Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-51770 March 20, 1985
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
FRNCISCO GLIT, defendant-appellant.

CONCEPCION, !R., J:
The prisoner was arrested for illin! the victi" oil the occasion of a robber#. $e had
been detained and interro!ated al"ost continuousl# for five da#s, to no avail. $e
consistentl# "aintained his innocence. There was no evidence to lin hi" to the cri"e.
%bviousl#, so"ethin! drastic had to be done. A confession was absolutel# necessar#.
&o the investi!atin! officers be!an to "aul hi" and to torture hi" ph#sicall#. &till the
prisoner insisted on his innocence. $is will had to be broen. A confession "ust be
obtained. &o the# continued to "altreat and beat hi". 'The# covered his face with a
ra! and pushed his face into a toilet bowl full of hu"an waste. The prisoner could not
tae an# "ore. $is bod# could no lon!er endure the pain inflicted on hi" and the
indi!nities he had to suffer. $is will had been broen. $e ad"itted what the
investi!atin! officers wanted hi" to ad"it and he si!ned the confession the# prepared.
(ater, a!ainst his will, he posed for pictures as directed b# his investi!ators, purportin!
it to be a reenact"ent.
This incident could have happened in a Russian !ula! or in $itler's )er"an#. But no it
did not. *t happened in the Philippines. *n this case before +s.
The Revised Penal Code punishes the "altreat"ent of prisoners as follows,
ART. -./. Maltreatment of prisoners. 0 The penalt# of arresto mayor in its "ediu"
period to prision correccional in its "ini"u" period, in addition to his liabilit# for the
ph#sical in1uries or da"a!e caused, shall be i"posed upon an# public officer or
e"plo#ee who shall over do hi"self in the correction or handlin! of a prisoner or
detention prisoner under his char!e, b# the i"position of punish"ents in a cruel and
hu"iliatin! "anner.
*f the purpose of the "altreat"ent is to e2tort a confession, or to obtain so"e
infor"ation fro" the prisoner, the offender shall be punished b# prision correccional in
its "ini"u" period, te"porar# special dis3ualification and a fine not e2ceedin! /44
pesos, in addition to his liabilit# for the ph#sical in1uries or da"a!e caused.
This Court in a lon! line of decisions over the #ears, the latest bein! the case of
People vs. Cabrera,
1
has consistentl# and stron!l# conde"ned the practice of
"altreatin! prisoners to e2tort confessions fro" the" as a !rave and unfor!ivable
violation of hu"an ri!hts. But the practice persists. 5ortunatel#, such instances
constitute the e2ception rather than the !eneral rule.
Before +s for "andator# review is the death sentence i"posed upon the accused
5rancisco )alit b# the Circuit Cri"inal Court of Pasi!, Ri6al, in Cri". Case No. CCC-
7**--/89 of said court.
The record shows that in the "ornin! of Au!ust -., :9;;, Mrs. Natividad 5ernando, a
widow, was found dead in the bedroo" of her house located at Barrio )eroni"o,
Montalban, Ri6al, as a result of seven <;= wounds inflicted upon different parts of her
bod# b# a blunt instru"ent.
2
More than two wees thereafter, police authorities of
Montalban piced up the herein accused, 5rancisco )alit, an ordinar# construction
worer <pion= livin! in Mariina, Ri6al, on suspicion of the "urder. %n the followin! da#,
however, &epte"ber 8, :9;;, the case was referred to the National Bureau of
*nvesti!ation <NB*= for further investi!ation in view of the alle!ed li"ited facilities of the
Montalban police station. Accordin!l#, the herein accused was brou!ht to the NB*
where he was investi!ated b# a tea" headed b# NB* A!ent Carlos 5lores.
"
NB* A!ent
5lores conducted a preli"inar# interview of the suspect who alle!edl# !ave evasive
answers to his 3uestions.
#
But the followin! da#, &epte"ber 9, :9;;, 5rancisco )alit
voluntaril# e2ecuted a Salaysay ad"ittin! participation in the co""ission of the cri"e.
$e i"plicated >ulin! ?ula# and Pablin! ?ula# as his co"panions in the cri"e.
