TITLE THREE

CRIME AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER

CHAPTER ONE
REBELLION, COUP DETAT, SEDITION,
AND DISLOYALTY

Political crimes are those directly aimed against
the political order, as well as such common
crimes as may be committed to achieve a
political purpose. The decisive factor is the
intent or motive.

ARTICLE 134
REBELLION OR INSURRECTION

Elements:
1. That there be (a) public uprising, and (b)
taking arms against the Government.
2. That the purpose of the uprising to said
Government or its laws:
a. To remove from the allegiance to
said Government or its laws:
i. The territory of the
Philippines or any
part thereof; or
ii. Any body of land,
naval, or other
armed forces; or
b. To deprive the Chief Executive or
Congress, wholly or partially, of any
of their powers and prerogatives

Is rebellion and insurrection the same?
The term rebellion is more frequently used
where the object of the movement is
completely to overthrow and supersede the
existing government; while the term
insurrection is more commonly employed in
reference to a movement which seeks merely to
effect some change of minor importance, or to
prevent the exercise of governmental authority
with respect to particular matters or subjects.
(30 Am. Jur. 1)

What is the essence of the crime of rebellion?
The essence of rebellion is public uprising and
taking up arms. It aims to overthrow the duly
constituted Government. It is generally carried
out by civilians.

If there is no public uprising, it is direct assault.

What is the nature of the crime of rebellion?
Rebellion or of inciting is a crime of the masses,
of a multitude. It is vast movement of men and
a complex network of intrigues and plots. (Pp v
Almazan, CA, 37 O.G. 1932)


Although the law provides that rebellion is
committed by rising publicly and taking arms
against the Government, an actual clash of arms
with the forces of the Government is not
absolutely necessary. (Pp v Cube, C.A. 46 O.G.
4412)

The crime of rebellion is complete the very
moment a group of rebels rise publicly and take
arms against the Government, for the purpose
of overthrowing the same by force. It is not
necessary, to consummate rebellion, that the
rebels succeed in overthrowing the
Government. Rising publicly and taking arms
against the Government is the normative
element of the offense, while the intent or
purpose to overthrow the Government is the
subjective element.

Distinction between Rebellion and Treason:

REBELLION TREASON
The uprising is against
the government.
The levying of war is
done to aid the
enemy.
The purpose is to
substitute the
Government with
another.
The purpose is to the
deliver the
Government to the
enemy.

Mere giving of aid or comfort is not criminal in
the case of rebellion. There must be an actual
participation. Hence, mere silence or omission
of public officer is not punishable in rebellion.

Difference between Rebellion and Insurrection

REBELLION INSURRECTION
The object of the
movement is
completely to
overthrow and
supersede the existing
government.
The movement seeks
merely to effect some
change of minor
importance, or to
prevent the exercise
of governmental
authority with respect
of particular matters
of subjects.

Distinction between Rebellion and Sedition

REBELLION SEDITION
There must be taking
up of arms against the
government.
It is sufficient that
public uprising be
tumultuous.
Purpose is always
political, that is to
overthrow the
government.
Purpose may be
political or social, that
is merely to go against
the established
government not to
overthrow it.


ARTICLE 134 A
COUP DETAT
Elements:
1. That the offender is a person or persons
belonging to the military or police or
holding any public office or
employment;
2. That it is committed by means of swift
attack accompanied by violence,
intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth;
3. That the attack is directed against duly
constituted authorities of the Republic
of the Philippines, or any military camp
or installation, communication network,
public utilities or other facilities needed
for the exercise and continued
possession of power;
4. That the purpose of the attack is to
seize or diminish state power.

The crime of coup detat may be committed
with or without civilian participation.

The use of unlicensed firearm is absorbed in the
crime of rebellion if used in furtherance of or
incident to, or in connection with the crime of
attempted coup detat.

