Subayco vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 117267-310, 22 August 1996

G.R. No.
117267-117310
GENEROSO N. SUBAYCO, ALFREDO T. ALCALDE, and ELEUTERIO O. IBAÑEZ, petitioners, vs.

SANDIGANBAYAN and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.
August 22, 1996
FACTS:
There was a rally held at Escalante, Negros Occidental that started on September 18, 1985. It was planned
to go on until September 21, 1985, the anniversary of the proclamation of martial law by then President
Marcos. The rally was without permit from the local authorities, although the plan was not kept secret from
them. In fact, this planned demonstration was taken up at a conference called by the Provincial Command
and attended by the accused Capt. Sanson of the 334th PC Company stationed at Sagay, among other
unit commanders. Capt. Sanson, was informed that the rallyists had failed to honor their commitment not
to barricade the entire portion of the national highway so as not to obstruct traffic. He was likewise informed
that the demonstrators were collecting money from passing motorists and that the demonstrators were
becoming unruly.
After failing to peacefully dispense the crowd, fire-fighting personnel and men under Capt. Jugan of the
Escalante INP, the CHDF headed by Sgt. Subayco and another team headed by Lt. Supaco were deployed.
Fire trucks were dispatched to hose the demonstrators with water but even after the water from them had
been exhausted, the demonstrators stayed put. Capt. Sason ordered his men to throw teargas to the
demonstrators, the tear gas caused the demonstrators to lie face down on the ground; they persisted in
their places rather than disperse. Then, a single shot rang out followed by successive gunfire from different
directions. The firing lasted for a few minutes. Twenty (20) demonstrators were shot dead and twenty-four
(24) others were wounded by the military and para-military forces of the Marcos government.
The prosecution contends that the whole dispersal operation was an unlawful conspiracy, that the firing
at the crowd was part of the dispersal operation, and that all those who took part in the dispersal operation
should be held liable for each death and each injury that resulted therefrom.
The accused denied the existence of conspiracy. Subayco and Ibañez claimed that they merely fired into
the air but not toward the crowd. On his part, Alcalde admitted that he fired his weapon to prevent the
rallyists from climbing the firetruck.
On the basis of the evidence adduced and following its theory of implied conspiracy, the respondent Court
held petitioners liable for the deaths and injuries of all the victims. It is this finding of implied conspiracy
that petitioners assail in the petition at bar.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the petitioners are guilty of the crime of murder and frustrated murder and whether unlawful
conspiracy exists between the petitioners-accused to fire at the protesters.
RULING:
YES. The petitioners are guilty of the crime of murder and frustrated murder. The court upheld the
respondent court’s ruling proving the existence of an implied conspiracy among the petitioners.
Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony
and decide to commit it. It may be deduced from the mode and manner in which the offense was committed.
In the case at bar, At the first crack of gunfire coming from CHDF Alfredo Quinatagcan (a.k.a. Pidong Bagis),
from shooting a rallyist named Jovy Jaravelo, commenced firing of petitioners and their companions at the
demonstrators, as if on signal. They fired indiscriminately toward the demonstrators who were then already
lying prone on the ground. There was no imminent danger to their safety. Not just one or a few shots were
fired but several. The firing lasted a few minutes and cost the lives and limbs of the demonstrators. The
collective acts of the petitioners and their companions clearly show the existence of a common design
toward the accomplishment of a united purpose.
DISPOSITION:
IN VIEW WHEREOF, the Decision of the Sandiganbayan promulgated October 3, 1994 is affirmed. Let
copies of this Decision be furnished the Secretary of Justice and the Secretary of Interior and Local
Government that they may undertake the necessary efforts to effectuate the early arrest of the other
accused in the cases at bar. Costs against petitioners.

Subayco vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 117267-310, 22 August 1996

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Subayco vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 117267-310, 22 August 1996

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Subayco vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 117267-310, 22 August 1996

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

G.R. No.

GENEROSO N. SUBAYCO, ALFREDO T. ALCALDE, and ELEUTERIO O. IBAÑEZ, petitioners, vs.

August 22, 1996

You might also like