisfied beyond a
reasonable doubt that the person is guilty. Where there is a reasonable doubt,
the person must be acquitted (that is, found to be not guilty of the offence).

The fact that a person has been charged does not mean that she or he is guilty,
and any discussion of the charge should make it clear that at this stage the
offence is only alleged.
 Burden of proof

The prosecution have the task of proving the guilt of the person who is charged
with an offence (the defendant). For the defendant to be found guilty of an
offence, it must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. It is not up to the defendant
to establish her or his innocence.

This rule applies in all criminal trials, although sometimes is up to the defendant
to give evidence of a certain point in the defence case. For example, in those
offences which prohibit a certain act 'without reasonable excuse', the defendant
must explain her or his excuse, although it is up to the prosecution to prove that
the excuse is not reasonable.

In some cases the burden of proof of a particular defence (such as insanity) may
be on the defendant, but then the defence need only be proved on the balance of
probabilities,and not beyond a reasonable doubt, as the prosecution must do.

Right to remain silent

Generally a person is not required to answer police questions. However, there are
some exceptions to this rule. The main exception is that a police officer can
request the name and address of a person found committing an offence, or who
the police officer has reasonable cause to suspect has committed, or is about to
commit, an offence or of a person who may be able to assist in the investigation
of an offence or suspected offence [Summary Offences Act 1953 s 74A]. In these
circumstances a person who refuses to give her or his name and address, or who
gives a false name and address, commits an offence. Drivers of motor vehicles are
also required to give their name and address, and that of the owner of the car, as
well as some questions in relations to firearms see : arrest and questioning.

Double jeopardy
The principle of criminal law called the double jeopardy rule is that no person
should be punished more than once for the same offence and that no person
ought to be placed twice in jeopardy (at risk) of being convicted. This means that
a person who has been charged, tried and acquitted cannot be charged again for
the same matter. However, often a new trial is ordered where for example, an
appeal court overturns a conviction or where the first trial resulted in a hung jury
or a mistrial.

Changes to the Criminal Procedure Act 1921 (SA) (ss 141- 148) mean that double
jeopardy no longer applies for serious offences such as murder, manslaughter and
aggravated rape, provided certain circumstances are met. There are two
situations in which a person can be re-tried for an offence for which they have
previously been acquitted:

Where fresh and compelling evidence not provided at the original trial is
produced. This evidence must be reliable and substantial [Criminal Procedure Act
1921 (SA) s 147]; or

Where the acquittal is shown to be a ‘tainted acquittal’. A tainted acquittal occurs

where a person was not convicted of an offence because an administration of
justice offence was committed (offences of perjury, fabrication or concealment of
evidence, bribery, witness or juror intimidation or attempting to pervert the
course of justice). Charges can be laid against the acquitted person if it is more
likely than not that they would have been convicted but for the administration of
justice offence [s 148].

What are the modes of acquiring criminal liability?

Criminal liability refers to the legal responsibility one bears for committing a
crime. The modes of acquiring criminal liability can vary based on the legal system
of a specific jurisdiction, but generally, there are several common modes of
acquiring criminal liability:
Actus Reus (Guilty Act): This refers to the physical act of committing a crime. For
someone to be held criminally liable, there must be a voluntary and intentional
act or omission that violates the law. Mere thoughts or intentions are generally
not sufficient to establish criminal liability.

Mens Rea (Guilty Mind): This refers to the mental state or intention of the
perpetrator at the time of committing the crime. Different crimes require
different levels of intent, ranging from intention to commit the crime (specific
intent) to recklessness or negligence (general intent).

Concurrence: For criminal liability to be established, there must be a concurrence

or coming together of both the guilty act (actus reus) and the guilty mind (mens
rea). In other words, the person must have committed the prohibited act with the
required mental state.

Causation: It must be proven that the defendant's actions were the cause of the
harm or consequences that occurred. There must be a direct link between the
defendant's actions and the resulting harm.

Strict Liability: In some cases, certain offenses do not require the prosecution to
prove a specific mental state (mens rea). These are known as strict liability
offenses. The focus is solely on the prohibited act (actus reus). These offenses are
often minor in nature and relate to regulatory matters.

Vicarious Liability: In certain situations, an individual or entity can be held

criminally liable for the actions of another person. This is often seen in cases
involving employers held responsible for the actions of their employees.

Corporate Criminal Liability: Corporations can also be held criminally liable for
the actions of their employees if the company's policies, practices, or lack of
oversight contributed to the commission of a crime.

