People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee VS Gregorio Perfecto, defendant-appellant



People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee VS
Gregorio Perfecto, defendant-appellant

Facts:
                On August 20 1920, the Secretary of the Philippine Senate Fernando M. Guerrero discovered that certain documents which constituted the records of testimony given by witnesses in the investigation of oil companies had disappeared from the office. On Sept. 20, 1920, the newspaper LA Nacion, edited by Mr. Gregorio Perfecto published an article about it to the effect that, “the author or author’s of the robbery of the records from the iron safe of the senate have, perhaps, but followed the example of certain senators who secured their re-election through fraud and robbery.”
                On Sept 25, 1920, the Senate adopted a resolution authorizing the President of Senate to indorse to the Attorney-General, for his study and corresponding action to the case of the Newspaper LA Nacion and its editor Gregorio Perfecto. The editorial in question alleged that it constituted a violation of Art. 256 of the Spanish Penal Code. The defendant Gregorio Perfecto was found guilty in the Municipal Courts and again in the Court of First Instance.

Issue:
                Whether or not defendant guilty for violation of Art. 256 of Spanish Penal Code.

Ruling:
                The Supreme Court acquitted Gregorio Perfecto holding that Art 256 of the SPC had been abrogated being political in nature, upon advent of American sovereignty.
                In public law, it is a principle that upon acquisition of territory, the previous political relations of the ceded region is totally abrogated. “Political” being used to denominate the laws regulating the relations sustained by the inhabitants.
                Art 256 was enacted by the government of Spain to protect Spanish Officials who were representative of the King. However, with the change of sovereignty, a new government, and a new theory of government was set-up in the Philippines. No longer is there a minister of crown or a person in authority of such exalted position that the citizen must speak of him only with bated breath.
                Said article is contrary to the genius and fundamental principles of the American character and system of government. It was crowded out by implications as soon as the United States established its authority.
Post a Comment (0)
Previous Post Next Post