G.R. No. L-10845; April 28, 1958
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. AMBROSIO LUCERO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

On January 6, 1953, 1st Lt. Severino F. de Jesus, Team Leader of the 7th MIS “A” Team, issued a certificate authorizing Ambrosio Lucero, a civilian confidential agent, to temporarily use a confiscated .38 caliber revolver. The authorization was for a mission “to make surveillance and effect killing or capture of Angel Aviso alias Cmdr Mori,” a reported Huk commander. Lucero had also been appointed a confidential informer and given an identification card by the Battalion Commander of the 7th Battalion Combat Team. On February 7, 1953, Lucero was caught in possession of the revolver in Navotas, Rizal. An information for illegal possession of firearm was filed against him. At trial, the defense admitted these facts, presenting the certificate of authority (Exhibit “1”) and identification card (Exhibit “2”). The trial court found him guilty and sentenced him accordingly. The Court of Appeals certified the appeal to the Supreme Court as it raised only questions of law.

ISSUE

Whether Ambrosio Lucero, a civilian confidential agent appointed by a military commander and temporarily provided with a firearm for a specific mission to capture or kill a Huk commander, is criminally liable for illegal possession of firearm.

RULING

The Supreme Court REVERSED the judgment of the trial court and ACQUITTED Ambrosio Lucero. The Court held that the appointment of civilian informers to aid in apprehending Huks was a recognized and successful practice. The military commander entrusted with the duty of capturing a Huk commander had the lawful authority to appoint a civilian informer and, as a necessary incident to that power, to provide the informer with a weapon to defend himself and effectively carry out the mission. The temporary grant of the revolver was a necessary means to accomplish a lawful purpose. The provisions of the Revised Administrative Code (Sections 887 and 888) cited by the Solicitor General were deemed inapplicable, as they refer to possession for personal use, not to temporary use for a governmental purpose like apprehending rebels. The authority granted to Lucero was thus valid, exempting him from criminal liability.
Separate Opinions:
Justice J.B.L. Reyes, with whom Chief Justice Paras concurred, dissented. He argued that a mission “to effect the killing” of an individual, even a rebel like Commander Mori, was patently illegal as it authorized murder without due process and could not constitute valid authority for bearing a firearm.