People v. Tan Gee
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The steamer Don Engracio arrived in Manila on October 27, 1905, carrying Tan Gee and Luis Ortiz de Taranco Vy Chavo. Upon disembarkation, Juan Silerio, a customs secret-service agent, requested Tan Gee's certificate of entrance into the Islands. Tan Gee stated he had no certificate. Luis Ortiz de Taranco Vy Chavo then offered and handed Silerio 40 pesos, Philippine currency, as a bribe to allow Tan Gee to proceed without being subjected to customs examination or arrest. Procedural History: The customs agent took Tan Gee to the customs authorities and subsequently filed a complaint against Luis Ortiz de Taranco Vy Chavo for attempted bribery. The Court of First Instance of Manila found both Tan Gee and Luis Ortiz de Taranco Vy Chavo guilty of bribery, sentencing each to three months' imprisonment, a fine of 400 dollars, and costs. The court also ordered the confiscation of the 40 pesos offered as a bribe. The Appeal: Luis Ortiz de Taranco Vy Chavo appealed the judgment of the Court of First Instance. The appellant argued that the offense, if any, was not consummated bribery nor a violation of the Customs Administrative Act, but rather an attempt to commit bribery.
Issue(s)
Whether the act of offering money to a customs secret-service agent to allow a person without the required certificate to pass constitutes attempted bribery under the Penal Code. Whether the offense should be prosecuted under the Customs Administrative Act or the general provisions of the Penal Code.
Ruling
The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of First Instance with respect to the appellant, Luis Ortiz de Taranco Vy Chavo. It found him guilty of attempted bribery and sentenced him to pay a fine of 60 pesos, with the confiscation of the 40 pesos offered as the bribe, and to pay one-half of the costs of both instances. The Court held that the act constituted attempted bribery, not consummated bribery or a violation of the Customs Administrative Act.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Court held that the act of Luis Ortiz de Taranco Vy Chavo in offering 40 pesos to Juan Silerio, a customs secret-service agent, constituted attempted bribery. The offer was made with the clear intent to influence the public official to refrain from performing his duty, which was to detain Tan Gee for not having the required certificate of entrance. The overt act of offering the money, even though not accepted, commenced the commission of the crime of bribery. The Court emphasized that the essential elements of the offense were present, regardless of the specific manner of appointment or arrest of the agent, as he was acting in his official capacity and exercising authority at the time. The penalty for attempted bribery is a fine, which is lesser than that for consummated bribery, as provided by the Penal Code. On Issue 2: The Court ruled that the offense was punishable under Article 387 of the Penal Code in relation to Article 383, concerning bribery, and not under Section 333 of the Customs Administrative Act. The reason for this distinction was that the attempted bribery was not made for the purpose of bribing a customs official in the performance of duties specifically prescribed by the Customs Administrative Act. Instead, it was an attempt to bribe a public official who was tasked with carrying out the provisions of Philippine Commission Act No. 702, which prohibited the entry of Chinese persons without proper documentation. Juan Silerio, as a secret-service agent authorized by Act No. 367, was acting in his capacity as a public official charged with enforcing immigration laws, making the offense fall under the general provisions of bribery.
Main Doctrine
The crime of attempted bribery is committed when an individual offers a bribe to a public official with the intent to influence the performance of his official duties, even if the bribe is not accepted and the official is not successfully influenced. The Court clarified that the offense is punishable under the general provisions of the Penal Code concerning bribery, not under specific administrative acts, unless the act directly pertains to the duties prescribed therein. The penalty for attempted bribery is a fine, which is lesser than that for consummated bribery.