G.R. No. L-924; August 30, 1947
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. TIBURCIO ALITAGTAG, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Tiburcio Alitagtag was charged with treason on three counts before the People’s Court: (1) participation in the arrest and execution of guerrilla suspect Augusto Ramirez on February 4, 1945, in Santa Rosa, Laguna; (2) participation in the arrest of Canuto Velandres and two others on the same day; and (3) enlistment and service as a member of the Makapilis in December 1944 and retreating with Japanese troops. The trial court found counts 2 and 3 not duly proven but considered evidence on count 3 (being a Makapili) as proof of adherence to the enemy. It found count 1 established by the direct testimony of two witnesses: Canuto Velandres and Buenaventura Dichoso. Velandres testified that on February 4, 1945, he and two others were arrested and taken to Dichoso’s yard, where they saw the accused and others, all armed and in denim clothes, with a blindfolded prisoner (Augusto Ramirez). After Ricardo Beato ordered Ramirez killed, Filemon Alitagtag, Tiburcio Alitagtag (the accused), and Martin Laurel bayoneted Ramirez, who fell into a pit. Beato then ordered Velandres and his companions killed, but they were released upon news of approaching guerrillas. Velandres later helped the accused and his companions, along with Japanese soldiers, load bancas and retreat toward Rizal. Dichoso corroborated the arrest and execution, testifying he saw the accused and others, identified as Makapilis, arrest Ramirez in his yard, dig a grave, and bayonet him, with the accused delivering one of the thrusts. The accused denied the allegations. The trial court sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, a P10,000 fine, and costs, appreciating the aggravating circumstance of aid by a group and the mitigating circumstance of lack of instruction, setting them off against each other.

ISSUE

Whether the evidence is sufficient to convict Tiburcio Alitagtag of treason.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The testimony of prosecution witnesses Velandres and Dichoso, believed by the trial court, sufficiently established the overt act in count 1—the accused’s participation in the arrest and execution of Augusto Ramirez, a guerrilla suspect, demonstrating his adherence to the enemy. The court found no ground to overturn the trial court’s findings on witness credibility, dismissing alleged contradictions as minor. Regarding adherence to the enemy, the evidence on count 3, though not proving the specific overt act of enlistment, showed the accused acted as a Makapili: bearing arms, wearing a Japanese-style uniform, participating in drills under Japanese officers, rounding up and executing guerrillas, and retreating with Japanese troops. This conduct was sufficient to infer adherence, as formal enlistment was not required; it was the intention revealed by acts that mattered. The Makapili organization was characterized as an instrument of the Japanese for suppressing resistance, and membership or acting in such capacity constituted adherence. The penalty imposed was in accordance with law. The judgment was affirmed with costs.