G.R. No. 172707 ; October 1, 2013
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. HALIL GAMBAO Y ESMAIL, EDDIE KARIM Y USO, EDWIN DUKILMAN Y SUBOH, TONY ABAO Y SULA, RAUL UDAL Y KAGUI, THENG DILANGALEN Y NANDING, JAMAN MACALINBOL Y KATOL, MONETTE RONAS Y AMPIL, NORA EVAD Y MULOK, THIAN PERPENIAN Y RAFON A.K.A LARINA PERPENIAN AND JOHN DOES, Accused-Appellants.

FACTS

On August 12, 1998, at around 7:30 PM in Pasay City, accused-appellants, conspiring and mutually helping one another, by force, intimidation, and the use of high-powered firearms, willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously took, carried away, and deprived Lucia Chan y Lee of her liberty against her will for the purpose of extorting ransom. A demand for ransom amounting to Four Hundred Thousand Pesos (P400,000.00) was made as a condition for her release. The antecedent facts show that on August 11, 1998, two persons, including accused-appellant Theng Dilangalen, went to Chan’s residence inquiring about a passport. They returned the next day and, in the evening, Dilangalen and an unidentified armed companion forcibly took Chan from her home. Chan was forced into a “Tamaraw FX” van and brought to a house where she was guarded by appellants, including Monette Ronas and Nora Evad, who threatened to kill her unless she paid a ransom. She was later moved to another location where ransom negotiations occurred. Chan’s son, Levy, was contacted, and it was agreed he would deliver P400,000.00 at a “Chowking” Restaurant. Police surveillance led to the interception of the ransom money and the arrest of appellants Eddie Karim, Tony Abao, Halil Gambao, and Edwin Dukilman on August 14, 1998. A subsequent police assault on a cottage in Calamba, Laguna, resulted in the safe rescue of Chan and the apprehension of appellants Theng Dilangalen, Raul Udal, Jaman Macalinbol, Teng Mandao, Thian Perpenian, Nora Evad, and Monette Ronas. During the trial on October 7, 1998, after the victim and her son testified, appellants manifested their desire to change their pleas from “not guilty” to “guilty.” The trial court explained the consequences, and each appellant affirmed their understanding before re-arraignment. The prosecution presented evidence, and the Regional Trial Court convicted them of Kidnapping for Ransom. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction with modifications.

ISSUE

Whether the accused-appellants are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Kidnapping for Ransom as defined and penalized under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659 .

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The accused-appellants, by their own voluntary change of plea to “guilty” after being fully apprised of the consequences, and in light of the evidence presented, are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Kidnapping for Ransom under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended. The elements of the crime are present: (1) the accused kidnapped or detained another person; (2) the kidnapping or detention was illegal; and (3) the kidnapping or detention was for the purpose of extorting ransom. The facts established that appellants, acting in conspiracy, forcibly took Lucia Chan, detained her in different locations, and demanded a ransom of P400,000.00 for her release, which was paid and intercepted by police. The pleas of guilt, entered knowingly and voluntarily, constitute an admission of all the material facts alleged in the information and a waiver of the right to present evidence. The Court modified the penalties imposed in accordance with prevailing law, particularly considering the provisions of Republic Act No. 9346 , which prohibits the imposition of the death penalty. The dispositive portion of the Court of Appeals decision, which affirmed the trial court’s judgment of conviction with modifications to the penalties, was upheld.