The Importance of Truthfulness: Perjury Conviction Upheld Despite Petition Withdrawal

A.M. No. MTJ-95-1063, February 09, 1996

Imagine facing criminal charges because of a statement you made in a document you later withdrew. This is the reality explored in Choa v. Chiongson, a Philippine Supreme Court case that underscores the enduring consequences of false statements made under oath, even if the document containing those statements is later rendered inactive.

This case highlights the serious nature of perjury and the importance of ensuring the accuracy of all statements made in legal documents, regardless of their subsequent status. Alfonso C. Choa learned this lesson the hard way when he was convicted of perjury based on statements in a withdrawn naturalization petition.

Understanding Perjury Under Philippine Law

Perjury, as defined under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code, involves making a false statement under oath or affirmation, when such statement is required by law or made for a legal purpose. The key elements are:

• The accused made a statement under oath or affirmation.
• The statement was made regarding a material matter.
• The statement was false.
• The statement was made willfully and deliberately.
• The oath was taken before a competent officer authorized to administer it.

A “material matter” refers to the main subject of the inquiry or is specifically and directly probative of it. Even seemingly minor details can be considered material if they influence the decision-making process.

The Revised Penal Code states:

“Article 183. False testimony in other cases and perjury in solemn affirmation. — The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person who, knowingly making oath, gives false testimony or makes a false affidavit regarding any material matter before any other person authorized to administer an oath in matters in which the law requires an oath.”

Example: Imagine someone applying for a business permit and falsely stating their business address. Even if the permit is later withdrawn, the applicant could still face perjury charges if the false address was material to the permit application.

The Case of Alfonso C. Choa: Facts and Procedure

The case began when Alfonso C. Choa’s wife, Leni L. Ong-Choa, filed a complaint alleging that Choa made false statements in his Petition for Naturalization. Specifically, the complaint alleged that Choa falsely stated that his wife and children resided at a particular address and that he was of good moral character, despite allegedly having an extramarital affair.

Here’s a breakdown of the key events:

1. Choa filed a Petition for Naturalization, which included statements about his family’s residence and his moral character.
2. His wife filed a complaint alleging that these statements were false.
3. The City Prosecutor’s Office filed an Information charging Choa with perjury.
4. The Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MCTC) of Bacolod City, presided over by Judge Roberto S. Chiongson, found Choa guilty of perjury.
5. Choa moved for reconsideration, arguing that the withdrawal of his naturalization petition rendered it functus officio (having no further legal effect). He also argued that the statements in the petition were privileged and that his prosecution violated the equal protection clause.
6. The motion for reconsideration was denied.

The Supreme Court quoted the lower court’s ruling, stating, “[E]very interest of public policy demands that perjury be not shielded by artificial refinements and narrow technicalities. For perjury strikes at the very administration of the laws… It is the policy of the law that judicial proceedings and judgment shall be fair and free from fraud, and that litigants and parties be encouraged to tell the truth and that they be punished if they do not.”

The Supreme Court ultimately upheld the lower court’s decision, emphasizing that the withdrawal of the petition did not negate the fact that false statements were made under oath.

Practical Implications and Lessons Learned

This case serves as a stark reminder that truthfulness in legal documents is paramount. Even if a document is later withdrawn or dismissed, the consequences of making false statements under oath can still be severe.

Key Lessons:

• Accuracy is Crucial: Always ensure the accuracy of all statements made in legal documents, especially those made under oath.
• Withdrawal Doesn’t Erase: Withdrawing a document does not erase the potential consequences of false statements contained within it.
• Seek Legal Advice: If you are unsure about the accuracy of a statement or the legal implications of making it, consult with an attorney.

Hypothetical Example: A contractor submits a sworn affidavit stating that all subcontractors have been paid. Later, it’s discovered that some subcontractors were not paid. Even if the project is completed and the affidavit is no longer actively relied upon, the contractor could still face perjury charges.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q: What is the penalty for perjury in the Philippines?

A: The penalty for perjury under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code is arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period. This translates to imprisonment ranging from four months and one day to two years and four months.

Q: Can I be charged with perjury if I didn’t know the statement was false?

A: No. Perjury requires a willful and deliberate assertion of falsehood. If you genuinely believed the statement to be true at the time you made it, you cannot be convicted of perjury.

Q: What if I correct the false statement later?

A: While correcting a false statement may be viewed favorably by the court, it does not automatically absolve you of liability for perjury. The prosecution may still proceed, especially if the false statement caused harm or prejudice to another party.

Q: Does the withdrawal of a legal document automatically negate any potential perjury charges?

A: As illustrated in Choa v. Chiongson, the withdrawal of a legal document does not automatically negate perjury charges. The false statement itself is the basis for the charge, regardless of the document’s current status.

Q: What should I do if I realize I made a false statement in a legal document?

A: Immediately consult with an attorney. They can advise you on the best course of action, which may include correcting the statement and mitigating any potential damages.

Q: Is an online statement considered perjury?

A: If the online statement meets all the elements of perjury, including being under oath or affirmation before a competent officer, it can be considered perjury.

ASG Law specializes in criminal law, including cases involving perjury and false statements. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.