G.R. No. L-4445; February 28, 1955
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MANUEL BERONILLA, FILIPINO VELASCO, POLICARPIO PACULDO, and JACINTO ADRIATICO, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

The appellants were convicted of murder for the execution of Arsenio Borjal on April 18, 1945, in La Paz, Abra. Borjal was the elected mayor who served during the Japanese occupation. Appellant Manuel Beronilla was appointed Military Mayor of La Paz in December 1944 by Lt. Col. R. H. Arnold of the 15th Infantry, USAFIP, a guerrilla unit. Beronilla received orders to investigate puppet officials, including Borjal, and to appoint a 12-man jury to try persons accused of treason or espionage. In March 1945, Borjal returned to La Paz and was placed under custody. A jury was appointed, a trial was conducted over 19 days, and Borjal was found guilty and sentenced to death. The trial records were forwarded to Lt. Col. Arnold for review. On April 18, 1945, the records were returned to Beronilla with a message (Exhibit 8) stating the matter was best handled by his government and approving whatever disposition he made. That night, Beronilla ordered Borjal’s execution, carried out by Jacinto Adriatico. Father Filipino Velasco performed the last rites. The appellants were later indicted for murder. Some co-accused were granted amnesty or acquitted. The trial court convicted the four appellants, finding the crime fell within the Amnesty Proclamation (Executive Proclamation No. 8) but was committed after the liberation of La Paz, thus outside the amnesty period.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the appellants are guilty of murder for the execution of Arsenio Borjal, considering they acted pursuant to orders from superior military authorities and their claim to amnesty under Proclamation No. 8.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of conviction and acquitted the appellants. The Court found that the arrest, trial, and execution of Borjal were done in compliance with express orders from the 15th Infantry Headquarters. The crucial question was whether Beronilla received a radiogram from overall area commander Col. Volckmann (Exhibit H) declaring the jury system illegal and specifically mentioning Borjal’s case, which would have invalidated the orders. The Court found no satisfactory proof that Beronilla actually received this message. The testimony of the sole witness claiming he did was not credible due to inconsistencies with a prior affidavit. The Court concluded the appellants acted in good faith upon orders they could not question, without awareness of any illegality, and thus criminal intent was not established. Furthermore, regarding amnesty, the Court held that given the contradictory evidence on the liberation date of La Paz and the Presidential directive to resolve any reasonable doubt in favor of the accused, the appellants should have been granted the benefits of Amnesty Proclamation No. 8.