What is the essence of the crime of coup
detat?
The essence of the crime is a swift attack upon
the facilities of the Philippine Government,
military camps and installations,
communication networks, public utilities and
facilities essential to the continued possession
of government powers.

What is the objective of coup detat?
The objective of coup detat is to destabilize or
paralyze the government through the seizure of
facilitates and utilities essential to the
continued possession and exercise of
governmental powers.

Distinction between Coup detat and Rebellion

COUP DETAT REBELLION
Essence is a swift
attack against the
government, its
military camp or
installations,
communication
network and public
utilities essential to
the continued exercise
of governmental
powers.
Essence of the crime is
public uprising and
taking up arms against
the government.

May be carried out
singly or
simultaneously.
Requires a public
uprising or multitude
of people.
Principal offenders
must be members of
the military, national
police or public
officer, with or
without civilian
support.
Offenders need to be
committed by the
uniformed personnel
of the military or the
police.
The purpose is merely
to paralyze the
existing government.
The purpose is to
overthrow the existing
government.


ARTICLE 135
PENALTY FOR REBELLION, INSURRECTION OR
COUP DETAT

Who are liable for rebellion, insurrection
and/or coup detat?
A. The leaders
i. Any person who (a) promotes,
(b) maintains, or (c) heads a
rebellion or insurrection; or
ii. Any person who (a) leads, (b)
directs, or (c) commands others
to undertake a coup detat.
B. The participants
i. Any person who (a)
participates, or (b) executed the
commands of others in
rebellion, or insurrection;
ii. Any person in the government
service who (a) participates, or
(b) executes directions or
commands of others in
undertaking a coup detat;
iii. Any person not in the
government service who (a)
participates, (b) supports, (c)
finances, (d) abets, or (e) aids in
undertaking a coup detat.


ARTICLE 136
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT
REBELLION OR INSURRECTION

Conspiracy to commit rebellion
There is conspiracy to commit rebellion when
two (2) or more persons come to an agreement
to rise publicly and take arms against the
government for any of the purposes of rebellion
and decide to commit it.

Proposal to commit rebellion
There is proposal to commit rebellion when the
person who has decided to rise publicly and
take arms against the government for any of
the purposes of rebellion proposes its execution
to some other person or persons.

Persons merely agreeing and deciding among
themselves to rise publicly and take arms
against the Government for the purposes
mentioned in Article 134, without actually rising
publicly and taking arms against the
Government, or those merely proposing the
commission of said acts to other persons
without actually performing those over acts
under Article 134, are already subject to
punishment. (Pp v Geronimo, 100 Phil 90)

No conspiracy when there is no agreement and
no decision to commit rebellion.

Organizing a group of soldiers, soliciting
membership in, and soliciting funds from the
people for, the organization, show conspiracy to
overthrow the Government.


ARTICLE 137
DISLOYALTY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS AND
EMPLOYEES

The offender must be a public officer or
employee and there must be an actual
rebellion.

Punishable acts:
1. Failing to resist a rebellion by all means
in their power;
2. Continuing to discharge the duties of
their offices under the control of the
rebels; or
3. Accepting appointment to office under
them.

The crime of disloyalty of public officers
presupposes the existence of rebellion by other
persons.

Offender must not be in conspiracy with the
rebels. Otherwise, the crime they commit is
rebellion.


ARTICLE 138
INCITING TO REBELLION OR SEDITION

Elements:
1. Offender does not take arms or is not in
open hostility against the government
2. He incites others to the execution of
any acts of rebellion
3. Inciting is done by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems,
banners, or other representations
tending to the same end

What does Shall incite others to the execution
of any of the acts specified in Article 134 of this
Code mean?
This clause means that the offender shall incite
others to rise publicly and take arms against the
Government for any of the purposes of
rebellion.

