ARTICLE 347.SIMULATION OF BIRTHS, SUBSTITUTION OF ONE CHILD FOR ANOTHER AND CONCEALMENT OR ABANDONMENT OF A LEGITIMATE CHILD

The simulation of births and the substitution of one child for another shall be punished by prision mayor and a fine of not exceeding 1,000 pesos.

The same penalties shall be imposed upon any person who shall conceal or abandon any legitimate child with intent to cause such child to lose its civil status.

Any physician or surgeon or public officer who, in violation of the duties of his profession or office, shall cooperate in the execution of any of the crimes mentioned in the two next preceding paragraphs, shall suffer the penalties therein prescribed and also the penalty of temporary special disqualification.

ACTS PUNISHED: Simulation of births Substitution of one child for another Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child with intent to cause such child to lose its civil status

The object of the crime is the creation of false or the cause of the loss of civil status, or the loss of any trace as to the filiation of the child. Simulation of birth takes place when the woman pretends to be pregnant when she in fact is not, on the day of delivery, takes anothers child as her own The woman defrauds the legitimate heirs as she is introducing a stranger in the family The woman who simulates the birth and person who furnishes the child are both responsible as principals The simulation that is a crime is that which alters the civil status; thus, if one simulates birth for the purpose of belying the reputation that she is sterile but introduces no strange child in the family and causes no child to lose his civil status and incurs no damage does not incur criminal liability The fact that the child will be benefited by the simulation is not a defense; the law punisjhes the act because it creates a false status to the detriment of the rest of the family Substituting one child for another committed when X is born of A and B; Y is born of C and D; and offender with intent to cause the loss of any trace of their filiation exchanges X and Y without the knowledge of their respective parents Substitution may be done by placing a live child of a woman in place of a dead one of another Concealing or abandoning of any legitimate child, requisites: That the child is legitimate That the offender conceals or abandons such child and The offender has the intent to cause such child to lose its civil status The child must be legitimate and fully developed and living, as the child not capable of living has no civil status, unable to transmit any rights The unlawful sale of a child by its father is not a crime under this article because abandonment should be understood in Art. 347 as leaving a child at a public place where other people may find it, causing the child to lose his/her civil status Ex. Leaving the child at the door of hospitals, churches, religious institutions Concealing a legitimate child must be for the purpose of causing the child to lose its civil status. Thus, if someone places a baby at the door of an orphanage did it so someone can take care of the baby it is presumed that he doesnt act with the purpose of losing the filiation of the child Abandonment of a minor is crime against security purpose is to avoid obligation of rearing the child v. abandonment in Art. 247 (purpose of losing civil status) A woman who has given birth to a child, abandons the child in a certain place, to free herself of the obligation and duty of rearing and caring for the child. What crime is committed by the woman? The crime is abandoning a minor under Art. 276. Suppose that the purpose of that woman in abandoning the child is to preserve the inheritance of her child by a former marriage, what then is the crime? Evidently, the purpose of the woman is to cause the child to lose its civil status so that it may not be able to share in the inheritance; hence, the crime would fall under the second paragraph ofArt. 347. Suppose a child, one day after its birth, was taken to, and left in, the midst of a lonely forest, and it was found by a hunter who took it home, what crime was committed by the person who left it in the forest? It is attempted infanticide, as the act of the offender is an attempt against its life. A physician or surgeon or public officer, who cooperates in the execution of any of these crimes, is also liable if he acts in violation of the duties of his profession or office.

ARTICLE 348. USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS

The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person who shall usurp the civil status of another, should he do so for the purpose of defrauding the offended part or his heirs; otherwise, the penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed.

Usurping the civil status of another is committed by assuming the filiation, or the parental or conjugal rights of another. Committed when a person represents himself to be another and assumes the filiation or the parental or conjugal rights of such another person. Example: where A impersonates himself to be C, the son of another, and assumes the rights of C Seems that the term "civil status" includes one's profession, thus usurpation of profession may also be punished under this article. It is absolutely necessary, however, in order to constitute this crime that the intent of the offender is to enjoy the rights arising from the civil status of the person impersonated. Otherwise, the case will be considered only as a violation of Art. 178 for assuming or using fictitious name, or as estafa under Art. 315 The purpose of defrauding the offended party or his heirs qualifies the crime.