5
As a
result, he was char!ed with the cri"e of Robber# with $o"icide, in an infor"ation filed
before the Circuit Cri"inal Court of Pasi!, Ri6al, co""itted as follows,
That on or about the -.rd da# of Au!ust :9;; in the "unicipalit# of Montalban,
province of Ri6al, Philippines, and within the 1urisdiction of this $onorable Court, the
above-na"ed accused, conspirin! and confederatin! to!ether with >ulin! ?oe and
Pablin! ?oe, whose true *dentities and present whereabouts are still unnown and
three of the" "utuall# helpin! and aidin! one another, with intent of !ain and b#
"eans of force, inti"idation and violence upon the person of one Natividad 5ernando
while in her dwellin!, did, then and there wilfull#, unlawfull#, and feloniousl# tae, steal
and carr# awa# fro" the person of said Natividad 5ernando, cash "one# of an
undeter"ined a"ount, belon!in! to said Natividad 5ernando, thereb# causin! da"a!e
and pre1udice to the latter in an undeter"ined a"ount@ that b# reason or on the
occasion of said robber#, and for purpose of enablin! the" <accused= to tae, steal
and carr# awa# the said cash "one# in pursuance of their conspirac# and for the
purpose of insurin! the success of their cri"inal act, with intent to ill, did, then and
there wilfull#, unlawfull#, and feloniousl# attac, assault and stab with a da!!er said
Natividad 5ernando on the different parts of her bod#, thereb# inflictin! "ultiple in1uries
on the head and e2tre"ities, which directl# caused her death, and the total a"ount of
the loss is P:4,444.44 includin! valuables and cash.
Trial was held, and on Au!ust ::, :9;8, i""ediatel# after the accused had ter"inated
the presentation of his evidence, the trial 1ud!e dictated his decision on the case in
open court, findin! the accused !uilt# as char!ed and sentencin! hi" to suffer the
1
death penalt#@ to inde"nif# the heirs of the victi" in the su" of P::4,444.44, and to
pa# the costs. $ence, the present recourse.
The incri"inator# facts of the case, as found b# the trial court, are as follows,
5ro" the evidence adduced in this case, it was !athered that in the earl# "ornin! of
Au!ust -., :9;;, a ;4-#ear old wo"an na"ed Natividad 5ernando, widow, in the
twili!ht of her life, was robbed and then haced to death b# the accused and two
others in her <victi"'s= own residence at Montalban, Ri6al.
Prosecution witness 5lorentino 7alentino testified that he heard accused 5rancisco
)alit and his wife havin! an ar!u"ent in connection with the robber# and illin! of the
victi", Natividad 5ernando. *t appears that on Au!ust :8, :9;;, accused )alit and two
others, na"el#, >ulin! ?ula# and a certain APablin!A accidentall# "et each other at
Mariina, Ri6al, and in their conversation, the three a!reed to rob Natividad 5ernando@
that it was further a!reed a"on! the" to enter the pre"ises of the victi"'s house at
the bac #ard b# cli"bin! over the fence@ that once inside the pre"ises, the# will
search ever# roo", especiall# the aparador and filin! cabinets, with the sole ai" of
looin! for cash "one# and other valuables.
Bitness 7alentino further testified that on Au!ust --, :9;;, at around C,44 o'cloc in
the afternoon, accused 5rancisco )alit and his two co"panions, >ulin! ?ula# and
Pablin!, as per their previous a!ree"ent, "et at the place where the# for"erl# saw
each other in Mari3uina, Ri6al@ that the three conspirators too a 1eepne# for
Montalban and upon passin! the Montalban Municipal Buildin!, the# stopped and the#
waited at the side of the road until the hour of "idni!ht@ that at about :-,44 o'cloc that
ni!ht, the three repaired to the pre"ises of the victi", Natividad 5ernando@ that the#
entered the said pre"ises throu!h the bac wall of the house@ that while enterin! the
pre"ises of said house, >ulin! ?ula# saw a bolo, l#in! near the pi!!er# co"pound,
which he piced up and used it to destro# the bac portion of the wall of the house@
that it was >ulin! ?ula# who first entered the house throu!h the hole that the# "ade,
followed b# the accused )alit and ne2t to hi" was APablin!A, that it was alread# earl#
dawn of Au!ust -., :9;; when the three were able to !ain entrance into the house of
the victi"@ as the three could not find an#thin! valuable inside the first roo" that the#
entered, >ulin! ?ula# destro#ed the screen of the door of the victi", Natividad
5ernando@ that upon enterin! the roo" of the victi", the three accused decided to ill
first the victi", Natividad 5ernando, before searchin! the roo" for valuables@ that
>ulin! ?ula#, who was then holdin! the bolo, be!an hacin! the victi", who was then
sleepin!, and accused )alit heard a "oanin! sound fro" the victi"@ that after the
victi" was illed, the three accused be!an searchin! the roo" for valuables@ that the#
helped each other in openin! the iron cabinet inside the roo" of the victi", where the#
found so"e "one#@ that when the three accused left the roo" of the victi", the#
brou!ht with the" so"e papers and pictures which the# threw outside@ that after illin!
