GR 106643; (May, 1995) (Digest)
G.R. No. 106643 May 16, 1995
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. EDWIN MESAL Y MIRANDILA, accused-appellant.
FACTS
On June 21, 1989, a team of PC Rangers engaged in a firefight with NPA rebels in Barangay Panlayaan, Sorsogon. After the encounter, the team found accused-appellant Edwin Mesal lying on the ground behind a house, in possession of an M-14 rifle with ten rounds of ammunition. The rifle was certified to have been looted from a government patrol base during an NPA raid on May 1, 1989. The prosecution charged Mesal with illegal possession of a firearm in furtherance of subversion.
The accused testified that he was a welder who had been abducted by the NPA and was merely taking cover during the firefight. The Regional Trial Court convicted him of illegal possession of firearms in furtherance of rebellion under P.D. 1866 and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. On appeal, Mesal contended that the prosecution failed to prove the lack of a license for the firearm, an essential element of the crime, as no certification from the PNP Firearms and Explosives Unit was presented.
ISSUE
Whether the prosecution successfully proved the elements of illegal possession of firearms, specifically the lack of a license, and whether the possession was in furtherance of rebellion.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for simple illegal possession of firearms but modified the penalty, deleting the qualifying circumstance of rebellion. The Court held that the lack of a license was sufficiently established through other evidence, even without a certification from the PNP. Testimony from a military supply officer proved the rifle was a military-issue weapon looted during an NPA raid, making it impossible for the accused to have legally possessed it. This evidence adequately substituted for the usual certification.
However, the Court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove the possession was in furtherance of rebellion, insurrection, or subversion. The evidence only showed Mesal was captured with the rifle at the encounter site. Witnesses could not confirm he was an NPA member or that he fired at troops. Mere possession at the location, without overt acts proving knowing and willful membership in a subversive organization, is insufficient to qualify the offense. The penalty was thus reduced to the medium period for simple illegal possession under P.D. 1866. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court imposed a prison term of ten years and one day of prision mayor maximum as minimum to eighteen years, eight months, and one day of reclusion temporal maximum as maximum.