Difference between inciting to rebellion and
proposal to commit rebellion

INCITING TO
REBELLION
PROPOSAL TO
COMMIT REBELLION
The offender has not
decided to commit
rebellion.
The person who
proposes has decided
to commit rebellion
The act of inciting is
done publicly.
The person who
proposes the
execution of the crime
uses secret means.
The offender induces another to commit
rebellion.
The crime of rebellion should not be actually
committed by the persons to whom it is
proposed or who are incited. If they commit
rebellion because of the proposal or inciting,
the one inciting may become a principal by
inducement in the crime of rebellion.

In both proposal and inciting to commit
rebellion, the crime of rebellion should not be
committed by the persons to whom it is
proposed or who are incited. If they commit the
rebellion because of the proposal or the
inciting, the proponent or the one inciting
becomes a principal by inducement in the crime
of rebellion provided that the requisites of
paragraph No. 2 of Article 17 are present.

ARTICLE 139
SEDITION

Elements:
1. The offender rise (a) publicly and (b)
tumultuously;
2. They employ force, intimidation or
other means outside of legal methods;
3. Offenders employ any of those means
to attain any of the following objects to:
i. Prevent the promulgation or
execution of any law or the
holding of any popular election;
ii. Prevent the national
government, or any public
officer from freely exercising its
of his function, or prevent the
execution of any administrative
order;
iii. Inflicting any act of hate or
revenge of any person or
property of any public officer or
employee;
iv. Commit, for any political or
social end, any act of hate or
revenge against the private
persons and any social class;
and
v. Despoil, for any political or
social end any person,
municipality or province, or the
National Government of all its
property or any part thereof.

What are tumultuous acts?
Acts are tumultuous if caused by more than
three (3) persons who are armed or provided
with the means of violence.
The ultimate object of sedition is a violation of
the public peace or at least such a course of
measures as evidently engenders it. (Pp v Perez,
45 Phil 599)

Does the crime of sedition contemplate rising
up of arms against government?
No, the purpose of the offenders in rising
publicly is merely to create commotion and
disturbance by way of protest to express their
dissent and disobedience to the government or
to the authorities concerned.

The objective of sedition is not always against
the government, its property or officer. It could
be against a private person or social class.

Difference between Sedition and Rebellion

SEDITION REBELLION
There must be public uprising
It is sufficient that the
public uprising is
tumultuous.
There must be taking
up of arms against the
Government.
The purpose of the
offenders may be
political or social.
The purpose is always
political.

Difference between Sedition and Treason

SEDITION TREASON
Sedition involves
disturbance of public
order resulting from
tumultuous uprising.
There is no public
uprising.

Difference between sedition and crime of
tumults and other disturbance of public order.

SEDITION
CRIME OF TUMULTS
AND OTHER
DISTURBANCE OF
PUBLIC ORDER
Sedition involves
disturbance of public
order resulting from
tumultuous uprising.
There is no public
uprising.
Sedition cannot be committed by one (1)
person because in the opening statement of
Article 139 says: The crime of sedition is
committed by persons who rise publicly and
tumultuously. Tumultuous means that it is
caused by more than three (3) persons who are
armed or provided with means of violence.

Public uprising and an object of sedition must
concur.

Common crimes are not absorbed in Sedition
and other crimes must be charged separately.

ARTICLE 140
PENALTY FOR SEDITION

Persons liable for sedition:
1. The leader of the sedition, and
2. Other persons participating in the
sedition.

ARTICLE 141
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEDITION

An agreement and a decision to attain any
object of sedition without any agreement to
rise publicly and tumultuously is not conspiracy
to commit sedition. Such an agreement and
decision may constitute a conspiracy to commit
direct assault of the first form (Article 148),
which is not a felony.

Only conspiracy is punished and not proposal to
commit sedition.

To be liable there must be an agreement and
determination to rise publicly and tumultuously
to attain any of the objects specified in Article
139.