and robbin! the victi", the three accused went out of the pre"ises of the house, usin!
the sa"e wa# b# which the# !ained entrance, which was throu!h the bac portion of
the wall@ that the three accused waled towards the river ban where the# divided the
loot that the# !ot fro" the roo" of the victi"@ that their respective shares a"ount to
P;4.44 for each of the"@ and that after receivin! their shares of the loot, the three
accused left and went ho"e.
Bhen witness 5lorentino 7alentino was in his roo", which was ad1oinin! that of
accused 5rancisco )alit, he overheard accused )alit and his wife 3uarrelin! about the
intention of accused )alit to leave their residence i""ediatel#@ that he further stated
that he overheard accused )alit sa#in! that he and his other two co"panions robbed
and illed Natividad 5ernando.
As a result of the illin!, the victi", Natividad 5ernando, suffered no less than seven
stab wounds. There was "assive cerebral he"orrha!e and the cause of death was
due to shoc and he"orrha!e, as evidenced b# the Medico-(e!al Necrops# Report
<E2hs. 'C' and 'C--'=, and the pictures taen of the deceased victi" <E2hs. 'E', 'E-:' and
'E--'=.
The accused, upon the other hand, denied participation in the co""ission of the
cri"e. $e clai"ed that he was in his house in Mariina, Ri6al, when the cri"e was
co""itted in Montalban, Ri6al. $e also assailed the ad"issibilit# of the e2tra-1udicial
confession e2tracted fro" hi" throu!h torture, force and inti"idation as described
earlier, and without the benefit of counsel.
After a review of the records, Be find that the evidence presented b# the prosecution
does not support a conviction. *n fact, the findin!s of the trial court relative to the acts
attributed to the accused are not supported b# co"petent evidence. The principal
prosecution witness, 5lorentino 7alentino "erel# testified that he and the accused
were livin! to!ether in one house in Mariina, Ri6al, on Au!ust -., :9;;, because the
"other of his wife is the wife of the accused@ that when he returned ho"e at about
D,44 o'cloc in the "ornin! fro" the police station of Mariina, Ri6al, the accused and
his wife were 3uarrelin! <nagtatalo=@ that he heard that the accused was leavin! the
house because he and his co"panions had robbed AAlin! NeneA, the owner of a
poultr# far" and pi!!er# in Montalban, Ri6al@ that the wife of the accused was
i"plorin! hi" not to leave, but the latter was insistent@ that he saw the accused
carr#in! a ba! containin! about two handfuls <dakot= of coins which he had taen fro"
Alin! Nene@ that upon learnin! of what the accused had done, he went to the
Montalban police the ne2t da# and reported to the police chief about what he had
heard@ and that a wee later, Montalban police"en went to their house and arrested
the accused.
