Piracy in the High Seas 1.

Anti-terrorism law- “a paper tiger”

“Terrorism”-commission of a predicate
3 ways to qualify: crime which causes wide-spread panic
1. Boarding the ship or extra-ordinary fear in order to coerce
2. abandon the government to give in to an
3. Killing, rape, P.i. () unlawful demand.

Mutiny-crew or passengers disobey the captain
or
-create commotions, violate rules that
are intended for the comfort or safety of the
passengers or crew.
1st element: the accused must commit any of
the crimes mentioned by the law for the
purpose of committing a principal crime.
“Predicate crimes”-exclusively enumerated by
the law:

- qualified if: passengers are left Under the RPC:

without any means to protect themselves; or if 1. Piracy in general and mutiny in the high
there is killing, rape, p.i. seas
Piracy vs Mutiny 2. Rebellion
3. Coup d’etat
Points of Piracy Mutiny 4. Murder
distinction 5. Kidnapping
Relationship to Outsiders to Either 6. Serious illegal detention
the vessel the vessel passengers or
crew Under special laws:
Purpose Gain Raising
commotions; 1. Piracy in PH waters
defiance 2. Highway robbery
3. Violation of law on firearms and
explosives
Crimes against Law of nations- by a treaty -MUST RESULT TO AN EXTRAORDINARY
Rome statute on ICC: Phils is a signatory PANIC OR FEAR in the place where any of
these predicate crimes are committed.
Genocide
Extraordinary fear or panic- a question of
War crimes fact.

Crimes of aggression -THERE MUST BE AN OBJECT OR PURPOSE:

TO DEMAND THE GOVERNMENT TO GIVE IN
Crimes against humanity- state-sponsored or
TO SOMETHING.
the government kept quiet if there is a killing
against groups of people. DEMAND-any demand (economic, religious,
social)
Crimes against Law of nations created by the PH
Congress
 If charged of violation of Anti-Terrorism act
but if it is proven that the accused
committed any of the predicate crimes but
the 2nd or 3rd element is not present:
Accused is acquitted of the said charge but
he may be convicted of the predicate crime
committed as an ordinary crime.
e.g. several murders committed which was
not proven to have resulted to an
extraordinary fear nor it was proven that
these were for an unlawful demand.
Ruling: Convict them for as many murders
as committed.
Important features:
a. AS to anti-wiretapping law
If the LE want to listen secretly to the
conversations of the terrorists, they have to
apply for a JUDICIAL AUTHORIY authorizing
them to tap and record.
b. AS to period for detaining a terrorist: 48
hrs
2. Anti-human trafficking Law
-any transaction involving human
beings
-offenders need NOT BE Filipinos
-may be committed outside PH if the
accused are Filipinos or Residents of the
PH or the victims are Filipinos.
SPECIAL LAWS WHICH ARE RELATED TO THE
CRIMES AGAINST THE LAW OF NATIONS:
1. Piracy in PH waters (PD 532)
Piracy in PH waters, Mutiny in PH
waters, highway robbery
Purpose: to protect people travelling from one
place to another thru the waters or highways.
Same acts as seen in Piracy in High Seas:
1. Use of violence, intimidation or threat
2. Purpose: to gain
3. Committed on-board a PH ship
“PH ship”/ “PH watercraft”- any watercraft
that is used to transport people or goods
over PH waters.
-publicly-owned or privately owned
- not necessarily moving
- Ship or banca
“PH waters”- territorial sea, bodies of water
connecting different islands, and navigable
rivers and lakes.
“navigable”-used as a means for
transportation
-Accused in this kind of piracy INCLUDE
passengers and crew.
-If Killing, Rape, P.I. is committed: used to
Qualify Piracy in PH waters.
**this is one of the RARE instances where a
felony is used to qualify a violation of a
special law.
2. Anti-Hijacking Law (RA 6235)
We have to distinguish as to what kind of
aircraft is involved:
1. Hijacking of a PH aircraft
-as long as registered with CAAB
-may be privately-owned
-may be for commercial purposes
 -may be a military aircraft
2 ways:
a. Usurping or gaining control while in-
flight
“Usurp”- no authority to be a pilot but
by means of force or threat, you dictate
control.
“In-flight”-from the time all the closed
are doors after the last passenger has
entered the door until the doors are
opened for the passengers to go out.
Not in-flight: charge with robbery or
theft.
b. Ordering a change in course or
destination
-includes domestic or international
flights
-flight path
-compels the pilot to go elsewhere
Qualified if:
a. firing at the pilot, Crew or
passengers
b. attempted to explode an explosive
inside
c. killing, rape, p.i.
-felonies used to qualify a special
law
*NO SUCH THING as an “ATTEMPTED
HIJACKING”- hijacker does not need to succeed.
2. Hijacking of a foreign aircraft
Ways:
a. Usurping or taking control of the
plane while it is within the PH
-may be flying or in stop-over in the
PH.
- passengers need not be there
b. PH is not a landing point or
destination or stopover for the
plane but the hijacker compels the
foreign plane to land in the PH
-once the foreign law enters PH
airspace: there is ALREADY a
VIOLATION of the said Anti-
hijacking law.
Thus, PH courts will have
jurisdiction
e.g. if there is an emergency:
hijacked plane from Malaysia to
Japan, ordered to land in San Fdo,
L.U.: lost fuel, passenger is seeking
medical attention.
-in the nature of a continuing and
transitory crime.
OTHER ACTS PUNISHED:
Acts Inimical to aviation- took in
danger the safety of the passengers
and crew
-for planes operating as a PUBLIC
transport
1. Bring into these planes articles
or substances that may
endanger the plane, the crew,
the passengers.
e.g. poisonous, corrosive,
explosives
if these want to be carried:
these should be carried by
planes used to transport goods.

