Understanding Conspiracy and Shared Criminal Liability in the Philippines

G.R. Nos. 112716-17, December 16, 1996

Imagine you’re at a restaurant when suddenly, a fight breaks out. While you didn’t throw any punches, you blocked the exit, preventing anyone from helping the victim. Are you liable for the injuries? In the Philippines, the concept of conspiracy means you could be, even if you didn’t directly inflict harm. The Supreme Court case of People vs. Herbias clarifies the extent of liability when individuals act together in a crime, even if their specific roles differ. This case highlights how Philippine law views shared criminal intent and the consequences of participating in a conspiracy.

The Essence of Conspiracy in Philippine Law

Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. It is not enough that the crime was committed jointly or simultaneously; there must be a prior agreement to commit the crime. This agreement doesn’t need to be formal or written; it can be inferred from the actions of the individuals involved.

The Revised Penal Code, Article 8, defines conspiracy and its implications:

“Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor.”

This means that conspiracy itself is only punishable when specifically stated by law. However, when a crime is committed as a result of a conspiracy, all conspirators are equally liable, regardless of their individual participation. This principle is based on the idea that each conspirator is an agent of the others, and the act of one is the act of all.

For example, if two people plan to rob a bank, and during the robbery, one of them shoots and kills a security guard, both individuals are liable for murder, even if only one pulled the trigger. This is because the killing was a foreseeable consequence of the planned robbery.

The Case of People vs. Herbias: A Detailed Look

The case of People vs. Herbias involved the killing of Jeremias Saladio. Jeremias was driving his jeepney when two men on a motorcycle attacked him. Eduardo Herbias drove the motorcycle while his companion fired shots at Jeremias, resulting in his death. Another passenger, Edgardo Manansala, was also wounded during the attack.

Here’s a breakdown of the events and the court’s proceedings:

• Jeremias Saladio was shot while driving his jeepney.
• Eduardo Herbias was identified as the driver of the motorcycle used in the attack.
• Herbias and an unknown assailant were charged with murder and frustrated murder.
• The trial court found Herbias guilty of both crimes.
• Herbias appealed, arguing inconsistencies in witness testimonies and questioning the possibility of the victim’s actions after being shot.

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for murder but acquitted Herbias of frustrated murder. The Court emphasized the principle of conspiracy, stating that Herbias’s act of driving the motorcycle and handing over the gun to his companion established his participation in the conspiracy to kill Jeremias Saladio.

The Supreme Court reasoned:

“Conspiracy to kill Jeremias Saladio was adequately established. There was unity of design and purpose as shown by the fact that appellant gave his gun to the other assailant when the latter ran out of bullets. After the execution of their criminal act they left the crime scene together. Consequently, although it was not appellant who actually shot the victim, he and his cohort are equally liable for the crime. When there is conspiracy the act of one is the act of all.”

However, the Court found no evidence of a conspiracy to harm Edgardo Manansala, the passenger who was wounded. Therefore, Herbias could not be held liable for frustrated murder, as the intent to harm Manansala was not proven to be part of the agreement.

Practical Implications of the Herbias Ruling

This case serves as a stark reminder that participation in a conspiracy can lead to severe consequences, even if one’s direct involvement in the actual crime is limited. The key takeaway is that if you agree to commit a crime with others, you are responsible for the actions of your co-conspirators, as long as those actions are within the scope of the conspiracy.

Key Lessons:

• Be mindful of associations: Associating with individuals planning illegal activities can make you liable, even if your role seems minor.
• Withdraw from conspiracies: If you find yourself in a conspiracy, clearly and unequivocally withdraw your participation to avoid liability.
• Seek legal advice: If you are accused of conspiracy, seek legal counsel immediately to understand your rights and options.

For businesses, this ruling underscores the importance of due diligence and ethical conduct. Companies must ensure their employees are aware of the risks of participating in illegal activities, even indirectly.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What is the difference between conspiracy and being an accomplice?

A: Conspiracy involves an agreement to commit a crime, while being an accomplice involves aiding or assisting in the commission of a crime without necessarily being part of the initial agreement. Conspirators are equally liable, while accomplices may have a lesser degree of liability.

Q: How can I prove I withdrew from a conspiracy?

A: You must demonstrate a clear and unequivocal act of withdrawal, such as informing your co-conspirators that you are no longer participating and taking steps to prevent the crime from occurring.

Q: Can I be charged with conspiracy even if the crime was never committed?

A: Generally, no. Conspiracy is usually charged in conjunction with the commission of the intended crime. However, some laws may specifically penalize conspiracy even if the crime is not carried out.

Q: What defenses are available if I am accused of conspiracy?

A: Possible defenses include lack of intent, lack of knowledge of the conspiracy, withdrawal from the conspiracy, or mistaken identity.

Q: How does conspiracy affect sentencing?

A: If you are found guilty of conspiracy, you will typically receive the same sentence as the person who directly committed the crime, as all conspirators are considered equally liable.

ASG Law specializes in criminal law and defense. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.