ARTICLE 142
INCITING TO SEDITION

Punishable acts:
1. Inciting others to the accomplishment
of any of the acts which constitute
sedition by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, etc.
2. Uttering seditious words or speeches
which tend to disturb the public peace;
3. Writing, publishing or circulation
scurrilous (low, vulgar, mean or foul)
libels against the government or any of
the duly constituted authorities thereof,
which tend to disturb the public peace.

It is the use of words, emblems, etc. and not the
performance of an act that is punished in
inciting to sedition.

In inciting to sedition, the offender must not
take part in any public or tumultuous uprising.

Inciting to sedition to accomplish any objects
Elements:
1. That the offender does not take direct
part in the crime of sedition.
2. That he incites others to the
accomplishment of any of the acts
which constitute sedition.
3. That the inciting is done by means of
speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, cartoons, banners or other
representations tending to the same
end.

It is not inciting to sedition when it is not proved
that the defendant incited the people to rise
publicly and tumultuously in order to attain any
of the ends mentioned in Article 139. (Pp v
Arrogante, 39 O.G. 1974)

When are uttering seditious words or speeches
and writing, publishing or circulating scurrilous
libels punishable?
When they:
1. Tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful
officer in executing the functions of his
office; or
2. Tend to investigate others to cabal and
meet together for unlawful purposes;
or
3. Suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies
or riots; or
4. Lead or tend to stir up the whole people
against the lawful authorities or to
disturb the peace of the community,
the safety and order of the
Government.

A theatrical play or drama where the words
uttered or speeches delivered are seditious may
be punished.

Proposal to throw hand grenades in a public
place, intended to cause commotion and
disturbance, as an act of hate and revenge
against the police force, is inciting to sedition.

What are the two (2) rules relative to seditious
words?
1. CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER RULE -
words must be of such a nature that by
uttering them there is danger of public
uprising and that such danger should be
both clear and imminent.

Present refers to the time element. The danger
must not only be probable but very likely
inevitable.

2. DANGEROUS TENDENCY RULE - if words
used tend to create a danger of public
uprising, then those words could
properly be subject of penal clause.

Which of the above rule is adopted in the
Philippine jurisdiction?
It is the dangerous tendency rule that is
generally adopted in the Philippines with
respect to sedition cases. It is enough that the
words used may tend to create danger of public
uprising.

CHAPTER TWO
CRIMES AGAINST POPULAR REPRESENTATION

What are the crimes against popular
representation?
1. Acts tending to prevent the meeting of
the National Assembly and similar
bodies (Article 143)
2. Disturbance of proceedings (Article 144)
3. Violation on parliamentary immunity
(Article 145)

SECTION ONE CRIMES AGAINST LEGISLATIVE
BODIES AND SIMILAR BODIES

ARTICLE 143
ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE MEETING OF
THE ASSEMBLY AND SIMILAR BODIES

Elements:
1. That there be a projected or social
meeting of the National Assembly or
any of its committees or
subcommittees, constitutional
committees or divisions thereof, or of
any provincial board or city or municipal
council or board.
2. That the offender who may be any
person prevents such meeting by force
or fraud.

The chief of police and mayor who prevented
the meeting of the municipal council are liable
under Article 143, when the defect of the
meeting is not manifest and requires an
investigation before its existence can be
determined.

ARTICLE 144
DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDINGS

Elements:
1. That there be a meeting of the National
Assembly or any of its committees or
subcommittees, constitutional
commissions or committees or divisions
thereof, or of any provincial board or
city or municipal council or board.
2. That the offender does any of the
following acts:
a. He disturbs any of such meetings
b. He behaves while in the presence of
any such bodies in such a manner
as to interrupt its proceedings or to
impair the respect due it.

It must be a meeting of a legislative body or of
provincial board or city or municipal council or
board which is disturbed.

