Module 4:

CRIMES AGAINST
PUBLIC INTEREST

__________________________
Name of Student

Reynaldo M. Esmeralda, RC, MSCrim, LLB/JD

Subject Teacher

1
 MODULE 4

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST

INTRODUCTION
This module will discuss about the crime against public interest define and penalized under
Act No. 3815, otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines. These are crimes
which involve deceit, misrepresentation, or falsity against the public at large. If the misrepresentation
or deceit or falsity was purposely availed of against a particular person the same will constitute
estafa. Its coverage includes Article 161 to Article 189. The crimes in this title are in the nature of
fraud or falsity to the public. The essence of the crime under this title is that which defraud the public
in general. There is deceit perpetrated upon the public. This is the act that is being punished under
this title.
The crimes are grouped into three categories:
A. Forgeries: these refer to deceits involving:
1. The seal of the government, the signature and stamp of the chief executive
2. Coins
3. Treasury or bank notes, obligations and securities of the government
4. Documents

B. Other Falsities: these are deceits pertaining to : (1). Authority, rank or title (2) Names (3)
Uniforms and insignias and (4) False Testimonies
C. Frauds or acts involving machinations in public biddings and (2) Combinations and
Monopolies in Restraint of Trade and Commerce
In addition, this module will cover also special laws related to crime against public interest
such as Presidential Decree No. 247 (Defacement, Mutilation, Tearing, Burning or Destroying
Central Bank Notes and Coins), Commonwealth Act No. 142 (Regulating the Use of Aliases) and
Republic Act No. 8293 (An Act Prescribing the Intellectual Property Code and Establishing the
Intellectual Property Office, Providing for Its Power and Functions, and for Other Purposes)

LEARNING OBJECTIVES
General Objectives

At the end of the lesson, students should be able to:

1. identify and define all crimes against public interest;
2. enumerate all the elements or essential requisites of each crimes against public interest;
3. determine who are liable and conceptualize how the crimes against public interest is committed;
4. give example of each of the crimes against public interest; and
5. apply what they learn in actual cases.

Specific Objectives
At the end of the lesson, students should be able to:
1. know the different felony that false to counterfeiting;
2. differentiates counterfeiting from mutilation;
3. define what is forgery and know how it is committed;
4. know the coverage of Presidential Decree No. 247;
5. define what is falsification, it kind and know how it is committed;
6. define document and differentiates the different kind of documents;
7. know when falsification is complexed with other crimes;
8. familiarized the rules on how to determine whether the act constitute only falsification or estafa or
both;
9. know what constitute usurpation of authority or official functions;

2
 10. define and differentiates using fictitious name and concealing true name and harmonize it with the
provision of Commonwealth Act No. 142 (Regulating the Use of Aliases);
11. know what constitute Illegal use of uniforms or insignia;
12. define what is false testimony and differentiates it with perjury;
13. define and know what is subordination of perjury;
14. know the purpose of Machinations in public auction;
15. know the punishable under Republic Act No. 8293 (An Act Prescribing the Intellectual Property Code
and Establishing the Intellectual Property Office, Providing for Its Power and Functions, and for Other
Purposes).

LEARNING CONTENTS
TITLE IV. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST

Crimes against public interest

1. Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the Philippines (Art. 161);
2. Using forged signature or counterfeiting seal or stamp (Art. 162);
3. Making and importing and uttering false coins (Art. 163);
4. Mutilation of coins, importation and uttering of mutilated coins (Art. 164);
5. Selling of false or mutilated coins, without connivance (Art. 165);
6. Forging treasury or bank notes or other documents payable to bearer, importing and uttering
of such false or forged notes and documents (Art. 166);
7. Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments not payable to bearer (Art. 167);
8. Illegal possession and use of forged treasury or bank notes and other instruments of credit
(Art. 168);
9. Falsification of legislative documents (Art. 170);
10. Falsification by public officer, employee or notary (Art. 171);
11. Falsification by private individuals and use of falsified documents (Art. 172);
12. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and telephone messages and use of said falsified
messages (Art. 173);
13. False medical certificates, false certificates of merit or service (Art. 174);
14. Using false certificates (Art. 175);
15. Manufacturing and possession of instruments or implements for falsification (Art. 176);
16. Usurpation of authority or official functions (Art. 177);
17. Using fictitious name and concealing true name (Art. 178);
18. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia (Art. 179);
19. False testimony against a defendant (Art. 180);
20. False testimony favorable to the defendant (Art. 181);
21. False testimony in civil cases (Art. 182);
22. False testimony in other cases and perjury (Art. 183);
23. Offering false testimony in evidence (Art. 184);
24. Machinations in public auction (Art. 185);
25. Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade (Art. 186);
26. Importation and disposition of falsely marked articles or merchandise made of gold, silver, or
other precious metals or their alloys (Art. 187);
27. Substituting and altering trademarks and trade names or service marks (Art. 188);
28. Unfair competition and fraudulent registration of trade mark or trade name, or service mark;
fraudulent designation of origin, and false description (Art. 189).

Article 161. Counterfeiting the Great Seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands,
Forging the Signature or Stamp of the Chief Executive

Acts punished
1. Forging the great seal of the Government of the Philippines;
3
2. Forging the signature of the President;
3. Forging the stamp of the President.

• When the signature of the President is forged, it is not falsification but forging of signature
under this article
• Signature must be forged, others signed it – not the President.

Article 162. Using Forged Signature or Counterfeit Seal or Stamp

Elements
1. The great seal of the Republic was counterfeited or the signature or stamp of the Chief
Executive was forged by another person;
2. Offender knew of the counterfeiting or forgery;
3. He used the counterfeit seal or forged signature or stamp.

• Offender is NOT the forger/not the cause of the counterfeiting

Article 163. Making and Importing and Uttering False Coins

Elements
1. There be false or counterfeited coins;
2. Offender either made, imported or uttered such coins;
3. In case of uttering such false or counterfeited coins, he connived with the counterfeiters or
importers.

Coin is counterfeit – if it is forged, or if it is not an article of the government as legal tender, regardless
if it is of no value.
• Counterfeiting – imitation of legal or genuine coin (may contain more silver, different design)
such as to deceive an ordinary person in believing it to be genuine –
• Essence of this article: making of coins without authority
• Utter – to pass counterfeited coins, deliver or give away
• Import – to bring to port the same
• Both Philippine and foreign state coins
• Applies also to coins withdrawn from circulation

Kinds of coins the counterfeiting of which is punished

1. Silver coins of the Philippines or coins of the Central Bank of the Philippines;
2. Coins of the minor coinage of the Philippines or of the Central Bank of the Philippines;
3. Coin of the currency of a foreign country.

Article 164. Mutilation of Coins

This has been repealed by PD 247.(07/18/73) (Defacement, Mutilation, Tearing, Burning or
Destroying Central Bank Notes and Coins)

Acts punished
1. Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with the further requirements that there be intent to
damage or to defraud another;
2. Importing or uttering such mutilated coins, with the further requirement that there must be
connivances with the mutilator or importer in case of uttering.
The first acts of falsification or falsity are –
(1) Counterfeiting – refers to money or currency;
(2) Forgery – refers to instruments of credit and obligations and securities issued by the
Philippine government or any banking institution authorized by the Philippine government to
issue the same;

4
(3) Falsification – can only be committed in respect of documents.
In so far as coins in circulation are concerned, there are two crimes that may be committed:
(1) Counterfeiting coins -- This is the crime of remaking or manufacturing without any authority
to do so.

• Mutilation – to take off part of the metal either by filling it or substituting it for another metal
of inferior quality, to diminish by inferior means (to diminish metal contents).
• Foreign notes and coins NOT included. Must be legal tender.
• Must be intention to mutilate.
• Mutilation under the Revised Penal Code is true only to coins. It cannot be a crime under the
Revised Penal Code to mutilate paper bills because the idea of mutilation under the code is
collecting the precious metal dust. However, under Presidential Decree No. 247,
mutilation is not limited to coins.

In the crime of counterfeiting, the law is not concerned with the fraud upon the public such
that even though the coin is no longer legal tender, the act of imitating or manufacturing the coin of
the government is penalized. In punishing the crime of counterfeiting, the law wants to prevent
people from trying their ingenuity in their imitation of the manufacture of money.
It is not necessary that the coin counterfeited be legal tender. So that even if the coin
counterfeited is of vintage, the crime of counterfeiting is committed. The reason is to bar the
counterfeiter from perfecting his craft of counterfeiting. The law punishes the act in order to
discourage people from ever attempting to gain expertise in gaining money. This is because if
people could counterfeit money with impunity just because it is no longer legal tender, people would
try to counterfeit non-legal tender coins. Soon, if they develop the expertise to make the
counterfeiting more or less no longer discernible or no longer noticeable, they could make use of
their ingenuity to counterfeit coins of legal tender. From that time on, the government shall have
difficulty determining which coins are counterfeited and those which are not. It may happen that the
counterfeited coins may look better than the real ones. So, counterfeiting is penalized right at the
very start whether the coin is legal tender or otherwise.

(2) Mutilation of coins -- This refers to the deliberate act of diminishing the proper metal
contents of the coin either by scraping, scratching or filling the edges of the coin and the
offender gathers the metal dust that has been scraped from the coin.
Requisites of mutilation under the Revised Penal Code
(1) Coin mutilated is of legal tender;
(2) Offender gains from the precious metal dust abstracted from the coin; and
(3) It has to be a coin.
Mutilation is being regarded as a crime because the coin, being of legal tender, it is still in
circulation and which would necessarily prejudice other people who may come across the coin.
For example, X mutilated a P 2.00 coin, the octagonal one, by converting it into a round one
and extracting 1/10 of the precious metal dust from it. The coin here is no longer P2.00 but only P
1.80, therefore, prejudice to the public has resulted.
There is no expertise involved here. In mutilation of coins under the Revised Penal Code,
the offender does nothing but to scrape, pile or cut the coin and collect the dust and, thus,
diminishing the intrinsic value of the coin.
Mutilation of coins is a crime only if the coin mutilated is legal tender. If the coin whose metal
content has been depreciated through scraping, scratching, or filing the coin and the offender
collecting the precious metal dust, even if he would use the coin after its intrinsic value had been
reduced, nobody will accept the same. If it is not legal tender anymore, no one will accept it, so
nobody will be defrauded. But if the coin is of legal tender, and the offender minimizes or decreases
the precious metal dust content of the coin, the crime of mutilation is committed.

5
 In the example, if the offender has collected 1/10 of the P 2.00 coin, the coin is actually worth
only P 1.80. He is paying only P1.80 in effect defrauding the seller of P .20. Punishment for
mutilation is brought about by the fact that the intrinsic value of the coin is reduced.
The offender must deliberately reduce the precious metal in the coin. Deliberate intent arises
only when the offender collects the precious metal dust from the mutilated coin. If the offender does
not collect such dust, intent to mutilate is absent, but Presidential Decree No. 247 will apply.

Presidential Decree No. 247 (Defacement, Mutilation, Tearing, Burning or Destroying Central
Bank Notes and Coins)

It shall be unlawful for any person to willfully deface, mutilate, tear, burn, or destroy in any
manner whatsoever, currency notes and coins issued by the Central Bank.
Mutilation under the Revised Penal Code is true only to coins. It cannot be a crime under the
Revised Penal Code to mutilate paper bills because the idea of mutilation under the code is
collecting the precious metal dust. However, under Presidential Decree No. 247, mutilation is not
limited to coins.

