Republic Act No. 8049 (An Act Regulating Hazing And Other Forms Of Initiation Rites In Fraternities, Sororities, And Other Organizations And Providing Penalties Therefor), popularly known as the Anti-Hazing Law, has been in existence since 1995. We’ve had several deaths due to hazing since then yet 2015 is the year we get our first convictions. It also took a while to get the convictions considering it was in January 14, 2006 when Alpha Phi Omega neophyte Marlon Villanueva was killed during hazing.
Apart
from the first hazing convictions, Dandy L. Dungo and Gregorio A. Sibal, Jr.
vs. People of the Philippines
(G.R. No. 209464, July 1, 2015) is also notable for its anti-hazing convictions based on “disputable
presumption of actual participation” and based on circumstantial evidence.
In support of the
convictions, below are the facts detailed by the CA and cited by the SC -
1.
Marlon
Villanueva is a neophyte of Alpha Phi Omega, as testified by his roommate Joey
Atienza.
2.
At around 3:00
o'clock in the afternoon of January 13, 2006, [UPLB student Gay Czarina] Sunga
was staying at their tambayan, talking to her organization mates. Three men were seated two meters way from her.
She identified two of the men as
appellants Sibal and Dungo, while she did not know the third man. The three men were wearing black shirts with
the seal of the Alpha Phi Omega.
3.
Later at 5:00
o'clock in the afternoon, two more men coming from the entomology wing arrived
and approached the three men. Among the
men who just arrived was the victim, Marlon Villanueva. One of the men wearing black APO
shirts handed over to the two fraternity neophytes some money and told the men
"Mamalengke na kayo." He later
took back the money and said, "Huwag na, kami na lang."
4.
One of the men
wearing a black APO shirt, who was later identified
as appellant Dungo, stood up and asked Marlon if the latter already reported to
him, and asked him why he did not report to him when he was just at the, tambayan.
Dungo then continuously punched the
victim on his arm.
This went on for five minutes. Marlon
just kept quiet with his head bowed down. Fifteen minutes later, the men left
going towards the Entomology wing.
5.
The deceased
Marlon Villanueva was 'last seen alive by Joey Atienza at 7:00 in the evening
of 13 January 2006, from whom he borrowed the shoes he wore at the initiation
right [sic].
Marlon told Joey that it was his
"finals" night.
6.
On January 13,
2006 at around 8:30 to 9:00 o'clock in the evening, [nearby sari-sari store
owner] Susan Ignacio saw more than twenty (20) persons arrive at the Villa
Novaliches Resort onboard a jeepney. She
estimated the ages of these persons to be between 20 to 30 years old. Three (3) persons riding a single motorcycle
likewise arrived at the resort.
7.
Ignacio saw
about fifteen (15) persons gather on top of the terrace at the resort who
looked like they were praying. Later that
evening, at least three (3) of these persons went to her store to buy some
items. She did not know their names but
could identity [sic] their faces. After she was shown colored photographs, she
pointed to the man later identified as Herald Christopher Braseros. She also pointed out the man later identified
as Gregorio Sibal, Jr.
8.
Donato Magat,
a tricycle driver plying the route of Pansol, Calamba City,
testified that around 3:00 o'clock in the morning of January 14, 2006, he was
waiting for passengers at the corner of Villa Novaliches Resort when a man
approached him and told him that someone inside the resort needed a ride. Magat
then went to the resort and asked the two (2) men standing by the gate who will
be riding his tricycle.
9.
The four (4)
men boarded his tricycle but Magat noticed that when he touched the body of the
man who was being carried, it felt cold. The said man looked very weak like a
vegetable.
10. Seferino Espina y Jabay testified that he worked as
a security guard at the J.P.
Rizal Hospital
and was assigned at the emergency room. At
around 3:00 o'clock in the early morning of January 14, 2006, he was with
another security guard, Abelardo Natividad and hospital helper Danilo Glindo
a.k.a. Gringo, when a tricycle arrived at the emergency room containing four
(4) passengers, excluding the driver. He
was an arm's length away from said tricycle. He identified two of the passengers thereof as
appellants Dungo and Sibal. Espina said
he and Glinda helped the passengers unload a body inside the tricycle and
brought it to the emergency room.
11. Afterwards, Espina asked the two men for
identification cards. The latter replied
that they did not bring with them any I.D. or wallet. Instead of giving their true names, the appellants
listed down their names in the hospital logbook as Brandon Gonzales y Lanzon
and Jericho Paril y Rivera. Espina then
told the two men not to leave, not telling them that they secretly called the police
to report the incident which was their standard operating procedure when a dead
body was brought to the hospital.
