Dear PAO,
My brother had a verbal tussle with Dino regarding their common fence. My brother later asked for forgiveness, which Dino accepted, so he turned his back and went on his way. When he was about a meter away from Dino, the latter rushed toward him and hacked him from behind, resulting in his death. A corresponding criminal complaint was filed against Dino, and according to my relative, who is a police officer, the act was attended by treachery. Dino claimed that there was no treachery because of their prior verbal tussle, which should have put my brother on guard against any imminent danger. Is he correct?
Capsula
Dear Capsula,
Treachery is an aggravating circumstance which is found in Article 14 (16) of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, as amended:
“That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia).
“There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.”
The elements of treachery were enumerated in People of the Philippines vs. Natindim, et al. (G.R. No. 201867, November 04, 2020), penned by Honorable Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando:
“The essence of treachery is the swift and unexpected attack on the unarmed victim without the slightest provocation on the victim's part. The two elements of treachery, namely: (1) that at the time of the attack, the victim was not in a position to defend himself or herself, and (2) that the offender consciously adopted the particular means, method or form of attack employed by him or her, xxx”
Even in the presence of a prior verbal tussle between the victim and the accused, treachery may still be appreciated. This is supported by People of the Philippines vs. Archivido, G.R. No. 233085. September 21, 2020, where the Supreme Court, speaking through Justice Samuel H. Gaerlan, stated that:
“Remarkably, in People v. Kalipayan, the Court held that an attack against a victim whose back was turned against the aggressor is treacherous. This manner of attack is a sign of the accused's conscious choice to employ the specific means and methods to kill the victim. It cannot be regarded as a sudden emotional response.
“Similarly, in People v. Saure, the Court affirmed the presence of treachery even though there was a prior altercation between the accused and the victim:
“Treachery is evidently present in the instant case as the accused-appellant, stealthily and without warning, rushed towards the victim from behind and stabbed him in the chest. The victim, who was then seated, was not aware of any impending danger. Although there had been prior verbal altercation, the victim had reasons to believe that the matter has already been settled after Alinsub's intervention.”
Applying the above-quoted jurisprudence to your situation, the essence of treachery lies in the sudden and unexpected nature of the attack, leaving the victim with no opportunity to defend himself. Although there was a prior verbal tussle between your brother and the accused, the same had already ceased when your brother asked for forgiveness and this was accepted by the accused. When your brother turned his back and had already walked a meter away, Dino launched his attack from behind. Clearly, such action was consciously employed to eliminate any chance for your brother to defend himself. Thus, treachery may be appreciated under the given set of facts.
We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice is solely based on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.
Thank you for your continued trust and support.