Complicity: Individuals who aid, abet, counsel, or otherwise assist in the

commission of a crime can also be held criminally liable as accessories or
accomplices.
Attempt: Even if a person does not fully complete a crime, they can still be held
criminally liable for attempting to commit the crime if they had the intent and
took substantial steps toward its completion.

Accessory After the Fact: A person who helps someone evade law enforcement
or hide evidence after a crime has been committed can be considered an
accessory after the fact and may face criminal liability.

It's important to note that the specific elements required for criminal liability can
vary based on jurisdiction and legal traditions. The modes mentioned above are
general concepts that provide a framework for understanding how criminal
liability is established.

What is Generality Principle

Generality means that the criminal law of the country governs all persons who
lives or sojourns in the Philippines (Article 14, NCC), subject to certain exceptions
brought about by international agreement. Ambassadors, chiefs of states and
other diplomatic officials are immune from the application of penal laws when
they are in the country where they are assigned (People vs. Galacgac, CA., 54 O.G.
1027). Acts performed should be in official capacity and performance of his duty
(G.R. No. 125865. January 28, 2000).

Exception to generality principle?

1. Principles of Public International Law

2. Treaties or Treaty Stipulations

3. Law of Preferrential Application

What is Territoriality Principle

means that the penal laws of the country have force and effect only within the
National Territory of the Philippines, subject to certain exceptions brought about
by international agreements and practice. The territory of the country is not
limited to the land where its sovereignty resides but includes also its atmosphere,
its interior waters and maritime zone, including those outside of its jurisdiction as
provided in Article 2, paragraphs 1-5 of RPC.

Territoriality in criminal law means that our penal laws undertake to punish
crimes committed only within the Philippine territory. Outside the parameters of
the Philippine archipelago, Philippine criminal laws cannot be enforced.

Exception to Territoriality Principle

The Territoriality Principle is a fundamental concept in international law that
establishes a nation's sovereignty over its territory and allows that nation to
exercise its laws, jurisdiction, and authority within its borders. However, there are
exceptions to the Territoriality Principle that arise due to various international
agreements, treaties, and customary practices. Some of these exceptions include:

Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: This exception allows a country to assert jurisdiction

over certain actions or individuals that occur outside its territory but have a
significant impact within its jurisdiction. For example, some countries might assert
jurisdiction over crimes like terrorism, piracy, or certain cybercrimes that have
cross-border implications.

Nationality Principle: Under this principle, a country can claim jurisdiction over its
citizens regardless of where the crime was committed. If a citizen of one country
commits a crime abroad, their home country might have the right to prosecute
them upon their return.
Protective Principle: This exception allows a country to assert jurisdiction over
actions that threaten its national security, even if they occur outside its territory.
It's often applied to cases involving espionage, treason, and other activities that
might pose a danger to the state.

Passive Personality Principle: Under this principle, a country can claim jurisdiction
over a crime that harms its own citizens, even if the crime occurred outside its
territory. This is based on the idea that a country has an interest in protecting the
safety and rights of its citizens.

Universality Principle: In certain cases, crimes of grave concern to the

international community as a whole, such as genocide, war crimes, and crimes
against humanity, can be subject to universal jurisdiction. This means any country
can prosecute the perpetrators, regardless of where the crimes were committed
or the nationality of the perpetrators or victims.

Treaties and Agreements: Bilateral or multilateral treaties can establish

exceptions to the Territoriality Principle. For example, extradition treaties allow
countries to transfer individuals accused or convicted of crimes to other countries
for prosecution or punishment.

Customary International Law: In some cases, customary international law might

lead to deviations from the Territoriality Principle. This could involve established
practices that allow countries to assert jurisdiction over certain crimes or
situations beyond their borders.

What is Prospectivity Principle

 It means the law acts or omissions will only be subject to a penal law if they
are committed after a penal law had already taken effect. Vice-versa, this act or
omission which has been committed before the effectivity of a penal law could
not be penalized by such penal law. Exception: (1) when new statute it is
favorable to the accused and (2) the accused is not a habitual delinquent (Article
22 of RPC).

In criminal law means that penal laws can only punish an act committed
after its effectivity. It cannot penalize an act that was not punishable at the time
of its commission. It cannot be given retroactive effect UNLESS favorable to the
accused who is not a habitual deliquent.

exception to prospectivity principle.