2. Carriage of goods which are not
in accordance with rules
e.g. dynamite in pockets
CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF
THE STATE
- Sanctions for vio for certain rights
provided under Bill of Rights
- Accused: public officers
- Private persons are also liable if they
conspire or accomplices or accessories
“Personal liberty”-freedom of
locomotion/movement; to go where one wants
to go
If violated, possible crimes:
1. Arbitrary detention (art. 124, 125)
2. Kidnapping
3. Serious or slight illegal detention
4. Abduction
5. Human trafficking
6. Coercion
7. Abandonment of minors
Depends on who is the accused and the
reason why the person was restricted of
his freedom of locomotion.
Arbitrary detention
3 forms:
1. arbitrary detention proper
- p.o. detains another without just or
valid cause
- who is liable?
Public officer who have the right or
duty to actually arrest and detain a
person who is a suspect in the
commission of a crime.
e.g.
PNP
PDEA
NBI
CIDG
Customs Police
EPZA police
AFP-No!
Xpn: when they capture an enemy of
the state, the law concerining arrest can
be applied
Those who can order the arrest of
another/ persons in authority
e.g. prosecutors
mayors, vice mayor
governor
“Detention”, 3 concepts:
a. “Lock up”-placed in an enclosure
e.g. coffin, car, room
b. Physically immobilized- tie him up;
c. Movement is restricted- physical or
psychological restraint
2. failing to file proper charges
3. delaying release
Reason: suspected of committing a
crime (real or imagined)
“Arbitrary”- whimsical, oppressive,
capricious
Valid grounds to arrest and detain:
1. commission of an actual crime
2. violent insanity or illness
There is arbitrary detention if:
1. an accused is arrested even if there
is no crime
2. arrest was without warrant
3. arrest and detention is not a valid
warrantless arrest
arrest in flagrante-in the very act
a. committed an overt act- an attempt or
consummated
b. place of the arrest is place of
commission
time of the arrest is the time of
commission
Else, even if officer saw the crime, but
the arrest was not right there and then:
there is still an invalid arrest.
Duty of officer after putting someone under
police custody:
Reading him his rights
With Woa: to jail
w/oBring him to nearest police station and
comply with the provisions of Art. 125:
take evid, prepare the charges, and file it within
a period of:

Continuous chasing: in flagrante lata! 12hrs-light felonies

Good faith arrest: if to the mind/ observation, 18hrs-grave/less grave

based on his experience, it appears that the
36hrs-afflictive penalties
accused’s actuations is a crime and it turns out
that the accused is innocent, the law enforcer
is not liable.

e.g. “Patayen ka! Patayen ka!” which turned out

to just be a practice for a drama.

Arrest based on a probable cause- when a crime

has just in fact been committed.

1. There really was a crime committed

2. Arresting officer was not in the time
and place commission
3. Had personal knowledge-conducted an
evidence gathering e.g. interview,
gathered trace evidence, studied CCTV
footage

How about the time that elapsed? There

must be an immediacy between the
commission and the arrest.

One day-no more

Person arrested is an escapee: can be arrested

anywhere and anytime by anyone

Art. 124 Penalty depends on the duration of

detention