Note that persons making bracelets out of some coins violate Presidential Decree No. 247.
The primary purpose of Presidential Decree No. 247 at the time it was ordained was to stop
the practice of people writing at the back or on the edges of the paper bills, such as "wanted: pen
pal".
So, if the act of mutilating coins does not involve gathering dust like playing cara y cruz, that
is not mutilation under the Revised Penal Code because the offender does not collect the metal
dust. But by rubbing the coins on the sidewalk, he also defaces and destroys the coin and that is
punishable under Presidential Decree No. 247.

Article 165. Selling of False or Mutilated Coin, without Connivance

Acts punished
1. Possession of coin counterfeited or mutilated by another person, with intent to utter the same,
knowing that it is false or mutilated;
Elements
1. Possession;
2. With intent to utter; and
3. Knowledge.
2. Actually uttering such false or mutilated coin, knowing the same to be false or mutilated.
Elements
1. Actually uttering; and
2. Knowledge.

• Does not require that the counterfeited coin is legal tender.

• Uttering false or mutilated coins, knowing it to be false or mutilated, is punishable even if the
offender was not in connivance with the counterfeiter or mutilator.
• R.A 427 prohibits and punishes possession and exportation of silver and/or nickel coins.

Article 166. Forging Treasury or Bank Notes or Other Documents Payable to Bearer;
Importing and Uttering Such False or Forged Notes and Documents
• Forging – by giving a treasury or bank note or document payable to bearer/order an
appearance of a true and genuine document
• Falsification – by erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering by any means the figures
and letters, words, signs contained therein
• E.g. falsifying – lotto or sweepstakes ticket. Attempted estafa through falsification of an
obligation or security of the Philppines.

6
 • Obligation or security includes: bonds, certificate of indebtedness, bills, national bank
notes, coupons, treasury notes, certificate of deposits, checks, drafts for money,
sweepstakes money
• Money issued by the Central Bank of the Philippines are bank notes (ex. PhP20 bills; PhP100
bills, etc).

Acts punished
1. Possession of coin, counterfeited or mutilated by another person, with intent to utter the
same, knowing that it is false or mutilated;
Elements
1. Possession;
2. With intent to utter; and
3. Knowledge.
2. Actually uttering such false or mutilated coin, knowing the same to be false or mutilated.
Elements
4. Actually uttering; and
5. Knowledge.

Article 167. Counterfeiting, Importing, and Uttering Instruments Not Payable to Bearer
Acts punished
1. Possession of coin, counterfeited or mutilated by another person, with intent to utter the
same, knowing that it is false or mutilated;
Elements
1. Possession;
2. With intent to utter; and
3. Knowledge.
2. Actually uttering such false or mutilated coin, knowing the same to be false or mutilated.
Elements
4. Actually uttering; and
5. Knowledge.

Article 168. Illegal Possession and Use of False Treasury or Bank Notes and Other
Instruments of Credit
Elements
1. Any treasury or bank note or certificate or other obligation and security payable to bearer, or
any instrument payable to order or other document of credit not payable to bearer is forged
or falsified by another person;
2. Offender knows that any of those instruments is forged or falsified;
3. He either –
a. uses any of such forged or falsified instruments; or
b. possesses with intent to use any of such forged or falsified instruments.
• Act sought to be punished: Knowingly possessing with intent to use any of such
forged treasury or bank notes

How forgery is committed under Article 169

1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument payable to bearer or to order mentioned
therein, the appearance of a true and genuine document;
2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering by any means the figures, letters, words,
or sign contained therein.

• If all acts done but genuine appearance is not given, the crime is frustrated

7
 Forgery under the Revised Penal Code applies to papers, which are in the form of obligations
and securities issued by the Philippine government as its own obligations, which is given the same
status as legal tender. Generally, the word “counterfeiting” is not used when it comes to notes; what
is used is “forgery.” Counterfeiting refers to money, whether coins or bills.
The Revised Penal Code defines forgery under Article 169. Notice that mere change on a
document does not amount to this crime. The essence of forgery is giving a document the
appearance of a true and genuine document. Not any alteration of a letter, number, figure or design
would amount to forgery. At most, it would only be frustrated forgery.
When what is being counterfeited is obligation or securities, which under the Revised Penal
Code is given a status of money or legal tender, the crime committed is forgery.

Example of forgery under par. 2

• Mr. “B” received a treasury warrant, a cheque issued by the Government. It was originally
made payable to Mr. “Y”, or his order. Mr. “B” wrote Mr. “Y’s” name on the back of the said
treasury warrant as if Mr. “Y” had indorsed it , and then presented it for payment. It was paid
to Mr. “B”
• -This is forgery because there was material alteration on a genuine document.

Article 170. Falsification of Legislative Documents

• Accused must not be a public official entrusted with the custody or possession of
such document otherwise Art 171 applies .
• The falsification must be committed on a genuine, true and authentic legislative
document. If committed on a simulated, spurious or fabricated legislative document,
the crime is not punished under this article but under Article 171 or 172.
• Offender can be private person or public officer, where said public officer is not
entrusted with the custody of such document.

Elements
1. There is a bill, resolution or ordinance enacted or approved or pending approval by either
House of the Legislature or any provincial board or municipal council;
2. Offender alters the same;
3. He has no proper authority therefor;
4. The alteration has changed the meaning of the documents.
The words "municipal council" should include the city council or municipal board – Reyes.
The crime of falsification must involve a writing that is a document in the legal sense. The
writing must be complete in itself and capable of extinguishing an obligation or creating rights or
capable of becoming evidence of the facts stated therein. Until and unless the writing has attained
this quality, it will not be considered as document in the legal sense and, therefore, the crime of
falsification cannot be committed in respect thereto.

Forgeries Upon Documents

A. The proper term is Falsification

B. Document is : (1) any writing, whether paper based or in any solid surface, which is complete,
creating rights or extinguishing obligations, or defining the relations between persons. Examples:
deeds and contracts, receipts, promissory notes, checks (2) a writing used as evidence of the facts
contained in the document such as death/birth certificates; clearances, medical records, x-rays;
driver’s license

Five classes of falsification:

(1) Falsification of legislative documents;
(2) Falsification of a document by a public officer, employee or notary public;

8
(3) Falsification of a public or official, or commercial documents by a private individual;
(4) Falsification of a private document by any person;
(5) Falsification of wireless, telegraph and telephone messages.

General Classification: (In falsification, it is essential to specify the document falsified)

1. Falsification of Legislative Document punished under Art. 170- bills, resolutions, ordinances
whether approved or pending approval, by any legislative body

a). the act of falsification is limited to alterations of a genuine legislative document

b). if by any other means, such as simulating a legislative document, the offense is ordinary
falsification.

2. Falsification of a Non-Legislative Document

a). Document proper under Article 171 and 172

b). Wireless, Telegram, cablegram, telephone Messages under Article 173

c). Certificates under Article 174

Distinction between falsification and forgery:

Falsification is the commission of any of the eight acts mentioned in Article 171 on legislative
(only the act of making alteration), public or official, commercial, or private documents, or wireless,
or telegraph messages.
The term forgery as used in Article 169 refers to the falsification and counterfeiting of treasury
or bank notes or any instruments payable to bearer or to order.
Note that forging and falsification are crimes under Forgeries.

Importance of distinguishing Falsification of Public from Falsification of Private

Documents

1. As to penalty: a higher penalty is imposed for falsification of public documents

2. As to modes of commission: there are 8 ways of falsifying a public documents as against 7

as to private documents

3. As to complexing with Estafa: Estafa cannot be complexed with Falsification of Private

document. The reason is because both have a common element which is damage

a). The crime is falsification if the deception cannot be committed without falsification, i.e. the
falsification is committed as a means to commit estafa.

b). It is estafa if the estafa can be committed without the necessity of falsifying a document

4. As to requirement of damage: In falsification of a private document the act of falsification must

be coupled with either (a) actual damage even if there was no intent to cause damage or (b) an
intent to cause damage even if no actual damage resulted. In falsification of public document,
the gravamen of the offense is the perversion of truth; the loss of faith and confidence by the
public in the document even if there is no actual damage t the public

9
Principles Involving Falsification:

1. The Falsification maybe complexed with the crimes of Estafa ( save private documents)
malversation or theft

2. Maybe committed intentionally or through negligence

a). Examples through negligence: (i) The Register of Deeds who issued a duplicate title without
noting on its back a notice of the encumbrances (ii) A Clerk who issues a certified true copy of a
birth certificate but inadvertently copied the wrong entries (iii) a person who signs a check to
accommodate a payee without verifying the payee’s identification

b). Thus the accused who is charged with intentional falsification may be convicted for falsification
thru negligence without amending the Information because the former includes the latter ( see PP
vs Uy 475 SCRA 248)

3. As to the liability of Heads of Offices as final approving authority if it turns out the document to
which they affixed their signatures contains falsities:

a). The Arias Principle ( Arias vs. Sandiganbayan, 180 SCRA 315) as reiterated in Magsuce vs.
Sandiganbayan ( Jan. 3, 1995) holds: “ All heads of offices have a right to rely to a reasonable extent
on their subordinate and on the good faith of those who prepared the documents, and are not liable
for the falsification”

b). Exceptions: (i). Where there is a clear evidence of conspiracy with the authors (ii) if through their
negligence, they brought about the commission of the crime. Thus in PP. vs. Rodis the Head of
Office was held liable where the document signed by him contained anomalies which were glaring
in the document

4. The following are accepted as defenses

a). Good faith and lack of intent to pervert the truth. As in the case of a co-employee who signed for
another in the payroll because the latter was sick

b). Alterations which are in the nature of corrections such as changing the civil status from single to
married in a Community Tax Certificate

d). Alterations which do not affect the integrity or veracity of the document. Example: The
Certification by the treasurer that he paid the salary on July 10 when in truth it was on July 12

e) Minor inaccuracies as in a deed of sale which declared the consideration was paid in cash when
it was paid in two installments

5. Presumption of Authorship of the Falsification: In the absence of satisfactory explanation, one

found in possession of and who used a forged document is the forger of said document. If a person
had in his possession a falsified document and he made sue of it, taking advantage of it and profiting
thereby, the clear presumption is that he is the material author of the falsification. ( Nierva vs. PP.
503 SCRA 114).

6. There is a ruling that generally, falsification of public/commercial documents have no attempted

or frustrated stages unless the falsification is so imperfect that it may be considered as frustrated.

10
(Personal Opinion: the crime should be consumated since what was frustrated was not the act but
the purpose of the offender)

7. There are as many falsifications as there are documents falsified; or as there are separate acts
of falsification committed by one person within the same period of time

a). The falsification of several signatures in one payroll is only one falsification

b). Several checks falsified at the same time gives rise to several separate crimes

8. Falsification is not a continuing crime

Proof of Falsification.

A. An allegation of forgery and a perfunctory comparison of the signature/handwritings by

themselves cannot support a claim of forgery, as forgery cannot be presumed and must
be proved by clear, positive and convincing evidence and the burden of proof lies on the
party alleging forgery.