12. Dr. Ramon Masilungan, who was then the attending
physician at the emergency room, observed that Marlon was motionless, had no
heartbeat and already cyanotic.
13. Dr. Masilungan tried to revive Marlon for about 15
to 20 minutes. However, the latter did
not respond to resuscitation and was pronounced dead. Dr. Masilungan noticed a big contusion hematoma
on the left side of the victim's face and several injuries on his arms and
legs. He further attested that Marlon's
face was already cyanotic.
14. When Dr. Masilungan pulled down Marlon's pants, he
saw a large contusion on both legs which extended from the upper portion of his
thigh down to the couplexial portion or the back of the knee.
15. Due to the nature, extent and location of Marlon's
injuries, Dr. Masilungan opined that he was a victim of hazing. Dr. Masilungan is familiar with hazing
injuries, having undergone hazing when he was a student and also because of his
experience treating victims of hazing incidents.
16. Dr. Roy Camarillo, Medico-Legal Officer of the PNP
Crime Laboratory in Region IV, Camp Vicente Lim, Canlubang, Calamba City,
testified that he performed an autopsy on the cadaver of the victim on January
14 2006; that the victim's cause of
death was blunt head trauma. From 1999
to 2006, he was able to conduct post-mortem examination of the two (2) persons
whose deaths were attributed to hazing. These two (2) persons sustained multiple
contusions and injuries on different parts of their body, particularly on the
buttocks, on both upper and lower extremities. Both persons died of brain
hemorrhage. Correlating these two cases
to the injuries found on the victim's body, Dr. Camarillo attested that the
victim, Marlon Villanueva, sustained similar injuries to those two (2) persons.
Based on the presence of multiple injuries and contusions on his body, he opined
that these injuries were hazing-related.
(Dungo and Sibal vs. People)
The
RTC convicted Dungo and Sibal for violation of Section 4 of the Anti-Hazing Law
and sentenced them to suffer Reclusion
Perpetua.
Said
Section 4 reads as follows:
“Section 4.
If the person subjected to hazing or other forms of initiation rites
suffers any physical injury or dies as a result thereof, the officers and
members of the fraternity, sorority or organization who actually participated
in the infliction of physical harm shall be liable as principals. The person or persons who participated in the
hazing shall suffer:
1.
The penalty of
reclusion perpetua (life imprisonment) if death, rape, sodomy or mutilation
results there from.
xxx”
The CA affirmed the
RTC’s judgment in toto.
Sufficiency of the Information
On appeal to the SC,
Dungo and Sibal claimed that the RTC and CA judgments violated the
constitutional right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of
the accusation against them because the offense charged in the information is
different from that for which they were found guilty.
The information stated
that Dungo and Sibal "did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously
assault and use personal violence upon one Marlon Villanueva y Mejilla",
i.e. they were charged for hazing by actual participation, while the only
offense proven at trial was hazing by inducement.
The SC noted the
complete wording of the information which reads as follows:
“That on or about
2:30 in the early morning of January 14, 2006, at Villa Novaliches, Brgy.
Pansol, Calamba City, Province of Laguna and within the jurisdiction of the
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, during a planned initiation
rite and being then officers and members of Alpha Phi Omega fraternity
and present thereat, in conspiracy with more or less twenty other members and
officers, whose identity is not yet known, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously assault and use personal violence upon one MARLON
VILLANUEVA y MEJILLA, a neophyte thereof and as condition for his admission to
the fraternity, thereby subjecting him to physical harm, resulting to his
death, to the damage and prejudice of the heirs of the victim.” (Dungo and
Sibal vs. People)
The SC held that the information
stated a “planned initiation rite” and “a planned event can be understood to
have different phases … [T]he hazing activity had different stages and the
perpetrators had different roles therein, not solely inflicting physical injury
to the neophyte. One of the roles of the petitioners in the hazing activity was
to induce Villanueva to be present. Dungo
and Sibal not only induced Villanueva to be present at the resort, but they
actually brought him there. They
fulfilled their roles in the planned hazing rite which eventually led to the
death of Villanueva. The hazing would
not have been accomplished were it not for the acts of the petitioners that
induced the victim to be present.”
The SC said that “[s]ecrecy
and silence are common characterizations of the dynamics of hazing. To require the prosecutor to indicate every
step of the planned initiation rite in the information at the inception of the
criminal case, when details of the clandestine hazing are almost nil, would be
an arduous task, if not downright impossible. The law does not require the
impossible”.
In upholding that the information
was sufficient to convict the accused for violation of Section 4 of the
Anti-Hazing Law, the SC held that it sufficiently stated “every element of the
crime of hazing, the offenders, and the accompanying circumstances in the
planned initiation activity”.
