G.R. No. L-20805 November 29, 1965
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellant, vs. IGNACIO DESIDERIO, defendant-appellee.

FACTS

An information was filed against Ignacio Desiderio in the Municipal Court and subsequently in the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga City for violation of Section 3601 of Republic Act 1937 (the Tariff and Customs Code). The information charged that on or about November 28, 1958, in Zamboanga City, Desiderio willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously possessed, received, concealed, bought, and sold (after illegal importation) eleven cases and twenty cartons of Chesterfield cigarettes and eleven cartons of Camel cigarettes, knowing them to have been imported contrary to law. Desiderio pleaded not guilty. On June 27, 1961, he filed a motion to quash the information, arguing that his criminal liability had been extinguished by a compromise agreement with the Collector of Customs on February 10, 1958, pursuant to Section 2307 of Republic Act 1937. The Court of First Instance granted the motion and dismissed the case in its order of October 11, 1962. The Solicitor General appealed this dismissal.

ISSUE

Whether a settlement of the case under Section 2307 of the Tariff and Customs Code (Republic Act 1937) extinguishes the criminal liability of the offender under Section 3601 of the same Code.

RULING

No. The order of dismissal is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings. A settlement under Section 2307 does not extinguish criminal liability under Section 3601. Section 2307 expressly limits the discharge of liability to “all liability which may or might attach to the property by virtue of the offense which was the occasion of the seizure and all liability which might have been incurred under any bond given by the owner or agent in respect to such property.” It pertains only to the liability attaching to the property or the bond, not to the personal criminal liability of the offender. Interpreting Section 2307 to discharge criminal liability would encourage smuggling by allowing offenders to escape prosecution merely by redeeming seized goods, contrary to public policy. Furthermore, Congress eliminated the prior provision (Section 1369 of the Revised Administrative Code) that allowed the Commissioner of Customs to compromise criminal liability, indicating a clear intent not to allow such compromises under the new Tariff and Customs Code. Section 2307 falls under the part entitled “Administrative Proceedings,” and settlement of administrative proceedings does not, absent an express provision, settle criminal liability. The cited case of People v. Magdaluyo is inapplicable as it involves a different law (the National Internal Revenue Code) containing an express compromise provision for both civil and criminal cases.