B. Criteria to determine forgery or falsification: per Ladignon vs. CA ( 390 Phil. 1161 as
reiterated in Rivera vs. Turiano ( March 7, 2007)

The process of identification must include not only the material differences between or among the
signatures/handwritings but a showing of the following:

(i) the determination of the extent, kind and significance of the resemblance and variation ( of the
handwriting or signature)

(ii) that the variation is due to the operation of a different personality and not merely an expected
and inevitable variation found in the genuine writing of the same writer

(iii) that the resemblance is a result more or less of a skillful imitation and not merely a habitual and
characteristic resemblance which normally appears in genuine handwriting

Article 171. Falsification by Public Officer, Employee or Notary or Ecclesiastical Minister

Coverage: this article provides: (1) the penalty of falsification if committed by a public officer
or employee or a notary or an ecclesiastical minister. The penalty is higher than if committed
by a private person. The document may be any document. (2) And the eight acts of
falsification.

A. The public officer must take advantage of his official position or that there was abuse of
office. By this is meant that his functions include participating in the preparation, recording,
keeping, publishing or sending out to the public of the falsified document otherwise he will
be punished as a private person. As for instance: secretaries, the Clerk of Court; the record
officers; those who issue receipts or licenses; the Register of Deeds; Local Civil Registrar.

B. As for an ecclesiastic, the document he falsified must affect the civil status of a person,
else he will be considered as a private person. The usual document involved is a marriage
contract

11
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer, employee, or notary public;
2. He takes advantage of his official position;
3. He falsifies a document by committing any of the following acts:
a. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric;
Requisites:
• That there be an intent to imitate, or an attempt to imitate
• That the two signatures or handwritings, the genuine and the forged, bear some
resemblance, to each other
• (lack of similitude/imitation of a genuine signature will not be a ground for
conviction under par. 1 but such is not an impediment to conviction under par.
2)

In counterfeiting, there is an imitation of the original handwriting, signature or rubric.

(People v. Gonzales, 68 OG 5558). To counterfeit a handwriting or signature is to
create one that is so similar to the genuine as to make it difficult to distinguish and
thus easily fool the public. This act includes creating or simulating a fictitious
handwriting or signature

b. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when
they did not in fact so participate; ]

1). There is no need to imitate the signature or handwriting

2). This includes simulating a public document like a Warrant of Arrest as having been
issued by a judge

3) Examples: impersonating a person in a document; voting in place of a registered

voter, posing as payee if a negotiable instrument in order to encash the same

Lack of similitude or imitation of a genuine signature will not be a ground for conviction
under par. (a) but such is no impediment to conviction under par. (b). Thus, one who
induces others to sign the names of the third persons in a payroll even without
attempting to imitate the genuine signatures is guilty of falsification by causing it to
appear that those who took no part in the making of the payroll had participated
therein. (US v. Friemuth, 3 Phil. 318, dissenting)

c. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other

than those in fact made by them;

1). This is twisting the statements or putting words into the mouth of another

2). Substituting a forged will where the accused is now named as an heir in lieu of the
original where he was not so named

3). Where the accused was instructed to prepare a Special Power of Attorney over a
parcel of land, with himself as the agent but he instead prepared a deed of sale with
himself as the vendee

Requisites:
• That the offender caused it to appear in a document that a person/s participated
in an act or a proceeding; and
• That such person/s did not in fact so participate in the act or proceeding

12
d. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;

Requisites:
• That the offender makes in a document statements in a narration of facts
• That he has a legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated by him;
(required by law to be done) and
• That the facts narrated by the offender are absolutely false; and
• That the perversion or truth in the narration of facts was made with the wrongful
intent of injuring a third person

The elements are: (1) Obligations on the part of the accused to disclose the truth; and
(2) Wrongful intent to injure a third person. (People v. Quasha, 39 OG 2826) Legal
obligation means there is a law requiring the disclosure of the facts contained in a
document. “Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts” refers to statements
made in a document, hence in writing and not to oral recitations of facts. The amount
written on a check is not a narration of facts by the drawer representing that he has
money in the bank. (People v. Tugbang, 196 SCRA 341)

A passport application is not required by law. (People v. Gonzales, 6259, March 31,
1971) However, in the Community Tax Certificate the obligation to disclose the truth
is inherent because under the law the person to whom the certificate is issued must
state to the officer who issues the same, the true facts required to appear therein, and
to guarantee that the facts given correctly and truly identify the holder of the certificate.
(People v. Po Giok To, 7236, April 20, 1955). This decision modified in part only the
Quasha case because wrongful intent to injure a third person as a rule is not an
element if the falsification is that of a public document.

The accused, as the appointing authority, had the legal obligation to disclose in the
certification his true relationship with the appointee. It cannot be said that he acted in
good faith when he made the untruthful statement. (Layno v. People, 93842, Sept. 7,
1992)

Good faith may not be invoked in the crime of falsification of a public document as
criminal intent and the will to commit the crime are presumed to exist unless the
contrary appears. (Siquian v. People, 171 SCRA 223)

NOTE:
1). This require that (i) the accused knows that what he imputes is false (ii) the falsity
involves a material fact (iii) there is a legal obligation for him to disclose the truth and
(iv) such untruthful statements are not contained in an affidavit or a statement required
by law to be sworn to.

2). by legal obligation is meant that the law requires a full disclosure of facts such as in a
public official’s Statements of Assets and Liabilities; the Personal Data Sheet
submitted to the NBI; the contents of an Application for Marriage; the Community Tax
Certificate

3). Narration of facts means an assertion of a fact and does not include statements of
opinion or conclusions of law. Thus when the accused placed himself as “eligible” in
his statement of candidacy when in truth he is disqualified, this is not a narration of
fact but a conclusion of law. Similarly, the accused as claimant to a land stated in his

13
 application that he entitled to the ownership when under the law he is disqualified, is
not liable

4). There is no falsification if there is some colorable truth in the statement of facts by the
accused

5). False statements in an application form of the Civil Service, which was under oath, for
police examination is perjury not falsification

6). But when a third person, not the Affiant, alters a prepared Affidavit, the crime
committed by him is falsification under mode number 6

e. Altering true dates - This requires that the date must be material as in the date of birth
or marriage; date of arrest; date when a search warrant was issued; date of taking the
oath of office

This mode of falsification is committed only if the true date is essential. Thus, if the
information recites that payment was made by the accused of a salary on July 31,
although actual payment was made on July 23, since payment was in fact made, it
was immaterial if this was done on July 23, or July 31. (People v. Reodica, 62 Phil.
567)

f. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its

meaning- The change must affect the integrity of the document. It must make the
document speak something false so that alterations to make it speak the truth cannot
be falsification.

Requisites:
• That there be an alteration (change) or intercalation (insertion) on a document
• That it was made on a genuine document
• That the alteration/intercalation has changed the meaning of the document
• That the change made the document speak something false.

An alteration which makes a document speak the truth does not constitute falsification.
(US v. Mateo, 25 Phil. 324) The word “alteration” has inherent in it the idea of deception
– making the instrument speak of something which the parties did not intend to speak.

EXAMPLES:
1. Changing the grades in one’s Transcript of Records
2. Changing one’s time of arrival in the DTR
3. Changing the stated consideration a deed of sale
4. Deleting a condition in a contract of lease

g. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original

document when no such original exists, or including in such a copy a statement
contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine original;
 This can only be committed by the Official Custodian of documents
 Example: Issuing a Certified True Copy of a birth certificate of a person
when no such certificate exists or
 Issuing a true copy of a title and indicating therein the land is mortgaged
when no such encumbrance exist on the original on file with the office

14
 h. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol,
registry, or official book.

There is no falsification thru false narration of facts. Perjury is the crime committed.
Falsification may be committed even if the public document is simulated (US v. Corral,
15 Phil. 383), or is not in the official form. (People v. Tupasi, 290, March 23, 1937)

The accused, a bookkeeper, who deliberately falsified the ledger by not recording in
his own personal account the chits for articles bought by him from the stores commits
falsification by omission. (People v. Dizon, 47 Phil. 350)

While intent to gain or to injure a third party is immaterial in falsification of public

documents, it is necessary that the alteration must be such as to affect the integrity of
the document or to change the effects which it would otherwise produce. (People v.
Pacana, 47 Phil. 48) The sanctity of the public document, a residence certificate,
cannot be taken lightly as being a “mere scrap of paper.” Intent to cause damage or
actual damage, is not an indispensable requisite for falsification of public document.

It is an established rule that when a person has in his possession a falsified document
and makes use of it, the presumption or inference is that such person falsified it.
(People v. Manansala, 105 Phil. 1253)

Example: Inserting a Birth Certificate in the recorded of the Civil Registrar to

make it appear the birth was recorded

4. In case the offender is an ecclesiastical minister who shall commit any of the offenses
enumerated, with respect to any record or document of such character that its falsification
may affect the civil status of persons.
For example, a customer in a hotel did not write his name on the registry book, which was
intended to be a memorial of those who got in and out of that hotel. There is no complete document
to speak of. The document may not extinguish or create rights but it can be an evidence of the facts
stated therein.
Note that a check is not yet a document when it is not completed yet. If somebody writes on
it, he makes a document out of it.
The document where a crime was committed or the document subject of the prosecution may
be totally false in the sense that it is entirely spurious. This notwithstanding, the crime of falsification
is committed.
It does not require that the writing be genuine. Even if the writing was through and through
false, if it appears to be genuine, the crime of falsification is nevertheless committed.

What is a DOCUMENT?

Document is any written instrument by which a right is established or an obligation is

extinguished (People v. Moreno, 48 OG 119), or every deed or instrument executed by a person by
which some disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced or set forth. (People v. Nillosquin, 48 OG
4453)

There are four kinds of documents:

1. Public document: a) it is created, executed or issued by a public official in response to
exigencies of public service, or in execution of which a public official intervened; or b)
document notarized by a notary public or a competent public official with the solemnities
required by law.
15
 Examples are: (a) Official receipt of the government, (b) Community Tax Certificate, etc.

Note: In case of falsification of Travel Documents ( Visa, Passport, and any document
submitted in connection therewith) the law applicable is R.A. 8239 or the Philippine
Passport Act.

Public Documents: they consists of the following

a). Those which embody the official acts of a public officer such as Decisions/Resolutions;
Administrative Orders; Marriage Contract; Oaths of Office

b). Those issued by a public officer or in which he participates, virtute officii ( by virtue of his
office) such as clearances; certificates of appearance, designation of personnel; receipts.
These are the so called “Official Documents”.

Thus all official documents are public documents but not all public documents are official
documents

c). Those acknowledged before a Notary Public such as deeds and conveyances

d). Private documents :

(i). which already formed part of the public records ( Public by Incorporation) such as private
deeds submitted to the office of the Register of Deeds; acknowledgment letter sent to the
Local \Civil Registrar; Protest letters to the Assessor’s Office; libelous letters offered as
exhibits in a trial; letters formally seeking opinions

(ii). those which are intended to form part of the public record ( Public by Intention)

Per Monteverde vs. PP ( Aug. 12, 2000) involving falsification of sales invoices required by
the BIR, it was held: : “ If the document is intended by law to be part of the public or official
record, the preparation of which being in accordance with rules and regulations issued by the
government, the falsification of that document, although it was a private document at the time
of the falsification ton, is regarded as falsification of public or official documents”

Examples: Falsification of Civil Service or Bar Exam Booklets; Application letters and
personal data sheets sent to personnel officers.