CHAPTER TWO: ILLEGAL MARRIAGES

ARTICLE 349. BIGAMY

The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person who shall contract a second or subsequent marriage before the former marriage has been legally dissolved, or before the absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead by means of a judgment rendered in the proper proceedings.

ELEMENTS:1. That the offender has been legally married. 2. That the marriage has not been legally dissolved or, in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse could not yet be presumed dead according to the Civil Code. 3. That he contracts a second or subsequent marriage. 4. That the second or subsequent marriage has all the essential requisites for validity. The first marriage must be a valid marriage. M and A married in 1936 and during the marriage, M married L in 1941, which gave rise to Ms prosecution for bigamy. Basis of bigamy is marriage of M with L because when M married P, A was already dead. SC: provisions of the marriage law make a subsequent marriage contracted by any person during the lifetime of his first spouse illegal and void from its performance, and no judicial decree is necessary to establish its invalidity, as distinguished from mere annullable marriages. as such, M was acquitted. Had M been prosecuted for bigamy having contracted the 2nd marriage with L, M would have been liable. Family Code: parties cannot presume marriage to be void; theres a need for a judicial declaration of nullity of the second marriage Nullity of marriage is not a defense in a bigamy charge; As with a voidable marriage, there must be a judicial declaration of the nullity of a marriage before contracting the second marriage. Article 40 of the Family Code of the Philippines states that "The absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be invoked for purposes of remarriage on the basis solely of a final judgment declaring such previous marriage void." Supreme Court held that there is need of a judicial declaration of the fact that the marriage of a person is void before that person can marry again; otherwise, the second marriage will be void. The subsequent judicial declaration of the nullity of the first marriage was immaterial because prior to the declaration of nullity, the crime had already been consummated. Recall the marriages which are considered VOID AB INITIO. (Art. 35, 36, 37, 38 of the Family Code) Note that what Art. 349 punishes is the act of contracting a second or subsequent marriage before the former marriage had been dissolved. Causes which may produce the legal dissolution of the first marriage: Death of one of the contracting parties; Judicial declaration annulling a void marriage; and Judicial decree annulling a voidable marriage. The death of the first spouse during the pendency of the bigamy case does not extinguish the crime, because when the accused married the second spouse, the first marriage was still subsisting. Divorce in foreign courts are not binding among Filipino citizen couples If the accused, in contracting the second marriage, acting on the honest beliefthat he was lawfully divorced from his first wife, he is liable for bigamy through reckless imprudence. However, in another case, it was held to be intentional bigamy. The reason for this ruling is that the legal effect of divorce is a matter of law and everyone is presumed to know the law. When a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise have capacity to remarry under Philippine law. Divorce by a Moro datu according to their customs and usages, not recognized. Once the prosecution has established that the defendant was already married at the time he contracted the second marriage, the burden of proof to show the dissolution of the first marriage is upon the defense. Under Article 41 of the Family Code, a summary proceeding for the declaration of presumptive death of the absent spouse is required before the surviving spouse can remarry. For the present spouse to contract a subsequent marriage, an absent spouse is presumed dead if he has been absent for four consecutive years and the spouse present had a well-founded belief that he is already dead. In case of disappearance where there is danger of death, an absence of only two years will be sufficient. However, a declaration of presumptive death should first be obtained from the courts. The second marriage, having all the essential requisites, would be valid were it not for the subsistence of the first marriage. Art. 3ofthe Family Code enumerates the three formal requisites for valid marriage. A marriage license issued before or at the time of marriage is one of them. Thus, when the second marriage took place one day before the issuance of the marriage license, such marriage is void ab initio. If the second marriage is void, there is no bigamy. In order that petitioner may be held guilty of the crime of bigamy, the marriage which he contracted for the second time with the second spouse must first be declared valid. But its validity had been questioned in the civil action. This civil action must be decided before the prosecution for bigamy can proceed Judgment of annulment precludes verdict of guilt in charge of bigamy. The second spouse is not necessarily liable for bigamy. Whether or not the second spouse should be included in the information is a question of fact that was determined by the fiscal who conducted the preliminary investigation in this case. The second husband or wife who knew of first marriage is an accomplice. The witness who falsely vouched for the capacity of either of the contracting parties is also an accomplice. In the crime of bigamy, it is immaterial whether it is the first or the second wife who initiates the action, for it is a public offense which can be denounced not only by the person affected thereby but even by a civic spirited citizen who may come to know the same. This is an offense against the State, not against the second wife. A person convicted of bigamy may still be prosecuted for concubinage. They are two distinct offenses in law and in fact, as well as in the mode of their prosecution. The first is an offense against civil status which may be prosecuted at the instance of the State; the second, an offense against chastity and may be prosecuted only at the instance of the offended party. The celebration of the second marriage, with the first still existing, characterizes the crime of bigamy; on the other hand, the mere cohabitation by the husband with a woman who is not his wife characterizes the crime of concubinage