SECTION TWO VIOLATION OF
PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY

ARTICLE 145
VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY

Punishable acts:
1. By using force, intimidation, threats, or
frauds to prevent any member of the
National Assembly from (1) attending
the meetings of the Assembly or of any
of its committees or subcommittees,
constitutional commissions or
committees or divisions thereof, or
from (2) expressing his opinions, or (3)
casting his votes.
Elements:
a. That the offender uses force,
intimidation, threats or fraud;
b. That the purpose of the offender is to
prevent any member of the National
Assembly from
i. Attending the meetings of the
assembly or any of its
committees or constitutional
commissions, etc; or
ii. Expressing his opinions; or
iii. Casting his vote.

2. By arresting or searching any member
thereof while the National Assembly is
in regular or special session, except in
case such member has committed a
crime punishable under the Code by a
penalty higher than prision mayor.
Elements:
a. That the offender is a public officer or
employee;
b. That he arrests or searches any member
of the National Assembly;
c. That the Assembly, at the time of arrest
or search, is in regular or special
session;
d. That the member arrested or searched
has not committed a crime punishable
under the Code by a penalty higher
than prision mayor.

What is session?
It refers to the entire period from its initial
convening until its final adjournment.

The 1987 Constitution exempts members of
Congress from arrest while Congress is in
session for all offenses punishable by a penalty
less than prision mayor.

It is not necessary that a member of the
Assembly is actually prevented from attending
the meeting of the National Assembly, or
from expressing his opinion or casting his vote.
It is sufficient that the offender, in using force,
intimidation, threats, or frauds, has the purpose
to prevent a member of the National Assembly
from exercising any of his such prerogatives.


CHAPTER THREE
ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES AND ASSOCIATIONS

ARTICLE 146
ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES

What are illegal assemblies?
They are:
1. Any meeting attended by armed
persons for the purpose of committing
any of the crimes punishable under the
Code.

Requisites:
a. That there is a meeting, a gathering or
group of persons, whether in a fixed
place or moving;
b. That the meeting is attended by armed
persons;
c. That the purpose of the meeting is to
commit any of crimes punished under
the Code.

In the first form of illegal assembly, armed med
attend the gathering with the purpose of
committing any of the crimes punishable under
RPC. The presence of armed men during the
gathering brings about the crime of illegal
assembly.

The persons present at the meeting must be
armed in the first form of illegal assembly, but
not all persons present at the meeting must be
armed.

If none of the persons present in the meeting
are armed, there is no crime. Example: persons
unarmed conspiring in a meeting to commit
qualified theft is not punishable.

Is an unarmed person merely present at the
meeting of the first form of illegal assembly
liable?
Yes. The last sentence of the first paragraph of
Article 146, says: Persons merely present at
such meeting shall suffer the penalty of arresto
mayor, unless they are armed, in which cases
the penalty shall be prision correccional.
Hence, the penalty of arresto mayor is intended
for persons present at the meeting who are not
armed.

2. Any meeting in which the audience,
whether armed or not, is incited to the
commission of the crime of treason,
rebellion or insurrection, sedition, or
assault upon a person in authority or his
agents.

Requisites:
a. That there is a meeting, a gathering or
group of persons, whether in a fixed
place or moving.
b. That the audience, whether armed or
not, is incited to the commission of the
crime of treason, rebellion or
insurrection, sedition or direct assault.

That the audience is actually incited to the
commission of any of the crimes of sedition,
rebellion, etc. seems to be a necessary element
of the second form of illegal assembly.

When the illegal purpose of the gathering is to
incite people to commit the crimes mentioned,
the presence of armed men is unnecessary. The
mere gathering for the purpose is sufficient to
bring about the crime already.

Who are the persons liable for illegal
assembly?
1. The organizers or leaders of the
meeting.
2. Persons merely present at the meeting.

As illegal assembly is a felony, the persons
merely present at the meeting must have a
common intent to commit the felony of illegal
assembly. The absence of such intent may
exempt the person present from criminal
liability.

If the presence of a person is out of curiosity, is
he liable?
No, since he does not have intent to commit
felony of illegal assembly.