2. Official document: any instrument issued by the government, by public official in the exercise
of the functions of his office or its agents or its officers having the authority to do so and the
offices they are authorized to issue.

Examples are: (a) Register of Attorneys, (b) document required by the NBI or any bureau to
be filled up for purposes of its record and information.

3. Commercial document : a)used by merchants or businessmen to promote or facilitate trade

or credit transactions or commercial dealings; b) regulated and defined by the Code of
Commerce or other commercial laws;

Commercial document is any instrument executed in accordance with the Code of Commerce
or any mercantile law containing disposition of commercial rights or obligations.

16
 Examples: commercial checks; sales receipts and invoices; trust receipts; deposit
and withdrawal slips and bank passbooks; tickets issued to passengers; enrollment
forms; grades.

4. Private document: every deed or instrument executed by private individuals without

intervention of notary public or other persons legally authorized by which documents some
disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced or set forth.

A private document may become a public or official document when it becomes a part of the
public or official record. (US v. Nieto, 6 Phil. 582)

Examples: unnotarized deeds, letters, private receipts, class cards, timre records in
private employment. Vouchers of business people are private, not commercial,
documents ( Batulanon vs. PP, 502 SCRA 35)

Public document is broader than the term official document. Before a document may be
considered official, it must first be a public document. But not all public documents are official
documents. To become an official document, there must be a law which requires a public officer to
issue or to render such document. Example: A cashier is required to issue an official receipt for
the amount he receives. The official receipt is a public document which is an official document.

• Document: Any written instrument which establishes a right or by which an obligation is

extinguished. A deed or agreement executed by a person setting forth any disposition or
condition wherein rights and obligations may arise.
• Persons liable – public officer, employee or notary public or ecclesiastical minister
• Counterfeiting – imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric
• Feigning – simulating a signature, handwriting, or rubric out of one of which does not in fact
exist

• Under Republic Act 7975, when a public officer who holds a position classified as Grade 27
or higher, commits a crime in relation to the performance of his official functions, the case
against him will fall under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. If a private person is included
in the accusation because of the existence of conspiracy in the commission of the crime, the
Sandiganbayan shall maintain jurisdiction over the person of the co-accused, notwithstanding
the fact that said co-accused is a private individual. If the public officer is found guilty, the
same liability and penalty shall be imposed on the private individual.

Article 172. Falsification by Private Individual and Use of Falsified Documents

• There is a complex crime of falsification of pubic documents through reckless
imprudence.
• There is a complex crime of estafa through falsification of public, official or
commercial document. In the crime of estafa, damage or intent to cause damage is not
an element. It is sufficient that the offender committed or performed the acts of
falsification as defined and punished under Article 171. The two offenses can co-exist
as they have distinct elements peculiar to their nature as a crime. When the
falsification is committed because it is necessary to commit estafa, what we have is a
complex crime defined and punished under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code.

Acts punished
1. Falsification of public, official or commercial document by a private individual;
17
2. Falsification of private document by any person;
3. Use of falsified document.
Elements under paragraph 1
1. Offender is a private individual or public officer or employee who did not take advantage of
his official position;
2. He committed any act of falsification;
3. The falsification was committed in a public, official, or commercial document or letter of
exchange.

In a crime of falsification of a commercial document, damage or intent to cause damage is not

necessary because the principal thing punished is the violation of the public faith and the destruction
of the truth as therein solemnly proclaimed.

Elements under paragraph 2

1. Offender committed any of the acts of falsification except those under 7 and 8 of Article
171(7), that is, issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an
original document when no such original exists, or including in such a copy a statement
contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine original;
2. Falsification was committed in any private document;
3. Falsification causes damage to a third party or at least the falsification was committed with
intent to cause such damage.

The .elements are: (a) The document is false, and (b) there is damage of a third party or
intent to cause damage. Thus, interchanging the word “debit” and “credit” in a statement of
account by making it appear that he was the creditor instead of debtor constitutes falsification
of a private document although there is no actual damage as intent to cause such damage is
sufficient. (US v. Tan Chian, 17 Phil. 209)

The falsification of private documents is committed in any of the ways specified in Article 171
excepting paragraphs (g) and (h) thereof.

• Not necessary that the offender profited or hoped to profit from the falsification.
• Mere falsification of a private document is not enough to commit crime under paragraph 2 of
Article 172. Two acts must be done by the offender.
1. He must have performed in the private document the falsification contemplated under
Article 171.
2. He must have performed an independent act which operates to cause damage or
prejudice to a third person. The third person mentioned herein may include the
government. Damage is not limited to money or pecuniary prejudice. Damage to one’s
honor, reputation or good name is included.

There is no complex crime of estafa through falsification of a private document.

• Why? If a private document is falsified to cause damage to the offended party, the crime
committed is falsification of a private document. These two crimes have an element in
common: intent to cause damage or the damage itself. (People v. Paguilalan, 38 OG 410)
Remember that in estafa, damage or intent to cause damage is an indispensable element of
the crime. The same element is necessary to commit the crime of falsification of private
document. Since they have a common element, such element cannot be divided into the two
parts and considered as two separate offenses.

18
 • As there is no complex crime of estafa thru falsification of a private document, it is important
to ascertain whether the offender is to be charged with falsification of a private document or
with estafa. Cuello Calon maintains that if there is intent to defraud and the deceit employed
is not covered by any means in Article 171, estafa is committed. It seems that if the
falsification of a private document is committed as a means to commit estafa, the proper
crime to be charged is falsification. But if the estafa can be committed without the necessity
of falsifying a document, the proper crime to be charged is estafa.

Criteria to determine whether the crime is estafa only or falsification only :

• IF the falsification of the private document was essential in the commission of estafa because
the falsification, estafa cannot be committed, the crime is falsification; estafa becomes the
consequence of the crime.
• IF the estafa can be committed even without resorting to falsification, the latter being resorted
only to facilitate estafa, the main crime is estafa; falsification is merely incidental, since even
without falsification, estafa can be committed.
• A private document which is falsified to obtain money from offended party is a falsification of
private document only.
• An employee of a private company who punches the bundy clock on behalf of a co-employee
is guilty of falsification of a private document.
• One who will take the civil service examination for another and makes it appear that he is the
examinee is guilty of falsification of a public document.

Elements under the last paragraph

In introducing in a judicial proceeding –
1. Offender knew that the document was falsified by another person;
2. The false document is in Articles 171 or 172 (1 or 2);
3. He introduced said document in evidence in any judicial proceeding.

In use in any other transaction –

1. Offender knew that a document was falsified by another person;
2. The false document is embraced in Articles 171 or 172 (1 or 2);
3. He used such document;
4. The use caused damage to another or at least used with intent to cause damage.

Any person who shall knowingly introduce in evidence in any judicial proceeding or to the
damage of another or who, with intent to cause such damage, shall use any of the false
documents. (Art. 172)

The use of a falsified document is not necessarily included in the crime of falsification of a public
document. (People v. Mendoza, 93 Phil. 581) However, being the possessor and user of the
falsified document, he is presumed to be the forger or falsifier and the offense of introducing by
him of falsified document is already absorbed in the main offense of forgery or falsification.

Rules to observe in the use of a falsified document.

1. It is a crime when knowingly introduced in a judicial proceeding even if there is not intent
to cause damage to another. The use alone is not a crime. The mere introduction of the
forged document is the crime itself. But when the falsified document is knowingly
introduced in an administrative proceeding, the use alone is not a crime. There must be
intent to cause damage or damage is actually inflicted.
19
 2. Falsification of document is a separate and distinct offense from that of the use of falsified
documents. So if the falsification of document was done or performed because it was
necessary to the use of the same and in the commission of the crime, then we may have
a complex crime defined and punished under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code.
3. Good faith is a defense in falsification of public document.

Falsification complexed with other crimes:

1. Malversation through falsification of public document.

Accused, a public employee, altered the duplicates of receipts to appropriate the sum of P 1,000.
The falsification was the means of which the accused availed himself in committing the
malversation. (People v. Barbas, 60 Phil. 241)

2. Estafa through falsification of a public document.

Accused as postmaster wrote the name of the payee in a money order in the space provided for
the signature acknowledging the payment of the money order. He then appropriated the amount
corresponding to said money order. (People v. Geyrosaya, 53 Phil. 278)

3. Theft thru falsification of official document.

Accused falsified purchase order (PO) for supplies. Through said PO, he succeeded in obtaining
the goods. (People v. Sison, 44 OG 3354)

Article 173. Falsification of Wireless, Cable, Telegraph and Telephone Messages, and Use of
Said Falsified Messages
Acts punished
1. Uttering fictitious wireless, telegraph or telephone message;
Elements
1, Offender is an officer or employee of the government or an officer or employee of a
private corporation, engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable or
telephone message;
2. He utters fictitious wireless, cable, telegraph or telephone message.
2. Falsifying wireless, telegraph or telephone message;
Elements
1, Offender is an officer or employee of the government or an officer or employee of a
private corporation, engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable or
telephone message;
2. He falsifies wireless, cable, telegraph or telephone message.
3. Using such falsified message.
Elements
1. Offender knew that wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message was falsified by
an officer or employee of the government or an officer or employee of a private
corporation, engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable or
telephone message;
2. He used such falsified dispatch;

20
 3. The use resulted in the prejudice of a third party or at least there was intent to cause
such prejudice.

Article 174. False Medical Certificates, False Certificates of Merits or Service, Etc.
Persons liable
1. Physician or surgeon who, in connection with the practice of his profession, issues a false
certificate (it must refer to the illness or injury of a person);
[The crime here is false medical certificate by a physician.]
2. Public officer who issues a false certificate of merit of service, good conduct or similar
circumstances;
[The crime here is false certificate of merit or service by a public officer.]
3. Private person who falsifies a certificate falling within the classes mentioned in the two
preceding subdivisions.

Acts Punished
1. Issuing a false medical certificate by a physician or surgeon
a). The contents are not true in that the person was never examined; or that he actually had no
illness; or that the illness is not as serious as stated in the certificate; or that the period of
confinement or rest is not as stated therein.
2. Issuing a false certificate of merit or service, good conduct or similar circumstances by a public
officer
a). as in the case of a barangay captain who issues a Certificate of Good Moral Character to a
bully , or a head of office who issues a Certificate of Exemplary Conduct to an employee with
several disciplinary penalties
3). The act of falsifying by a private person of medical certificate or certificate of merit
a). The name of the crime is Falsification of a Medical Certificate or Certificate of Merit to
distinguish it from ordinary falsification
b). Example: the patient who altered the period of days of confinement
4. The act of knowingly using said false certificates

Article 175. Using False Certificates

Elements
1. The following issues a false certificate:
a. Physician or surgeon, in connection with the practice of his profession, issues
a false certificate;
b. Public officer issues a false certificate of merit of service, good conduct or
similar circumstances;
c. Private person falsifies a certificate falling within the classes mentioned in the
two preceding subdivisions.
2. Offender knows that the certificate was false;
3. He uses the same.

