ESTRADA vs. SANDIGANBAYAN

JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA, petitioner,
vs.
SANDIGANBAYAN (Third Division) and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.

G.R. No. 148560
November 19, 2001

FACTS:

Petitioner Joseph Ejercito Estrada, the highest-ranking official to be prosecuted under RA 7080 (An Act Defining and Penalizing the Crime of Plunder), as amended by RA 7659,wishes to impress upon the Court that the assailed law is unconstitutional for it abolishes the element of mensrea in crimes already punishable under RPC.

ISSUE:

Is plunder, a crime punishable under a special penal law, mala in se which requires the element of mensrea?

HELD:

Yes. The legislative declaration in R.A. No. 7659 that plunder is a heinous offense implies that it is a malum in se. For when the acts punished are inherently immoral or inherently wrong, they are mala in seand it does not matter that such acts are punished in a special law, especially since in the case of plunder where the predicate crimes are mainly mala in se. Indeed, it would be absurd to treat prosecutions for plunder as though they are mere prosecutions for violations of the Bouncing Check Law (BP 22) or of an ordinance against jaywalking, without regard to the inherent wrongness of the acts.

HELLO!
You can help law students and barristas by contributing to our collection. Please upload your case digests, reviewers or other relevant materials HERE.

For attribution or removal, contact us.