ARTICLE 147
ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS

What are illegal associations?
1. Associations totally or partially
organized for the purpose of
committing any of the crimes
punishable under the Code.
2. Associations totally or partially
organized for some purpose contrary to
public morals.

Who are the persons liable for illegal
association?
1. Founders, directors and president of
the association.
2. Mere members of the association.

Difference between Illegal Association and
Illegal Assembly

ILLEGAL ASSOCIATION ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY
The basis of liability is
the gathering for an
illegal purpose which
constitutes a crime
under the RPC.
The basis is the
formation of
organization of an
association to engage
in an unlawful purpose
which is not limited to
a violation of the RPC.
It is necessary that
there is an actual
meeting or assembly.
It is not necessary that
there be an actual
meeting or assembly.
Meeting and the
attendance at such
meeting are the acts
punished.
Act of forming or
organizing and
membership in the
association are the
acts punished.

Subversion

The crime of subversion was first punished
under RA 1700, otherwise known as the Anti-
Subversion Act. PD 885 (Revised Anti-
Subversion Law) superseded RA No. 1700.

Acts punished under the Anti-Subversion Act
(RA no. 1700)
1. Knowingly, willfully and by overt acts (a)
affiliating oneself with, (b) becoming, or
(c) remaining a member of the
Communist Party of the Philippines
and/or its successors or of any
subversive association as defined in
Section 2 of this Act;
2. Conspiring with any other person to
overthrow the Government of the
Republic of the Philippines of the
government of any of its political
subdivisions by force, violence, deceit,
subversion or other illegal means, for
the purpose of placing such
government or political subdivision
under the control and domination of
any alien power; and
3. Taking up arms against the
Government, the offender being a
member of the Communist Party or of
any subversive association defined in
Sec. 2 of the Act.

What organizations are declared illegal and
outlawed under Sec. 2 of RA No. 1700?
The Communist Party, which is declared to be
an organized conspiracy, any other organization
and their successors having the purpose of
overthrowing the Government of the RP to
establish in the Philippines a totalitarian regime
and place the Government under the control
and domination of an alien power are declared
illegal and outlawed.

Acts punishable under the Revised Anti-
Subversion Law (RA No. 885)
1. Knowingly, willfully and by overt act
affiliating with, becoming or remaining
a member of a subversive association or
organization as defined in Section 2
thereof;
2. Taking up arms against the
Government, the offender being a
member of such subversive association
or organization.

What are subversive associations and
organizations under Section 2 of PD 885?
Any association, organization, political party, or
group of persons organized for the purpose of
overthrowing the Government of the RP or for
the purpose of removing from the allegiance to
said government or its laws, the territory of the
Philippines or any part thereof wit the open or
convert assistance or support of any foreign
power by force, violence, deceit or other legal
means.

CHAPTER FOUR
ASSAULT UPON, AND RESISTANCE AND
DISOBEDIENCE TO, PERSONS IN AUTHORITY
AND THEIR AGENTS

ARTICLE 148
DIRECT ASSAULTS

What are the two (2) ways of committing the
crime of direct assaults?
1. Without public uprising, by employing
force or intimidation for the attainment
of any of the purposes enumerated in
defining the crimes of rebellion and
sedition.

Elements:
a. That the offender employs force or
intimidation.
b. That the aim of the offender is to attain
any of the purposes of the crime of
rebellion or any of the objects in the
crime of sedition.
c. That there is no public uprising.

Is it necessary that the offended party in the
first form of direct assault be a person in
authority or his agent?
No, the offended party may be a private
individual or person belonging to a social class.


2. Without public uprising, by attacking,
by employing force, or by seriously
intimidating or seriously resisting any
person in authority or any of his agents,
while engaged in the performance of
official duties, or on the occasion of
such performance.