Prima facie evidence of participation does not
violate the right of the accused to be presumed innocent
Despite alleging only
one error in their appeal, appellants in their Reply alleged that the
prosecution failed to establish conspiracy.
The SC, while noting that the appellants raised a question of fact not
allowed in their appeal, decided to open the whole case for review “in the
interest of justice” and “due to the novelty of the issue presented”.
The novel issue involves
Section 4 paragraph 6 of the Anti-Hazing Law which states:
“The presence of
any person during the hazing is prima facie evidence of participation therein
as principal unless he prevented the commission of the acts punishable herein.”
The SC said that the law
“presents a novel provision that introduces a disputable presumption of actual
participation; and which modifies the concept of conspiracy … because a disputable presumption arises from
the mere presence of the offender during the hazing, which can be rebutted by
proving that the accused took steps to prevent the commission of the hazing.”
First, the SC reminded appellants
that “[p]enal laws which feature prima facie evidence by disputable presumptions
against the offenders are not new, and can be observed in the following: (1)
the possession of drug paraphernalia gives rise to prima facie evidence of the
use of dangerous drug; (2) the dishonor of the check for insufficient funds is
prima facie evidence of knowledge of such insufficiency of funds or credit; 102
and (3) the possession of any good which has been the subject of robbery or
thievery shall be prima facie evidence of
fencing.”
The SC found there was
prima facie evidence of appellants’ participation in the hazing based on the
testimonies of disinterested and credible witnesses establishing their (1) acts
of inducing Marlon Villanueva to participate in the hazing, and (2) their
presence in the resort (the crime scene). And since there was no testimony that either
appellant prevented the hazing, the disputable presumption was not overcome. Thus, the facts were sufficient to establish
their roles in the conspiracy.
Guilt beyond reasonable doubt also proven by
circumstantial evidence
The SC noted that
“[c]rimes are usually committed in secret and under conditions where
concealment is highly probable” and so direct evidence is understandably not
always available. And, “hazing is
shrouded in secrecy. Fraternities and
sororities … are secretive in nature and their members are reluctant to give
any information regarding initiation rites. The silence is only broken after
someone has been injured so severely that medical attention is required …
Bearing in mind the concealment of hazing, it is only logical and proper for
the prosecution to resort to the presentation of circumstantial evidence to
prove it.”
The SC laid down the requisites
and rules for sustaining a conviction based on circumstantial evidence: “(1)
there [is] more than one circumstance; (2) the inference must be based on
proven facts; and (3) the combination of all circumstances produces a
conviction beyond reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused … Jurisprudence
requires that the circumstances must be established to form an unbroken chain
of events leading to one fair reasonable conclusion pointing to the accused, to
the exclusion of all others, as the author of the crime.”
Finally, the defenses of
denial and alibi - being the “weakest of all defenses because they are easy to
concoct and fabricate” - were deemed insufficient by the SC. The only witnesses
presented by appellants were their fraternity brothers and Dungo’s girlfriend
who cannot be deemed impartial and disinterested so as to be credible and
reliable.
SC’s suggested amendments to the Anti-Hazing Law
The SC suggested the
imposition of penalty or liability for non-compliance of the following
provisions regarding the requirement of notice (Section 2) and the requirement
of representation (Section 3)-
“Section 2. No
hazing or initiation rites in any form or manner by a fraternity, sorority or
organization shall be allowed without prior written notice to the school
authorities or head of organization seven (7) days before the conduct of such
initiation. The written notice shall indicate the period of the initiation
activities which shall not exceed three (3) days, shall include the names of
those to be subjected to such activities, and shall further contain an
undertaking that no physical violence be employed by anybody during such
initiation rites.
Section 3. The head
of the school or organization or their representatives must assign at least two
(2) representatives of the school or organization, as the case may be, to be
present during the initiation. It is the duty of such representative to see to
it that no physical harm of any kind shall be inflicted upon a recruit,
neophyte or applicant.“
The SC also suggested
that Section 4 include not only physical harm but psychological harm as well.
It is really no cause
for jubilation, that the first convictions on this law have been handed down
and upheld. The passage of the law
should have been enough to do away with hazing. This case only memorializes three lives that
have been ruined, that of the victim’s which has been untimely taken and that
of his two tormentors. No real
brotherhood is worth paying such a steep price for membership. This case should give pause and reason to all
prospective initiates and their masters.
We end this with how the
SC ended its decision –
“R.A. No. 8049 is a
democratic response to the uproar against hazing. It demonstrates that there must, and should,
be another way of fostering brotherhood, other than through the culture of
violence and suffering. The senseless deaths of these young men shall never be
forgotten, for justice is the spark that lights the candles of their graves.”
No comments:
Post a Comment