Because of the barbarity and hideousness of the acts committed by the suspects/respondents in cutting off their victims’ appendages, stuffing their torsos, legs, body parts into oil drums and bullet-riddled vehicles and later on burying these oil drums, vehicles with the use of backhoes and other earth-moving machinery, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) investigating team recommended to the panel of public prosecutors that all respondents be charged with violation of the “Heinous Crimes Law.” The prosecution panel agreed with the CHR. As the Chief Prosecutor tasked with approving the filing of the Information, how will you pass upon the recommendation? Explain. (5%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
As Chief Prosecutor, I will disapprove the recommendation to charge the respondents with violation of the Heinous Crimes Law.
The Heinous Crimes Law (RA 7659) does not define specific crimes; it is merely an amendatory statute increasing penalties for designated felonies to death, now reclusion perpetua without parole under RA 9346.
The acts of dismembering victims, stuffing body parts into drums, and burying them constitute Murder under Article 248 of the RPC, qualified by cruelty or outraging the corpse, rather than a standalone offense under RA 7659.
Consequently, the Information must charge the respondents with Murder under the Revised Penal Code rather than a violation of the Heinous Crimes Law.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
What is the legal character of Republic Act No. 7659 (Heinous Crimes Law)?
RA 7659 is an amendatory statute that altered imposable penalties for designated felonies rather than creating new crimes.
What was the statutory effect of Republic Act No. 9346 on the Heinous Crimes Law?
RA 9346 abolished the imposition of the death penalty and imposed reclusion perpetua without parole eligibility.
How does cutting off body parts and burying corpses affect the criminal charge for killing a victim?
Outraging or scoffing at a corpse through dismemberment qualifies the unlawful killing to Murder under Article 248 RPC.
Why is an Information charging a direct 'violation of RA 7659' legally defective?
An Information cannot charge a violation of RA 7659 because the statute defines no separate crimes.
What qualifying circumstance under Article 248 RPC is present when an offender scoffingly dismembers a victim's corpse?
Dismembering or disrespecting a dead body constitutes outraging or scoffing at the corpse under Article 248 RPC.
Learn more about these topics
1. Nature of Law
Republic Act No. 7659, otherwise known as the Heinous Crimes Law, does not create or define distinct, standalone criminal offenses. Instead, it is an amendatory statute that merely prescribed the death penalty for specific heinous felonies already defined under the Revised Penal Code and special penal laws. Following the passage of Republic Act No. 9346, which prohibited the imposition of the death penalty, the statutory effect of RA 7659 was modified to prescribe reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole. Consequently, an information cannot charge an accused with a direct violation of RA 7659.
2. Murder and Cruelty
Under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, the unlawful killing of a person constitutes murder when attended by qualifying circumstances such as cruelty or outraging at the corpse. Cruelty requires that the offender deliberately and inhumanly augmented the victim's suffering before death. Outraging at or scoffing at the victim's corpse occurs when the offender performs hideous or disgraceful acts upon the body after death, such as dismemberment, decapitation, or stuffing body parts into oil drums. Such hideous acts qualify the killing to murder under the Revised Penal Code.
3. Role of Prosecutors
Public prosecutors are duty-bound to evaluate police and administrative investigation recommendations in accordance with established penal statutes. When an investigating body erroneously recommends charging an accused under an amendatory law that defines no separate felony, the Chief Prosecutor must disapprove the recommendation. The prosecutor must reclassify the offense and file the proper Information for Murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, explicitly alleging the qualifying circumstances of cruelty, treachery, or outraging at the corpse. This ensures that the Information complies with the constitutional right of the accused to be informed of the charge.