Elements:
1. That the offender (a) makes an attack
(b) employs force, (c) makes a serious
intimidation, or (d) makes a serious
resistance.
2. That the person assaulted is a person in
authority or his agent.
3. That at the time of the assault the
person in authority or his agent (a) is
engaged in the actual performance of
official duties or that he is assaulted, (b)
by reason of the past performance of
official duties.
4. That the offender knows that the one
he is assaulting is a person in authority
or his agent in the exercise of his duties.
5. That there is no public uprising.

Who is a person in authority?
A person directly vested with jurisdiction,
whether as an individual or as a member of
some court or governmental corporation,
board, or commission, shall be deemed a
person in authority. A barangay captain and a
barangay chairman shall also be deemed a
person in authority (Article 152, as amended)

Who is an agent of a person in authority?
An agent of a person in authority is one who, by
direct provision of law or by election or by
appointment by competent authority, is
charged with the maintenance of public order
and the protection and security of life and
property, such as a barrio councilman and
barrio policeman and barangay leader, and any
person who comes to the aid of persons in
authority. (Article 152, as amended)

In the second form, there is a need to
distinguish a situation where a person in
authority or his agent was attacked while
performing official functions.

If the attack was done during the exercise of
official functions, the crime is always direct
assault.

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 how defiance of the law and its
representative of all hazards. However, if the
victim is only an agent of a person in authority,
the force to constitute the crime need not be
serious, as the law with respect to the person in
authority uses the phrase lays hands upon a
person in authority. (US v Tabiana, 37 Phil 51)

It is also important that the offender knew that
the person he is attacking is a person in
authority or an agent of the person in authority,
performing his official functions. No knowledge
means no contempt.

Pushing a policeman and giving him fist blows
without hitting him is not direct assault.

On the second form of assault, the intimidation
or resistance must be serious whether the
offender party is an agent only or he is a person
in authority.

Can the crime of direct assault be complexed
with the material consequence of the unlawful
act?
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
or contempt of authority, the crime would be
direct assault with murder or homicide, as the
case may be.

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 or
homicide with direct assault depending on the
presence qualifying circumstances in killing the
victim. (Pp v Abalos, 258 SCRA 253)

When the persons in authority or their agents
descended to matters which are private in
nature, an attack made by one (1) against the
other is not direct assault.

When the accused challenged a district
supervisor of the Bureau of Public Schools to a
fight, for failure of the latter to accommodate
the recommendee of the former for the
position of teacher, even if the district
supervisor accepted the challenge, the attack
made by the accused constitutes direct assault,
because the character of a person in authority
or his agent is not assumed or laid off at will.
But attaches to him until he ceases to be in
office. (Justo v CA, 99 Phil 463)

What does on occasion of such performance
mean?
It means that the impelling motive of the attack
is the performance of official duty. The words
on occasion signify because or by reason
of the past performance of official duty, even if
at the very time of the assault no official duty
was being discharged. (Justo v CA, 99 Phil 453)

When can assault be qualified?
1. When the assault is committed with a
weapon; or
2. When the offender is a public officer or
employee; or
3. When the offender lays hands upon a
person in authority.

Direct assault cannot be committed during
rebellion.

The crime of slight physical injuries is absorbed
in direct assault if committed against an agent
of a person in authority. If committed against a
person in authority, it will be considered as a
separate crime.

The crime of direct assault is not committed
when the person in authority or his agent is
suspended or under suspension when he is
attacked.

ARTICLE 149
INDIRECT ASSAULTS

Elements:
1. That the person in authority or his
agent is the victim of any of the forms
of direct assault defined in Article 148.
2. That the person comes to the aid of
such authority or his agent.
3. That the offender makes use of force or
intimidation upon such person coming
to the aid of the authority or his agent.

Indirect assault can be committed only when
direct assault is also committed.

The offended party in indirect assault may be a
private person.

A private person who comes to the rescue of an
authority or his agent enjoys the privileges of
the latter, and any person who uses force or
intimidation upon such person under the
circumstances is guilty of atentado (assault)
under Article 149.