ARTICLE 350. MARRIAGE CONTRACTED AGAINST PROVISIONS OF LAWS

The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon any person who, without being included in the provisions of the next proceeding article, shall have not been complied with or that the marriage is in disregard of a legal impediment.

If either of the contracting parties shall obtain the consent of the other by means of violence, intimidation or fraud, he shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty provided in the next preceding paragraph.

ELEMENTS:1. That the offender contracted marriage. 2. That he knew at the time that the requirements of the law were not complied with; or the marriage was in disregard of a legal impediment. Circumstance qualifying the offense: If either of the contracting parties obtains the consent of the other by means of violence, intimidation or fraud. Under this article, the offender must not be guilty of bigamy. Example, getting married without a marriage license. Recall the requisites of the law for valid marriage legal capacity of the contracting parties who must be a male and a female; consent freely given in the presence ofthe solemnizing officer; authority of the solemnizing officer; a valid marriage license except in marriages of exceptional character a marriage ceremony which takes place with the appearance of the contracting parties before the solemnizing officer and their personal declaration that they take each other as husband and wife in the presence of not less than two witnesses of legal age. Conviction of a violation of Art. 350 involves moral turpitude, a disqualification for being admitted to the bar.

ARTICLE 351. PREMATURE MARRIAGES

Any widow who shall marry within three hundred and one day from the date of the death of her husband, or before having delivered if she shall have been pregnant at the time of his death, shall be punished by arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos.The same penalties shall be imposed upon any woman whose marriage shall have been annulled or dissolved, if she shall marry before her delivery or before the expiration of the period of three hundred and one day after the legal separation.

Persons liable for premature marriages: A widow who married within 301 days from the date of the death of her husband, or before having delivered if she is pregnant at the time of his death. A woman who, her marriage having been annulled or dissolved', married before her delivery or before the expiration of the period of 301 days after the date of the legal separation. The law in fixing the said 301 days(10 months), admits the possibility that a woman may be in pregnancy for more than nine months. This provision is intended to prevent confusion in connection with filiation and paternity, inasmuch as the widow might have conceived and become pregnant by her late husband. The purpose of the law is to prevent doubtful paternity. The period of 301 days may be disregarded if the first husband was impotent or sterile. The period of 301 days is important only for cases where the woman is not pregnant. If she is pregnant at the time she becomes a widow, the prohibition is good only up to her delivery.

ARTICLE 352. PERFORMANCE OF ILLEGAL MARRIAGE CEREMONY

Priests or ministers of any religious denomination or sect, or civil authorities who shall perform or authorize any illegal marriage ceremony shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the Marriage Law.

The offender under Art. 352 must be authorized to solemnize marriages. A clergyman who performed a marriage ceremony, not knowing that one of the contracting parties is a minor, is not liable.