Article 176. Manufacturing and Possession of Instruments or Implements for Falsification

Acts punished

21
 1. Making or introducing into the Philippines any stamps, dies, marks, or other instruments
or implements for counterfeiting or falsification;
Examples: false seals, false branding instruments
NOTE: The tools need not be a complete set
2. Introducing into the Philippines of said instruments or implements
3. Possession of said implements with animus utendi or intent to use the instruments or
implements for counterfeiting or falsification made in or introduced into the Philippines by
another person.

II. OTHER FALSITIES

Note: the subject of these falsities are not papers, instruments or documents but : (1) official
authority or functions; (2) rank, title, names, (3) uniforms and insignias and (4) testimonies under
oath. These are also capable of being falsified or subjected to acts of deception

Article 177. Usurpation of Authority or Official Functions

Acts punished
1. Usurpation of authority- Usurpation of Authority- the crime committed by a person who
knowingly and falsely represents himself to be an officer agent, representative or any department
or agency of the Philippine government or foreign country.

Elements
1. Offender knowingly and falsely represents himself;
2. As an officer, agent or representative of any department or agency of the Philippine
government or of any foreign government.

• In usurpation of authority: The mere act of knowingly and falsely representing oneself is
sufficient.
• The representation must be active, i.e by words or acts and the accused need not actually
perform any function pertaining to the office misrepresented. What is punished is the act of
false misrepresentation. He who does not object when introduced as a ranking official is not
guilty of usurpation.

• This is different from the crime of Usurpation of Powers under articles 239 to 241 which deals
with interference in the functions of one department by another department

• This includes any government owned or controlled corporations

• Example: a private person greets tourists, gives them the key to the city, welcomes
them, by declaring that he is the city mayor

2. Usurpation of official functions- the crime committed by any person who actually performs an
act pertaining to a public official of the government or any agency thereof accompanied by a
pretense that he is such public official.

Elements
1. Offender performs any act;
2. Pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of the Philippine government or
any foreign government, or any agency thereof;
3. Under pretense of official position;
4. Without being lawfully entitled to do so.
22
 • There must be a pretense or falsie assertion of being a public official. In the absence thereof,
there is no usurpation of functions.

a. Thus one who enters a public school ands starts teaching pupils, without claiming to
be a teacher, is not liable. Same with one who asks questions on witnesses about a
crime without asserting he is a police investigator. Or one who directs traffic might be
performing a civic action.
b. One who introduces himself to be an NBI agent and begins interrogating witnesses is
liable. As with one who claims to be a BIR agent and begins going over the books of
a businessman, or one who claims to be with the Department of Labor and starts
inquiries as to the employment status of employees.
c. There is such a crime as Seduction through Usurpation of Official Functions.
• A public officer may also be an offender in this felony. Under this law, the act
committed must pertain to (1) the government, (2) or to any person in authority or (3)
to any public officer. The offender who is a public official must assumes a position
without color of law. As in the case of a number one councilor who took over the
position of the mayor who was on leave despite opinions that it be the vice mayor who
must be the acting mayor.
• However, if the authority or function usurped pertains to a diplomatic, consular or
other accredited officers of a foreign government, the offender is also liable under R.A.
75.

Article 178. Using Fictitious Name and Concealing True Name

Acts punished
1. Using fictitious name
Elements
1. Offender uses a name other than his real name;
2. He uses the fictitious name publicly;
3. Purpose of use is to conceal a crime, to evade the execution of a judgment or to cause
damage [to public interest – Reyes].

Using Fictitious Name is the act of publicly using a name other than one’s registered or
baptismal name for the purpose of either to: (1) conceal a crime (2) evade judgment or (3) cause
damage to public interest
• A fictitious name is any name which a person publicly applies to himself without authority of
law.
• The purpose is material even if it is simply to cause confusion among the public
• If the purpose is to cause damage to a private person’s interest, the crime may constitute
estafa
• If the purpose is to obstruct justice the offense is punished under P.D. 1829

The name of a person is what appears in his birth certificate. The name of a person refers to
his first name, surname, and maternal name. Any other name which a person publicly applies to
himself without authority of law is a fictitious name.

2. Concealing true name- the purpose is to conceal one’s identity. Such as in order to avoid
giving support or to avoid debtors.
Elements
1. Offender conceals his true name and other personal circumstances;
2. Purpose is only to conceal his identity

23
 • What the offender does to violate or commit this act is for him to conceal his true name and
other personal circumstances. His only motive in doing so is to conceal his identity. In
concealment of true name, the deception is done momentarily, just enough to conceal the
name of the offender. In the use of fictitious name, the offender presents himself before the
public with another name.
• EXAMPLE: A person under investigation by the police who gives a false name and false
personal circumstances, upon being interrogated, is guilty of this crime.

Use of Fictitious Name Concealing True

(178) Name (178)

Element of publicity must Publicity not necessary

be present

Purpose is to conceal a Purpose is to conceal

crime, to evade the identity
execution of a
judgement, or to cause
damage

When may a person use a name other than his registered or baptismal name?
1. When allowed by the court in a petition for a change of name
2. When used in the field of entertainment, literature or sports
a). Pen names of authors such as Mark Twain, Saki
b). Names in the entertainment industry:
(i). Nicholas Cage ……………………..Nicholas Coppola
(ii). Tom Cruise.………………………. Tomas Mapother IV
(iii). John Denver………… Henry John Deutschendorf Jr.
(iii). Bob Dylan ………………………..Robert Zimmerman
(iv). Enya………………………………Eithne Ni Bhraonian
(v). Eminem………………………….….. Marshall Mathers

(vi). Whoopie Goldberg……………………. Caryn Johnson

(vii). Elton John……………………………….Reginald White

(viii). Joseph Estrada………………….. …….Joseph Ejercito

(ix). FPJ………………………………………...Ronald Poe

24
c). Sport’s Monickers such as “Flash”: Speedy”” Bata”, “Sugar”

3. When allowed by law such as when a woman marries or when a person is legally adopted
4. Under the Witness Protection Program in order to protect the identity and safety of the witness

Commonwealth Act No. 142 (Regulating the Use of Aliases)

No person shall use any name different from the one with which he was registered at birth in
the office of the local civil registry, or with which he was registered in the bureau of immigration upon
entry; or such substitute name as may have been authorized by a competent court.
Exception: Pseudonym solely for literary, cinema, television, radio, or other entertainment
and in athletic events where the use of pseudonym is a normally accepted practice.

Article 179. Illegal Use of Uniforms or Insignia

The act punished is the public and improper use of any insignia, uniform or dress pertaining
to an office not held by the accused or to a class of persons of which he is not a member. The use
must be malicious i.e. to give the impression that the accused is a member of the office or class and
thereby enjoy the prestige and honor of that office or class.
Elements
1. Offender makes use of insignia, uniforms or dress;
2. The insignia, uniforms or dress pertains to an office not held by such person or a class of
persons of which he is not a member;
3. Said insignia, uniform or dress is used publicly and improperly.
• The wearing of a uniform, or insignia of an imaginary office ,non-existing office or
establishment is not a crime. It is necessary that the uniform or insignia represents an
office which carries authority, respect, dignity, or influence which the public looks up
to.
• So also, an exact imitation of a uniform or dress is unnecessary; a colorable
resemblance calculated to deceive the common run of people is sufficient.
• If the uniform, insignia, badge, emblem or rank, medal, patch or identification card
pertains to members of the of the armed forced of the Philippines or constabulary (now
PNP)what applies is R.A. 493. If it pertains to the uniform, regalia or decoration of a
foreign state, it is punished under R.A. 75.

Examples: unlawful use of ecclesiastical habit of a religious order; school uniforms; uniform of the
boy’s scout; the regalia of the Knights of Columbus

Article 180. False Testimony against A Defendant

Elements
1. There is a criminal proceeding;
2. Offender testifies falsely under oath against the defendant therein;
3. Offender who gives false testimony knows that it is false.
4. Defendant against whom the false testimony is given is either acquitted or convicted in a final
judgment.

Three forms of false testimony

1. False testimony in criminal cases under Article 180 and 181;
a. Against a defendant in criminal cases. (Art. 180)
25
 b. Favorable to the defendant in criminal cases. (Art. 181)

For one to be criminally liable under this Article, it is not necessary that the criminal case
where the witness testified is terminated first. It is not even required of the prosecution to
prove which of the two statements to be false by evidence other than the contradictory
statements. (People v. Arazola, 65 OG 10887)

2. False testimony in civil case under Article 182;

3. False testimony in other cases under Article 183.

False testimony, defined

• False testimony is a declaration under oath of a witness in a judicial proceeding which is
contrary to what is true, or to deny the same, or to alter essentially the truth. It requires a
criminal intent and cannot be committed thru negligence. So, if it is due to error or good faith,
it is not felonious. (Cuello Calon, II, p. 300)

Nature of the crime of false testimony.

• 1. It cannot be committed through reckless imprudence because false testimony requires
criminal intent or intent to violate the law is an essential element of the crime.
• 2. If the false testimony is due to honest mistake or error or there was good faith in making
the false testimony, no crime is committed.

Article 181. False Testimony Favorable to the Defendant

Elements
1. A person gives false testimony;
2. In favor of the defendant;
3. In a criminal case.

Article 182. False Testimony in Civil Cases

Elements
1. Testimony given in a civil case;
2. Testimony relates to the issues presented in said case;
3. Testimony is false;
4. Offender knows that testimony is false;
5. Testimony is malicious and given with an intent to affect the issues presented in said case.

PERJURY FALSE TESTIMONY

1. Non-judicial proceedings. 1. Given in a judicial proceeding

2. Statement or testimony is 2. Testimony need not be

required by law. required by law.

3. Amount involved is not 3. Amount involved in civil cases

material. is material.

4. immaterial whether statement 4. It is always material in

or testimony is favorable or not criminal cases.
to the accused.

False testimony vs. Perjury

26
When one testifies falsely before the court, the crime committed is false testimony. If one testifies
falsely in a non-judicial proceeding, the crime committed is perjury. In false testimony, it is not
required that the offender asserts a falsehood on a material matter. It is enough that he testifies
falsely with deliberate intent. In perjury, the witness must testify or assert a fact on a material matter
with a full knowledge that the information given is essentially contrary to the truth. Material matter
means the main fact which is the subject or object of the inquiry.

Article 183. False Testimony in Other Cases and Perjury in Solemn Affirmation

Perjury is the willful and corrupt assertion of falsehood under oath or affirmation administered by
authority of law on a material matter.

Any person who, knowingly make untruthful statements, shall testify under oath, or make an affidavit,
upon any matter before a competent person authorized to administer an oath in cases in which the
law so requires. Any person who, in case of a solemn affirmation made in lieu of an oath, shall
commit any of the falsehoods mentioned in this and the three preceding articles. (Art. 183)

Acts punished
1. By falsely testifying under oath;
2. By making a false affidavit/statement.

Elements of perjury
1. Offender makes a statement under oath or executes an affidavit upon a material matter;
2. The statement or affidavit is made before a competent officer, authorized to receive and
administer oaths;
3. Offender makes a willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood in the statement or affidavit;
4. The sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is required by law, that is, it is made
for a legal purpose.

