Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 270 views

    People v. Tulin

    Uploaded by

    Zyra C.
    The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of four men for piracy in Philippine waters. The men had boarded and seized control of the cargo vessel M/T Tabangao as it was sailing off the coast of Mindoro, forcing the crew to sail to Singapore and transfer the cargo. While one man argued that the amended penal code superseded the law under which they were convicted, the court found that the laws exist harmoniously and both apply to their acts of piracy initiated in Philippine waters.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People v. Tulin

    Uploaded by

    Zyra C.
    270 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of four men for piracy in Philippine waters. The men had boarded and seized control of the cargo vessel M/T Tabangao as it was sailing off the coast of Mindoro, forcing the crew to sail to Singapore and transfer the cargo. While one man argued that the amended penal code superseded the law under which they were convicted, the court found that the laws exist harmoniously and both apply to their acts of piracy initiated in Philippine waters.

    Original Description:

    digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of four men for piracy in Philippine waters. The men had boarded and seized control of the cargo vessel M/T Tabangao as it was sailing off the coast of Mindoro, forcing the crew to sail to Singapore and transfer the cargo. While one man argued that the amended penal code superseded the law under which they were convicted, the court found that the laws exist harmoniously and both apply to their acts of piracy initiated in Philippine waters.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    270 views2 pages

    People v. Tulin

    Uploaded by

    Zyra C.
    The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of four men for piracy in Philippine waters. The men had boarded and seized control of the cargo vessel M/T Tabangao as it was sailing off the coast of Mindoro, forcing the crew to sail to Singapore and transfer the cargo. While one man argued that the amended penal code superseded the law under which they were convicted, the court found that the laws exist harmoniously and both apply to their acts of piracy initiated in Philippine waters.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    People vs.

    Tulin
    [G.R. No. 111709. August 30, 2001]
    MELO, J.:
    Facts:
    M/T Tabangao, a cargo vessel owned by the PNOC Shipping and Transport Corporation, loaded with kerosene,
    regular gasoline, and diesel oil, with a total value of P40,426,793,87. was sailing off the coast of Mindoro.
    The vessel was suddenly boarded, with the use of an aluminum ladder, by seven fully armed pirates who were armed
    with M-16 rifles, handguns, and bolos. They detained the crew and took complete control of the vessel. Thereafter,
    Loyola ordered three crew members to paint over, using black paint, the name "M/T Tabangao" on the front and rear
    portions of the vessel, as well as the PNOC logo on the chimney of the vessel. The vessel was then painted with the
    name "Galilee," with registry at San Lorenzo, Honduras. The crew was forced to sail to Singapore, all the while
    sending misleading radio messages to PNOC that the ship was undergoing repairs.
    PNOC, after losing radio contact with the vessel, reported the disappearance of the vessel to the Philippine Coast
    Guard and secured the assistance of the Philippine Air Force and the Philippine Navy. However, search and rescue
    operations yielded negative results. The ship arrived in the vicinity of Singapore where another vessel called "Navi
    Pride" anchored beside it. Emilio Changco ordered the crew of "M/T Tabangao" to transfer the vessel's cargo to the
    hold of "Navi Pride".
    M/T Tabangao"then arrived at Calatagan, Batangas, but the vessel remained at sea. The members of the crew were
    released. The incident was reported to the NBI.
    The four men, were found guilty of piracy in Philippine Waters. They appealed. One of them, Hiong, ratiocinates
    that he can no longer be convicted of piracy in Philippine waters as defined and penalized in PD. 532 because RA
    7659 which amended Article 122 of the Revised Penal Code, has impliedly superseded PD 532. He maintains that
    in order to reconcile the two laws, the word "any person" in PD 532 must be omitted such that it shall only apply to
    offenders who are members of the complement or to passengers of the vessel, whereas RA 7659 shall apply to
    offenders who are neither members of the complement or passengers of the vessel, hence, excluding him from the
    coverage of the law.
    Issue: Whether the conviction is proper.
    Held: Yes.
    Article 122 of the Revised Penal Code, before its amendment, provided that piracy must be committed on the high
    seas by any person not a member of its complement nor a passenger thereof. Upon its amendment by RA 7659, the
    coverage of the pertinent provision was widened to include offenses committed "in Philippine waters." On the other
    hand, under PD 532 (issued in 1974), the coverage of the law on piracy embraces any person including "a
    passenger or member of the complement of said vessel in Philippine waters." Hence, passenger or not, a member of
    the complement or not, any person is covered by the law.
    RA neither superseded nor amended the provisions on piracy under PD 532. All the presidential decree did was to
    widen the coverage of the law, in keeping with the intent to protect the citizenry as well as neighboring states from

    crimes against the law of nations. For this reason, piracy under the Article 122, as amended, and piracy under
    Presidential Decree No. 532 exist harmoniously as separate laws.
    As regards the contention that the trial court did not acquire jurisdiction over the person of Hiong since the crime
    was committed outside Philippine waters, unquestionably, the attack on and seizure of "M/T Tabangao" and its
    cargo were committed in Philippine waters, although the captive vessel was later brought by the pirates to Singapore
    where its cargo was off-loaded, transferred, and sold. Although PD 532 requires that the attack and seizure of the
    vessel and its cargo be committed in Philippine waters, the disposition by the pirates of the vessel and its cargo is
    still deemed part of the act of piracy, hence, the same need not be committed in Philippine waters.
    Moreover, piracy falls under Title One of Book Two of the Revised Penal Code. As such, it is an exception to the
    rule on territoriality in criminal law.

    You might also like