$

This Court, in the case of Morales vs. Ponce Enrile,
7
laid down the correct procedure
for peace officers to follow when "ain! an arrest and in conductin! a custodial
investi!ation, and which Be reiterate,
At the ti"e a person is arrested, it shall be the dut# of the arrestin! officer to infor"
hi" of the reason for the arrest and he "ust be shown the warrant of arrest, if an#. $e
shall be infor"ed of his constitutional ri!hts to re"ain silent and to counsel, and that
an# state"ent he "i!ht "ae could be used a!ainst hi". The person arrested shall
have the ri!ht to co""unicate with his law#er, a relative, or an#one he chooses b# the
"ost e2pedient "eans 0 b# telephone if possible 0 or b# letter or "essen!er. *t shall
2
be the responsibilit# of the arrestin! officer to see to it that this is acco"plished. No
custodial investi!ation shall be conducted unless it be in the presence of counsel
en!a!ed b# the person arrested, b# an# person on his behalf, or appointed b# the
court upon petition either of the detainee hi"self or b# an#one on his behalf. The ri!ht
to counsel "a# be waived but the waiver shall not be valid unless "ade with the
assistance of counsel. An# state"ent obtained in violation of the procedure herein laid
down, whether e2culpator# or inculpator#, in whole or in part, shall be inad"issible in
evidence.
There were no e#ewitnesses, no propert# recovered fro" the accused, no state
witnesses, and not even fin!erprints of the accused at the scene of the cri"e. The onl#
evidence a!ainst the accused is his alle!ed confession. *t behooves +s therefore to
!ive it a close scrutin#. The state"ent be!ins as follows,
TAN%N), *pina!bibi!a#-ala" o sa in#o an! in#on! "!a arapatan sa ilali" n! &ali!an!-Batas n! Pilipinas na
un! in#on! nanaisin a# "aaarin! hindi a#o "a!bi!a# n! isan! sala#sa#, na hindi rin a#o "aaarin! pilitin o
satan at pan!auan upan! "a!bi!a# n! naturan! sala#sa#, na anu"an an! in#on! sasabihin sa pa!sisi#asat
na ito a# "aaarin! laban sa in#o sa anu"an! usapin na "aaarin! ilahad sa anu"an! huu"an o tribunal dito sa
Pilipinas, na sa pa!sisi#asat na ito a# "aaarin! atulun!in "o an! isan! "ananan!!ol at un! saalin! hindi "o
a#an! ba#aran an! isan! "ananan!!ol a# "aaarin! bi!#an a n! isa n! NB*. N!a#on at ala" "o na an! "!a
ito naahanda a ban! "a!bi!a# n! isan! usan!-loob na sala#sa# sa pa!tatanon! na itoE
&A)%T, %po.
&uch a lon! 3uestion followed b# a "onos#llabic answer does not satisf# the
re3uire"ents of the law that the accused be infor"ed of his ri!hts under the
Constitution and our laws. *nstead there should be several short and clear 3uestions
and ever# ri!ht e2plained in si"ple words in a dialect or lan!ua!e nown to the person
under investi!ation. Accused is fro" &a"ar and there is no showin! that he
understands Ta!alo!. Moreover, at the ti"e of his arrest, accused was not per"itted to
co""unicate with his law#er, a relative, or a friend. *n fact, his sisters and other
relatives did not now that he had been brou!ht to the NB* for investi!ation and it was
onl# about two wees after he had e2ecuted the salaysay that his relatives were
allowed to visit hi". $is state"ent does not even contain an# waiver of ri!ht to counsel
and #et durin! the investi!ation he was not assisted b# one. At the supposed
reenact"ent, a!ain accused was not assisted b# counsel of his choice. These
constitute !ross violations of his ri!hts.
The alle!ed confession and the pictures of the supposed re-enact"ent are
inad"issible as evidence because the# were obtained in a "anner contrar# to law.
Trial courts are cautioned to loo carefull# into the circu"stances surroundin! the
tain! of an# confession, especiall# where the prisoner clai"s havin! been "altreated
into !ivin! one. Bhere there is an# doubt as to its voluntariness, the sa"e "ust be
re1ected in toto.
(et a cop# of this decision be furnished the Minister of >ustice for whatever action he
"a# dee" proper to tae a!ainst the investi!atin! officers.
B$ERE5%RE, the 1ud!"ent appealed fro" should be, as it is hereb#, &ET A&*?E,
and another one entered ACF+*TT*N) the accused 5rancisco )alit of the cri"e
char!ed. (et hi" be released fro" custod# i""ediatel# unless held on other char!es.
Bith costs de oficio.
&% %R?ERE?.
3