• Subornation of perjury: procures another to swear falsely.

• Solemn affirmation: refers to non-judicial proceedings and affidavits
• A false affidavit to a criminal complaint may give rise to perjury
• The affidavit or sworn statement must be required by law like affidavit of adverse claim to
protect one’s interest on real property; or an affidavit of good moral character to take the bar
examination (Diaz vs. People, 191 SCRA 86)

• A “competent person authorized to administer an oath” means a person who has a right
to inquire into the questions presented to him upon matters under his jurisdiction
The phrase “when the law so requires” does not mean that the sworn statement or affidavit must be
required by law. The word “requires” is merely permissive, not mandatory.

False testimony is given in the course of a judicial proceeding, while perjury is not.

Where the defendant executed an affidavit stating that he lost his driver’s license of which he was
able to secure a new one, when in truth and in fact his driver’s license was confiscated by the
authorities, it was held that perjury was committed. (People v. Bautista, 43819, Dec. 11, 1936)
Unjustified statements in the personal data sheet in connection with employment in the government
constitutes perjury. (Inting v. Sandiganbayan, 524166, May 15, 1983)
27
A verified answer to a complaint filed in an ordinary civil case if false is not perjury as the verification
of the answer is not required by law. (Flordeliz v. Himalalaon, 84 SCRA 277)

There is no perjury purely on the basis of two contradicting statement. There must be other evidence
to show which of the two sworn statement is false. (US v. Capistrano, 40 Phil. 902)

Subornation of perjury is any person who procures a false witness and such person is convicted of
the crime of perjury. It no longer exists in our RPC but the act is punished as plain perjury in relation
to Article 17. The inducer becomes a principal by inducement and the one induced, a principal by
direct participation. (People v. Padol, 66 Phil. 365)
Article 184. Offering False Testimony in Evidence

Elements
1. Offender offers in evidence a false witness or testimony;
2 He knows that the witness or the testimony was false;
3. The offer is made in any judicial or official proceeding.
• The offender in this article knows that the witness to be presented is a false witness or that
the witness will lie while testifying.

Article 185. Machinations in Public Auctions

Any person who shall solicit any gift or promise as a consideration for refraining from taking
part in any public auction, and any person who shall attempt to cause bidders to stay away from an
auction by threats, gifts, promises, or any other artifice, with intent to cause reduction of the price of
the thing auctioned. (Art. 185)
Concept: The crime committed by any person who intends to cause the reduction of the price
of a thing auctioned and shall either (1) solicit any gift or a promise as a consideration for refraining
from taking part in any public auction, and (1) attempt to cause bidders to stay away from an auction
by threats, gifts, promises or any other artifice.

Acts punished
1. Soliciting any gift or promise as a consideration for refraining from taking part in any public
auction;

Elements
1. There is a public auction;
2. Offender solicits any gift or a promise from any of the bidders;
3. Such gift or promise is the consideration for his refraining from taking part in that public
auction;
4. Offender has the intent to cause the reduction of the price of the thing auctioned.

2. Attempting to cause bidders to stay away from an auction by threats, gifts, promises or any
other artifice.
NOTE: In the second mode, the threat, coercion or force, is absorbed but the bribery
is a separate offense
Elements
1. There is a public auction;

28
 2. Offender attempts to cause the bidders to stay away from that public auction;
3. It is done by threats, gifts, promises or any other artifice;
4. Offender has the intent to cause the reduction of the price of the thing auctioned.

Examples:

1. X knows Y is interested to buy a piano worth P250,000.00 being sold at an auction. X

approaches Y and says he can bid as high as P250,000.0 but will not bid if Y just give him
P25,000.00 so that Y has no competitor.
2. Y wants to buy the piano and knows that X is ready to bid against him. He tells X not to bid
and accept P25,000.00 instead.

When a thing is sold it is either through a direct sale to a particular individual or through public
bidding. Public bidding is preferred in order to obtain the best and most advantageous price. This is
especially true with respect to judgment debtors in case of judgment sales. The best and highest
price is achieved by leaving it to any interested buyer to offer a better price over those offered by
others. Any a scheme so that the article will be sold at a low price, is called machination.

Where two persons orally agreed that only one of them would submit a bid at a public bidding and
that to insure success of their scheme, they induced the only other party interested in the bidding to
withdraw therefrom in consideration of a certain sum of money, with the understanding that if they
would succeed, they would divide the auctioned property in proportion to their adjoining properties,
the crime under Article 185 is committed. (Ouano v. CA, 40203, Aug. 21, 1990)

Article 186. Monopolies and Combinations in Restraint of Trade

Acts punished
1. Combination to prevent free competition in the market;
Elements
1. Entering into any contract or agreement or taking part in any conspiracy or
combination in the form of a trust or otherwise;
2. In restraint of trade or commerce or to prevent by artificial means free competition in
the market.
2. By entering into a contract or agreement or taking part in any conspiracy or combination in
the form of a trust or otherwise, in restraint of trade or commerce or prevent by artificial means
free competition in the market.

3. Monopoly to restrain free competition in the market;

Elements
1. By monopolizing any merchandise or object of trade or commerce, or by combining
with any other person or persons to monopolize said merchandise or object;
2. In order to alter the prices thereof by spreading false rumors or making use of any
other artifice;
3. To restrain free competition in the market
4. Manufacturer, producer, or processor or importer combining, conspiring or agreeing with any
person to make transactions prejudicial to lawful commerce or to increase the market price
of merchandise.
Elements
1. Manufacturer, producer, processor or importer of any merchandise or object of
commerce;
2. Combines, conspires or agrees with any person;

29
 3. Purpose is to make transactions prejudicial to lawful commerce or to increase the
market price of any merchandise or object of commerce manufactured, produced, processed,
assembled or imported into the Philippines.

The grounds of liability are: (1) Knowingly permitting commission of said acts, or (2) Failing to
prevent commission of said acts.

Person/s liable:
• manufacturer
• producer
• processor
• importer

Crime is committed by:

• combining
• conspiring
• agreeing with another person

The purpose is:

• to make transactions prejudicial to lawful commerce
• to increase the market price of any merchandise or object of commerce manufactured,
produced, processed, assembled or imported into the Philippines

Also liable as principals:

• corporation/association
• agent/representative
• director/manager – who willingly permitted or failed to prevent commission of above offense

Aggravated if items are:

• food substance
• motor fuel or lubricants
• goods of prime necessity

Article 187. Importation and Disposition of Falsely Marked Articles or Merchandise Made of
Gold, Silver, or Other Precious Metals of Their Alloys
Elements
1. Offender imports, sells or disposes articles made of gold, silver, or other precious metals or
their alloys;
2. The stamps, brands, or marks of those articles of merchandise fail to indicate the actual
fineness or quality of said metals or alloys;
3. Offender knows that the stamps, brands, or marks fail to indicate the actual fineness or quality
of the metals or alloys.

• To be criminally liable, it is important to establish that the offender knows the fact that the
imported merchandise fails to indicate the actual fineness or quality of the precious metal. If
the importer has no expertise on the matter such that he has no way of knowing how the
fraud was committed, the existence of such fact may be seriously considered as a defense.
• What the law punishes herein is the selling of misbranded goods made of gold, silver and
other precious metals. Therefore, it must be shown that the seller knows that the merchandise
is misbranded. Hence, dishonesty is an essential element of the crime.

Article 188. Substituting and Altering Trademarks, Trade names, or Service Marks

30
Acts punished
1. Substituting the trade name or trademark of some other manufacturer or dealer, or a colorable
imitation thereof for the trade name or trademark of the real manufacturer or dealer upon any
article of commerce and selling the same;
2. Selling or offering for sale such articles of commerce knowing that the trade name or
trademark has been fraudulently used;
3. Using or substituting the service mark of some other person, or a colorable imitation of such
mark n the sale or advertising of his services;
4. Printing, lithographing or reproducing trade name, trademark, or service mark of one person
or a colorable imitation thereof to enable another person to fraudulently use the same
knowing the fraudulent purpose for which it is to be used.

• If a particular person is defrauded by the offender; as in the case of locally manufactured

goods, which the offender, by altering the label, are made to appear as imported articles and
sold to a particular person, the crime committed is undoubtedly estafa as far as the particular
person is concerned. But if the falsely mislabeled goods are displayed in a store and offered
for sale to the public in general, the crime committed is punished under Article 188. So, if the
deception is isolated and is confined to a particular person or group of persons, estafa is
committed. If the fraud is employed against the public, Article 188 is violated.
• Must not be another manufacturer otherwise unfair competition

Article 189. Unfair Competition, Fraudulent Registration of Trade Name, Trademark, or

Service Mark, Fraudulent Designation of Origin, and False Description
Acts punished
1. Unfair competition;
Elements
1. By selling his goods;
2. Giving them the general appearance of the goods of another manufacturer or dealer;
3. The general appearance is shown in the goods themselves, or in the wrapping of their
packages, or in the device or words therein, or in any feature of their appearance;
4. There is actual intent to deceive the public or defraud a competitor.
2. Fraudulent designation of origin; false description:
Elements
1. By affixing to his goods or using in connection with his services a false designation of
origin, or any false description or representation; and
2. Selling such goods or services.

• EXAMPLE: Accused caused to be affixed in the labels of the bottle containers of his food
seasoning a false designation of origin, that the said was packed in California, USA, when in
truth it was packed in the Philiippines.

3. Fraudulent registration
Elements
1. By procuring fraudulently from the patent office;
2. The registration of trade name, trademark or service mark

The true test of unfair competition is whether certain goods have been clothed with an
appearance which is likely to deceive the ordinary purchaser exercising ordinary care. (U.S.
vs. Manuel, 7 Phil. 221)

For unfair competition to take place, it must be the manufacturer of the goods who will cloth
or label his goods with the trade name or trademark of another manufacturer, who has
established a good name or good will in the mind of the public because of the quality of the

31
 merchandise manufactured by him. The imitator is also a manufacturer of the same kind of
product but of inferior quality. By labeling his product with the trademark or trade name of
said manufacturer, he profits from the goodwill of another.

• If the labeling or clothing of the goods is not done by another manufacturer, the crime
committed is not unfair competition but substitution of trademark or trade name under Article
188.