TITLE THIRTEEN: CRIMES AGAINST HONOR

1. Libel by means of writings or similar means. (Art.355) 2. Threatening to publish and offer to prevent such publication for a compensation. (Art. 356) 3. Prohibited publication of acts referred to in the course of official proceedings. (Art. 357) 4. Slander. (Art. 358)5. Slander by deed. (Art. 359) 6. Incriminating innocent person. (Art. 363) 7. Intriguing against honor. (Art. 364)

CHAPTER ONE: LIBEL

SECTION ONE. DEFINITION, FORMS, AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME

ARTICLE 353. LIBEL

A libel is public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.

Defamation, which includes libel and slander, means the offense of injuring a person's character, fame or reputation through false and malicious statements. It is that which tends to injure reputation or to diminish the esteem, respect, goodwill or confidence in the plaintiff or to excite derogatory feelings or opinions about the plaintiff. It is the publication of anything which is injurious to the good name or reputation of another or tends to bring him into disrepute. Defamation is an invasion of a relational interest since it involves the opinion which others in the community may have, or tend to have, of the plaintiff. "Libel" is a defamation committed by means of writing, printing, lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph, painting or theatrical or cine matographic exhibition, or any similar means (Art. 335). Oral defamation is called slander. Seditious libel is punished, not in this Chapter, but in Art. 142. The enjoyment of a private reputation is as much a constitutional right as the possession of life, liberty or property. It is one of those rights necessary to human society that underlie the whole scheme of civilization. The law recognizes the value of such reputation and imposes upon him who attacks it, by slanderous words or libelous publications, the liability to make full compensation for the damages done. Elements of defamation: 1. That there must be an imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, status or circumstance. 2. That the imputation must be made publicly. 3. That it must be malicious. 4. That the imputation must be directed to a natural or juridical person, or one who is dead. 5. That the imputation must tend to cause the dishonor, discredit or contempt of the person defamed. The imputation may cover: 1. Crime allegedly committed by the offended party; 2. Vice or defect, real or imaginary of the offended party;3. Any act, omission, condition, status of, or circumstance relating to the offended party. In determining whether a statement is defamatory, the words used are construed in their entirety and taken in their plain, natural and ordinary meaning as they would naturally be understood by persons reading them, unless it appears that they were used and understood in another sense. A charge is sufficient if the words are calculated to induce the hearers to suppose and understand that the person against whom they were uttered was guilty of certain offenses, or are sufficient to impeach the honesty, virtue or reputation, or to hold him up to public ridicule. It is not the intention of the writer or speaker, or the understanding of the plaintiff or of any hearer or reader by which the actionable quality of the words is to be determined, but the meaning that the words in fact conveyed on the minds of persons of reasonable understanding, discretion and candor, taking into consideration the surrounding circumstances which were known to the hearer or reader. The alleged defamatory statement should be construed not only as to the expression used but also with respect to the whole scope and apparent object of the writer or speaker. In other words, the article must be construed in its entirety including the headline, as they may enlarge, explain, or restrict, or be enlarged, explained or strengthened or restricted by the context. Whether or not it is libelous depends upon the scope, spirit, and motive of the publication taken in its entirety. Where the comments are insincere and intended to ridicule rather than praise the plaintiff, the publication is libelous. Praise undeserved is slander in disguise. Publication, even if intended for humor, may be libelous when the language used passed from the bounds of playful jest and intensive criticism into the region of scurrilous calumniation and intemperate personalities.

FIRST ELEMENT: THERE MUST BE AN IMPUTATION OF A CRIME, OR OF A VICE OR DEFECT, OR ANY ACT, OMISSION, CONDITION, STATUS OR CIRCUMSTANCE IMPUTATION OF A CRIMINAL ACT Examples: portraying someone as a swindler; branding someone as having murder, etc. Imputation of a crime may be implied from the acts and statements of the accused. Imputation of criminal intention not libelous because intent to commit a crime is not a violation of the law An expression of opinion by one affected by the act of another and based on actual fact is not libelous. IMPUTATION OF A VICE OR DEECT Example: lascivious and immoral habits IMPUTATION OF AN ACT OR OMISSION Ex. Imputed that X borrowed money without intending to pay, etc. IMPUTATION OF CONDITION, STATUS OR CIRCUMS TANCE Ex. Calling someone a bastard, coward, mangkukulam, etc.