G.R. No. 138962; October 4, 2002
PRESCILLA TUATES and ANDRES DE LA PAZ, petitioners, vs. HON. LUCAS P. BERSAMIN, as Presiding Judge, Branch 96, RTC Quezon City, People of the Philippines and I.C. Construction, Inc., respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners Prescilla Tuates and Andres de la Paz were convicted by the Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC) of Quezon City for violating Presidential Decree No. 772 (the Anti-Squatting Law). Their conviction was affirmed in toto by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City. While their motion for reconsideration was pending before the RTC, Republic Act No. 8368, entitled “An Act Repealing Presidential Decree No. 772,” was enacted. The RTC, in its subsequent order, ruled that only the petitioners’ criminal liability was extinguished by the repeal, and the civil aspect of the judgment—specifically, the order for the removal of their illegally constructed house and improvements—remained executory. The Court of Appeals sustained the RTC’s ruling. Petitioners then filed the present petition, arguing that the express repeal of P.D. 772 absolves them of both criminal and civil liability.

ISSUE

Whether the repeal of Presidential Decree No. 772 by Republic Act No. 8368 extinguishes both the criminal and civil liability of the petitioners.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition, ruling that the absolute and explicit repeal of P.D. 772 by R.A. 8368 decriminalizes squatting. Section 3 of R.A. 8368 mandates the dismissal of all pending cases under P.D. 772. This unconditional repeal means the act of squatting ceases to be a crime, and it is as if the offense never existed. Consequently, where there is no criminal liability, there can be no civil liability arising from the crime (ex delicto), as civil liability in such cases is rooted in the criminal act. Therefore, both the criminal and civil aspects of the cases against the petitioners must be dismissed. The Court clarified that this does not grant a license to illegally occupy lands, as property owners retain recourse through other laws, such as Republic Act No. 7279 (against professional squatters), the Revised Penal Code (for trespass, usurpation), the Rules of Court (for forcible entry, unlawful detainer), and the Civil Code (for damages). The assailed decisions of the Court of Appeals and the RTC were reversed and set aside. A new judgment was entered ordering the dismissal of the criminal cases, including their civil aspects, without prejudice to the filing of appropriate civil and/or criminal actions under other prevailing laws.