People v. City Court of General Santos City
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Private respondents were charged before the respondent City Court with violation of Presidential Decree No. 772 (Penalizing Squatting and Other Similar Acts). The information alleged that from 1968 and continuously until August 17, 1978, the accused unlawfully occupied and possessed, without the owner's consent and against his will, land owned by Jorge P. Royeca, by constructing houses thereon. This occupancy was allegedly done by means of force and/or taking advantage of the landowner's tolerance, despite repeated demands to vacate. Procedural History: Some private respondents filed motions to quash the information. The respondent City Court granted the motion to quash and dismissed the case, ruling that Presidential Decree No. 772 is not an ex-post facto law and the crime is not continuing. The court reasoned that the decree, effective August 20, 1975, was intended to penalize future occupations, and the accused had already succeeded in occupying the property in 1968. The Petition: The People of the Philippines, through the City Fiscal, filed a petition for review on certiorari seeking to reverse the order of dismissal and reinstate the criminal case, arguing that PD 772 is applicable to respondents who were occupying the land on August 20, 1975, and continued to do so.
Issue(s)
Whether the crime of squatting under Presidential Decree No. 772 is a continuing offense such that it can apply to occupancy that commenced before the law's effectivity but persisted thereafter.
Ruling
The petition is GRANTED. The assailed order of the respondent court dated August 31, 1978, is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The respondent court is ordered to reinstate the case for further proceedings until termination.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Supreme Court held that the trial court erred in ruling that Presidential Decree No. 772 (PD 772) applies only to entries made after its effectivity. The Court categorically stated that squatting is a 'continuous offense,' citing the precedent established in Dacutanan v. People (G.R. 83772, August 29, 1990). The reasoning is based on the fact that while the illegal occupancy may have commenced prior to August 20, 1975, the state of illegality continued uninterrupted up to the filing of the information in 1978 and beyond. The Court rejected the trial court's literal interpretation of the verb 'succeeds' as referring only to the initial moment of entry, emphasizing that the possession itself is the core of the violation when done against the owner's will and via force or tolerance. Because the act of occupying and possessing was still occurring after PD 772 became law, the respondents were in current violation of the statute. Therefore, the application of PD 772 to the respondents' ongoing conduct does not constitute a retroactive or ex post facto application, as they were being charged for their continuous act of illegal possession during the period when the law was already in force.
Main Doctrine
Squatting, as penalized by Presidential Decree No. 772, is a continuing offense. Therefore, even if the illegal occupancy commenced prior to the decree's effectivity, liability may still attach if the occupancy continued up to the filing of the information.