Republic Act No. 8293 (An Act Prescribing the Intellectual Property Code and Establishing
the Intellectual Property Office, Providing for Its Power and Functions, and for Other
Purposes)
Section 170. Penalties. – Independent of the civil and administrative sanctions imposed by
law, a criminal penalty of imprisonment from two (2) years to five (5) years and a fine ranging from
Fifty thousand pesos (P 50,000.00) to Two hundred thousand pesos (P 200,000.00), shall be
imposed on any person who is found guilty of committing any of the acts mentioned in Section 155,
Section 168 and Subsection 169.1.
Section 155. Remedies; Infringement. – Any person who shall, without the consent of the
owner of the registered mark:
155.1. Use in commerce any reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of a
registered mark or the same container or a dominant feature thereof in connection with the sale,
offering for sale, distribution, advertising of any goods or services including other preparatory steps
necessary to carry out the sale of any goods or services on or in connection with which such use is
likely to course confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive; or
155.2. Reproduce, counterfeit, copy or colorably imitate a registered mark or a dominant
feature thereof and apply such reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation to labels, signs,
prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles or advertisement intended to be used in commerce upon
or in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of goods or services on
or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive
shall be liable in a civil action for infringement by the registrant for the remedies hereinafter set forth:
Provided, that the infringement takes place at the moment any of the acts stated in Subsection 155.1
or this subsection are committed regardless of whether there is actual sale of goods or services
using the infringing material.
Section 168.1. Unfair Competition, Rights, Regulation and Remedies.
168.1. Any person who has identified in the mind of the public the goods he manufactures
or deals in, his business or services from those of others, whether or not a registered mark is
employed, has a property right in the goodwill of the said goods, business or service so identified,
which will be protected in the same manner as other property rights.
168.2. Any person who shall employ deception or any other means contrary to good faith by
which he shall pass off the goods manufactured by him or in which he deals, or his business, or
services for those of the one having established such goodwill, or who shall commit any acts
calculated to produce said result, shall be guilty of unfair competition, and shall be subject to an
action therefor.
168.3. In particular, and without in any way limiting the scope of protection against unfair
competition, the following shall be deemed guilty of unfair competition:
(a) Any person, who is selling his goods and gives them the general appearance of goods
of another manufacturer or dealer, either as to the goods themselves or in the wrapping of the
packages in which they are contained, or the devices or words thereon, on in any other feature or
their appearance, which would be likely to influence purchasers to believe that the goods offered
are those of a manufacturer or dealer, other than the actual manufacturer or dealer, or who otherwise
clothes the goods with such appearance as shall deceive the public and defraud another of his
legitimate trade, or any subsequent vendor of such goods or any agent of any vendor engaged in
selling such goods with a like purpose; or

32
 (b) Any person who by any artifice, or device, or who employs any other means calculated
to induce the false belief that such person is offering the services of another who ahs identified such
services in the mind of the public; or
(c) Any person who shall make any false statement in the course of trade or who shall
commit any other act contrary to good faith of a nature calculated to discredit the goods, business
or services of another.
168.4. The remedies provided by Section 156, 157 and 161 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Section 169. False Designation or Origin; False Description or Representation.

169.1. Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for
goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or
any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading
representation of fact, which:
(a) Is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation,
connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or
approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person; or
(b) In commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics,
qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person's goods, services or commercial
activities, shall be liable to a civil action for damages and injunction provided in Section 156 and 157
of this Act by any person who believes that he or she is or likely to be damaged by such act.

SUGGESTED READINGS:
1. People vs. Arazola, 13 Court of Appeals Report, 2nd series, p. 808
2. People vs. Podol 66 Phil. 365
3. Choa v. People, G.R. No. 142011, March 14, 2003
4. People v. Nillosquin, 48 OG 4453
5. US v. Nieto, 6 Phil. 582
6. People v. Gonzales, 68 OG 5558
7. US v. Friemuth, 3 Phil. 318, dissenting
8. People v. Quasha, 39 OG 2826
9. People v. Tugbang, 196 SCRA 341
10. People v. Gonzales, 6259, March 31, 1971
11. People v. Po Giok To, 7236, April 20, 1955
12. Layno v. People, 93842, Sept. 7, 1992
13. Siquian v. People, 171 SCRA 223
14. People v. Reodica, 62 Phil. 567
15. US v. Mateo, 25 Phil. 324
16. US v. Corral, 15 Phil. 383
17. People v. Tupasi, 290, March 23, 1937
18. People v. Dizon, 47 Phil. 350
19. People v. Pacana, 47 Phil. 48
20. People v. Manansala, 105 Phil. 1253
21. US v. Tan Chian, 17 Phil. 209
22. People v. Paguilalan, 38 OG 410
23. People v. Mendoza, 93 Phil. 581
24. People v. Sison, 44 OG 3354
25. People v. Arazola, 65 OG 10887
26. People v. Bautista, 43819, Dec. 11, 1936
27. Inting v. Sandiganbayan, 524166, May 15, 198
28. Flordeliz v. Himalalaon, 84 SCRA 277
29. US v. Capistrano, 40 Phil. 902
30. People v. Padol, 66 Phil. 365
31. Ouano v. CA, 40203, Aug. 21, 1990

REFERENCES:

33
Books/Review Notes
1. The Revised Penal Code by Luis B. Reyes
2. Fundamentals of Criminal Law Review by Antonio L. Gregorio
3. Revised Ortega Lecture Notes on Criminal Law 2.1
4. Pointers in Criminal Law by Edilberto G. Sandoval
5. Ateneo Review Notes in Criminal Law
6. Criminal Law Book II reviewer By R. Callanta
7. Judge Marlo B. Campanilla, Criminal Law Reviewer, Vol. 2, 2018 ed.
8. Boado, Comprehensive Reviewer in Criminal Law
9. Criminal Law Reviewer, Justice Luis B. Reyes

Online Reference
1. https://criminallawnotes.blogspot.com/search/label/Crimes%20Against%20National%20Security
2. https://attyrcd.wordpress.com/2016/03/09/crimes-against-public-interest/
3. https://batasnatin.com/law-library/criminal-law/crimes-and-penalties/1063-revised-penal-code-
title-four-crimes-against-public-interest.html

34
 LEARNING ACTIVITY 4.1

Name: _________________________________________Date:________________
Course/Year Level: _________________________________Score: _____________

Instruction: Write all the elements of all the crimes against public order. Use the table below for your
answer.

Name of the Crime Elements

Counterfeiting the great seal of the
Government of the Philippines (Art. 161);

Using forged signature or counterfeiting

seal or stamp (Art. 162);

Making and importing and uttering false

coins (Art. 163);

Mutilation of coins, importation and

uttering of mutilated coins (Art. 164);

35
Selling of false or mutilated coins,
without connivance (Art. 165);

Forging treasury or bank notes or other

documents payable to bearer, importing
and uttering of such false or forged notes
and documents (Art. 166);

Counterfeiting, importing and uttering

instruments not payable to bearer (Art.
167);

Illegal possession and use of forged

treasury or bank notes and other
instruments of credit (Art. 168);

36
Falsification of legislative documents
(Art. 170);

Falsification by public officer, employee

or notary (Art. 171);

Falsification by private individuals and

use of falsified documents (Art. 172);

Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph

and telephone messages and use of said
falsified messages (Art. 173);

False medical certificates, false

certificates of merit or service (Art. 174);

37
Using false certificates (Art. 175);

Manufacturing and possession of

instruments or implements for
falsification (Art. 176);

Usurpation of authority or official

functions (Art. 177);

Using fictitious name and concealing

true name (Art. 178);

Illegal use of uniforms or insignia (Art.

179);

38
False testimony against a defendant
(Art. 180);

False testimony favorable to the

defendant (Art. 181);

False testimony in civil cases (Art. 182);

False testimony in other cases and

perjury (Art. 183);

39
Offering false testimony in evidence (Art.
184);

Machinations in public auction (Art. 185);

Monopolies and combinations in

restraint of trade (Art. 186);

Importation and disposition of falsely

marked articles or merchandise made of
gold, silver, or other precious metals or
their alloys (Art. 187);

Substituting and altering trademarks and

trade names or service marks (Art. 188);

40
Unfair competition and fraudulent
registration of trade mark or trade name,
or service mark; fraudulent designation
of origin, and false description (Art. 189).

41
 LEARNING ACTIVITY 4.2

Name: _________________________________________Date:________________
Course/Year Level: _________________________________Score: _____________

Instruction: Briefly explain your answer. A mere yes or no question will not be given points.

1. The people playing cara y cruz, before they throw the coin in the air would rub the money to the
sidewalk thereby diminishing the intrinsic value of the coin. Is the crime of mutilation committed?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

2. When the image of Jose Rizal on a five-peso bill is transformed into that of Randy Santiago, is
there a violation of Presidential Decree No. 247?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

3. Sometime before martial law was imposed, the people lost confidence in banks that they
preferred hoarding their money than depositing it in banks. Former President Ferdinand Marcos
declared upon declaration of martial law that all bills without the Bagong Lipunan sign on them
will no longer be recognized. Because of this, the people had no choice but to surrender their
money to banks and exchange them with those with the Bagong Lipunan sign on them.
However, people who came up with a lot of money were also being charged with hoarding for
which reason certain printing presses did the stamping of the Bagong Lipunan sign themselves
to avoid prosecution. Was there a violation of Presidential Decree No. 247?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

4. An old woman who was a cigarette vendor in Quiapo refused to accept one-centavo coins for
payment of the vendee of cigarettes he purchased. Then the police came who advised her that
she has no right to refuse since the coins are of legal tender. On this, the old woman accepted
in her hands the one-centavo coins and then threw it to the face of the vendee and the police.
Was the old woman guilty of violating Presidential Decree No. 247?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
42
 ___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

5. A certain customer in a restaurant wanted to show off and used a P 20.00 bill to light his cigarette.
Was he guilty of violating Presidential Decree No. 247?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

6. A is one of those selling residence certificates in Quiapo. He was brought to the police precincts
on suspicion that the certificates he was selling to the public proceed from spurious sources and
not from the Bureau of Treasury. Upon verification, it was found out that the certificates were
indeed printed with a booklet of supposed residence certificates. What crime was committed?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

7. Public officers found a traffic violation receipts from a certain person. The receipts were not
issued by the Motor Vehicle Office. For what crime should he be prosecuted for?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

8. Can the writing on the wall be considered a document?

___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

9. In a case where a lawyer tried to extract money from a spinster by typing on a bond paper a
subpoena for estafa. The spinster agreed to pay. The spinster went to the prosecutor’s office
to verify the exact amount and found out that there was no charge against her. The lawyer was
prosecuted for falsification. He contended that only a genuine document could be falsified. Rule.
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

43
 ___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

10. Instead of the peso sign (P), somebody replaced it with a dollar sign ($). Was the crime of forgery
committed?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

11. An old man, in his desire to earn something, scraped a digit in a losing sweepstakes ticket, cut
out a digit from another ticket and pasted it there to match the series of digits corresponding to
the winning sweepstakes ticket. He presented this ticket to the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes
Office. But the alteration is so crude that even a child can notice that the supposed digit is merely
superimposed on the digit that was scraped. Was the old man guilty of forgery?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
12. A person has a twenty-peso bill. He applied toothache drops on one side of the bill. He has a
mimeograph paper similar in texture to that of the currency note and placed it on top of the
twenty-peso bill and put some weight on top of the paper. After sometime, he removed it and
the printing on the twenty-peso bill was reproduced on the mimeo paper. He took the reverse
side of the P20 bill, applied toothache drops and reversed the mimeo paper and pressed it to the
paper. After sometime, he removed it and it was reproduced. He cut it out, scraped it a little and
went to a sari-sari store trying to buy a cigarette with that bill. What he overlooked was that, when
he placed the bill, the printing was inverted. He was apprehended and was prosecuted and
convicted of forgery. Was the crime of forgery committed?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

13. John Carlos was charged with homicide before the Regional Trial Court of Manila. John Paolo,
a prosecution witness, testified that he saw John Carlos shoot Abby during their heated
argument. While the case is still pending, the City Hall of Manila burned down and the entire
records of the case were destroyed. Later, the records were reconstituted. John Paolo was again
called to the witness stand. This time he testified that his first testimony was false and the truth
was he was abroad when the crime took place.

