G.R. No. L-14712; April 29, 1961
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FEDERICO CORTES alias PEDRING CORTES, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The defendant-appellant, Federico Cortes, was convicted of treason by the Court of First Instance of Cebu based on two counts. Count No. 1 alleged he served as a member of the puppet police and Constabulary, and as an agent and informer for the Japanese Kempei Tai, reporting on guerrilla activities and participating in arrests. Count No. 7 specifically alleged that in 1942, he arrested and apprehended Fernando Macasero on charges of possessing contraband, turning him over to Japanese Sergeant Mori, resulting in Macasero’s court-martial and one-year imprisonment.
The prosecution presented multiple witnesses for Count No. 7. Fernando Macasero testified that Cortes first came to his house to change money and returned later with Japanese soldiers, pointed out Macasero’s house and the drawer containing money, tied his hands, and later beat him during interrogation. Macasero was subsequently imprisoned. His wife, Teodora Alisna, corroborated the money-changing incident and Cortes’s presence with the Japanese during the arrest. Witness Cornelio Barcelo testified he saw Cortes point out the correct house to the Japanese, tie Macasero’s hands, and later beat him with a stick at the school building. Cortes admitted being present but denied active participation, claiming he merely waited in the truck.

ISSUE

Whether the evidence presented is sufficient to convict Federico Cortes of the crime of treason.

RULING

Yes, but only for Count No. 7. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for treason based solely on Count No. 7, while acquitting on Count No. 1 due to insufficient evidence under the “two-witness rule” required for treason cases. The legal logic is anchored on the specific evidentiary standard for treason. The Court meticulously applied the rule that a conviction for treason requires the testimony of at least two witnesses to the same overt act of giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
For Count No. 1, the evidence showed Cortes was a Kempei Tai member who spied and secured labor for Japanese defenses. However, while these acts individually constituted aid to the enemy, the testimony of witnesses like Cañiza, Lim Beng Liong, and documentary exhibits pertained to different specific acts (membership, spying via reports, and labor procurement). No single overt act under this count was corroborated by two witnesses, failing the strict constitutional and jurisprudential requirement.
For Count No. 7, the Court found the two-witness rule fully satisfied. The testimonies of Macasero, his wife Alisna, and Barcelo converged on the same overt act: Cortes’s active participation in Macasero’s arrest and delivery to the Japanese, which directly aided the enemy. Their consistent accounts detailed his key actions—pointing out the house, identifying the money, tying hands, and beating the victim. Cortes’s own admission of being present during the operation, coupled with his failure to provide corroborating witnesses for his denial, strengthened the prosecution’s case. The Court thus found him guilty of treason for this specific act. The penalty of fifteen years of reclusion temporal, a fine, and costs imposed by the trial court was deemed commensurate and affirmed.