The judge immediately ordered the prosecution of John Paolo for giving a false testimony
favorable to the defendant in a criminal case. Will the case against John Paolo prosper?

44
 ___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

14. The accused was caught in possession of 100 counterfeit P20 bills. He could not explain how
and why he possessed the said bills. Neither could he explain what he intended to do with the
fake bills. Can he be held criminally liable for such possession? Decide.
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

15. X has in his possession a coin which was legal tender at the time of Magellan and is considered
a collector’s item. He manufactured several pieces of that coin. Is the crime committed?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

45
 LEARNING ACTIVITY 4.3

Name: _________________________________________Date:________________
Course/Year Level: _________________________________Score: _____________

Instruction: Write the letter of your answer before the number. Erasure means wrong.

1. Poly who frequently introduces himself as an NBI agent under false pretense may be
held liable for:
a. Usurpation of authority c. Disobedience
b. Estafa d. Resistance

2. To settle his debt, Noel imitated 1000 pesos, he is liable for:

a. Falsification of document c. Forgery
b. Intercalation d. Rubric

3. It is a crime committed if a person represents oneself to be an officer, agent or

representative of any department or agency of the Philippine gov’t or any foreign gov’t.
a. Using fictitious name d. Usurpation of authority
b. Concealing true name e. Usurpation of official functions
c. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia

4. This is the crime of remaking or manufacturing without any authority to do so.

a. Counterfeiting of coins c. Either
b. Mutilation of coins d. Neither

5. This refers to the deliberate act of diminishing the proper metal contents of the coin
either by scraping, scratching or filling the edges of the coin and the offender gathers
the metal dust that has been scraped from the coin.
a. Counterfeiting of coins c. Either
b. Mutilation of coins d. Neither

6. Manny Akiz introduced himself in public as Marlon Aguilar to evade the execution of
judgment against him for the crime of rape. What is the crime committed by Manny
Akiz?
a. Using fictitious name d. Usurpation of authority
b. Concealing true name e. Usurpation of official functions
c. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia

7. In connection with the above question, what if Manny Akiz merely introduced himself
in public as Marlon Aguilar just to conceal his identity? What is his liability?
a. Using fictitious name d. Usurpation of authority
b. Concealing true name e. Usurpation of official functions
c. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia

8. Senator De Limaw signed the name of President Butete in a document without his
consent. What is the crime committed by De Limaw?
a. Falsification of public document
b. Falsification of legislative documents
c. Counterfeiting great seal of government by forging the great seal of the
government
d. Counterfeiting great seal of government by forging the signature of the President

46
 e. Counterfeiting great seal of government by forging the stamp of the President

9. In connection with the above question, Senator De Limaw give the document to
Senator Triliones. Knowing that the signature therein was forged, still Senator
Triliones used the document. What is the crime committed by Triliones?
a. Counterfeiting great seal of government by forging the great seal of the
government
b. Counterfeiting great seal of government by forging the signature of the President
c. Counterfeiting great seal of government by forging the stamp of the President
d. Using forged signature or counterfeit seal or stamp.

10. Manny Peace issued a check worth P 10, 000.00. Mack Apal replaced the peso sign
(P) with a dollar sign ($). Was is the liability of Mack Apal?
a. Forgery c. Falsification
b. Violation of PD 247 d. Both and b

11. It is a crime committed is a person performs an act pertaining to any person in

authority or public officer of the Phil gov’t or foreign gov’t under the pretense of such
official position, and without being lawfully entitled to do so.
a. Using fictitious name d. Usurpation of authority
b. Concealing true name e. Usurpation of official functions
c. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia

12. The following crimes are called forgeries, except one-

a. Forging the seal of the Government, signature or stamp of the Chief Executive.
b. Mutilation of coin.
c. Using fictitious name and concealing true name.
d. Falsification of legislative document

13. Which of these is not an obligation or security of the Philippine Islands?

a. Bonds c. Bills
b. Checks d. Document of title

14. This is committed by the imitation of legal tender or genuine coin or when spurious
coin is made.
a. Forging c. Counterfeiting
b. Mutilation of coin d. Uttering false coin

15. It is committed by giving a treasury or bank note or document payable to

bearer/order an appearance of a true and genuine document.
a. Forging c. Counterfeiting
b. Mutilation of coin d. Falsification

16. It is committed by persons, who being under oath are required to testify as to the
truth of a certain matter at a hearing before a competent authority, shall deny the
truth or say something contrary to it.
a. Forgery c. Falsification
b. Perjury d. False testimony

17. A person who executes a false affidavit may be held liable for:
a. Forgery c. Falsification
b. Perjury d. False testimony

47
18. A, a notary public issued a supposed copy of dead of sale, when in fact no such deed
of sale was prepared by him. A is liable for:
a. Estafa c. Forgery

b. Falsification d. All of these

19. It is committed by erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering by any means

the figures and letters, words, signs contained therein.
a. Forging c. Counterfeiting
b. Mutilation of coin d. Falsification

20. The act that repeals Article 164 of the RPC. The act punish defacement,
mutilation, tearing, burning or destroying central bank notes and coins.
a. PD 247 c. RA 137
b. PD 1602 d. CA 142

21. In connection with the above question, what is the salient features of the above
law?
a. Mutilation of coins is not applicable to paper bills because the idea of mutilation is
collecting the precious metal dust.
b. Mutilation of coins is not limited to coins, it applies now to paper bills.
c. Mutilation of coins is limited only to willful defacement, mutilation and tearing
coins.
d. All of the above

22. It is a crime committed by any person who uses a name publicly other than his real
name for the purpose concealing a crime, evade the execution of a judgment, or cause
damage to public interest.
a. Using fictitious name d. Usurpation of authority
b. Concealing true name e. Usurpation of official functions
c. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia

23. Prosecutor Lagay offered as awitness Greg Papansin who gave false testimony in
a criminal case involving his client charge of rape. Prosecutor Lagay knows that Greg
Papansin is a false witness? What is the liability of Prosecutor Lagay?
a. False testimony against a d. False testimony in other cases
defendant and perjury
b. False testimony favorable to the e. Offering false testimony in
defendant evidence
c. False testimony in civil cases
24. In connection with the above question, what is the liability of Greg Papansin?
a. False testimony against a d. False testimony in other cases
defendant and perjury
b. False testimony favorable to the e. Offering false testimony in
defendant evidence
c. False testimony in civil cases

25. It is a crime committed by any person who conceals his true name and all other
personal circumstances for the purpose of conceal his identity.
a. Using fictitious name c. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia
b. Concealing true name d. Usurpation of authority

48
 e. Usurpation of official functions

26. Mutilation of coins is a crime only if the coin mutilated is ________.

a. legal tender c. Both a and b
b. not legal tender

27. Counterfeiting of coins is committed if the coin counterfeited is_________.

a. legal tender c. Both a and b
b. not legal tender

28. Mutilation of coins applies-

a. only to Philippine coins c. both Philippine and foreign state
b. only to foreign state coins coins

29. Counterfeiting of coins applies-

a. only to Philippine coins c. both Philippine and foreign state
b. only to foreign state coins coins

30. What is the intention of Presidential Decree No. 247?

a. To punish the act of defrauding the public through circulation of mutilated coins
b. To punish the act of destruction of money issued by the Central Bank of the
Philippines.
c. Both a and b

31. It refers to bonds, certificate of indebtedness, bills, national bank notes, coupons,
treasury notes, certificate of deposits, checks, drafts for money, sweepstakes money.
a. Treasury notes c. Obligation or security
b. Bank notes d. Instrument payable to bearer

32. It refers to the falsification and counterfeiting of treasury or bank notes or any
instruments payable to bearer or to order.
a. Forgery c. Mutilation
b. Falsification d. Counterfeiting

33. It is the commission of any of the eight acts mentioned in Article 171 on legislative
(only the act of making alteration), public or official, commercial, or private
documents, or wireless, or telegraph messages.
a. Forgery c. Mutilation
b. Falsification d. Counterfeiting

34. It is a crime committed by any person who use in publicly and improperly of
insignia, uniform or dress pertains to an office not held by him or to a class of persons
of which he is not a member.
a. Using fictitious name d. Usurpation of authority
b. Concealing true name e. Usurpation of official functions
c. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia

35. This is committed by counterfeiting, making or fraudulent alteration of any

writing, and may consist in the singing of another’s name or the alteration of an
instrument in the name, amount, description of the person and the like, with intent to
defraud.
a. Falsification b. Mutilation

49
 c. Perjury e. Forgery
d. False testimony

36. In this crime, offender has the intent to cause the reduction of the price of the thing
auctioned.
a. Machinations in Public Auctions
b. Monopolies and Combinations in Restraint of Trade
c. Substituting and Altering Trademarks, Trade names, or Service Marks
d. Unfair Competition

37. Regulating the Use of Aliases.

a. CA No. 141 c. CA No. 143
b. CA No. 142 d. CA No. 144

38. It is otherwise known as the Intellectual Property Code.

a. RA 7659 c. RA 8293
b. RA 9346 d. None of the above

39. This is the crime of remaking or manufacturing of coins without any authority to
do so.
a. Counterfeiting of Coins c. Forgery
b. Mutilation of Coins d. Falsification

40. One testifies falsely before the court, the crime committed is _______.
a. perjury c. both a and b
b. false testimony d. falsification

41. This refers to the deliberate act of diminishing the proper metal contents of the
coin either by scraping, scratching or filling the edges of the coin and the offender
gathers the metal dust that has been scraped from the coin.
a. Counterfeiting of Coins c. Forgery
b. Mutilation of Coins d. Falsification

42. If one testifies falsely in a non-judicial proceeding, the crime committed is ______.
a. perjury c. both a and b
b. false testimony d. falsification

43. The purpose of this crime is to conceal a crime, to evade the execution of a
judgement, or to cause damage
a. Use of Fictitious Name c. Usurpation of Official Function
b. Concealing True Name d. Illegal Use of Uniforms

44. Procures another to swear falsely.

a. Contempt c. False Testimony
b. Subornation of perjury d. Perjury

45. Knowingly and falsely representing oneself to be an officer, agent or representative

of any department or agency of the Philippine government or any foreign government
a. Use of Fictitious Name c. Usurpation of Official Function
b. Concealing True Name d. Usurpation of Authority

46. Can only be committed in respect of documents.

50
 a. Counterfeiting of Coins c. Forgery
b. Mutilation of Coins d. Falsification

47. It is the declaration under oath of a witness in a judicial proceeding which is

contrary to what is true, or to deny the same, or to alter essentially the truth.
a. perjury c. falsification
b. false testimony d. Subornation of perjury

48. Performing an act pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of the
Philippine government or of a foreign government under the pretense of such official
position, and without being lawfully entitled to do so.
a. Use of Fictitious Name c. Usurpation of Official Function
b. Concealing True Name d. Usurpation of Authority

49. The purpose of this crime is to conceal identity.

a. Use of Fictitious Name c. Usurpation of Official Function
b. Concealing True Name d. Illegal Use of Uniforms

50. The willful and corrupt assertion of falsehood under oath of affirmation,
administered by authority of law on a material matter.
a. Mutilation c. Falsification
b. Perjury d. Forgery

51
52