ARTICLE 347.

SIMULATION OF BIRTHS,
SUBSTITUTION OF ONE CHILD FOR ANOTHER AND
CONCEALMENT OR ABANDONMENT OF A
LEGITIMATE CHILD
The simulation of births and the substitution of
one child for another shall be punished by prision
mayor and a fine of not exceeding 1,000 pesos.
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any
person who shall conceal or abandon any
legitimate child with intent to cause such child to
lose its civil status.
Any physician or surgeon or public officer who, in
violation of the duties of his profession or office,
shall cooperate in the execution of any of the
crimes mentioned in the two next preceding
paragraphs, shall suffer the penalties therein
prescribed and also the penalty of temporary
special disqualification.
ACTS PUNISHED:
Simulation of births
Substitution of one child for another
Concealing or abandoning any legitimate
child with intent to cause such child to lose
its civil status

The object of the crime is the creation of

false or the cause of the loss of civil status,
or the loss of any trace as to the filiation of
the child.
Simulation of birth takes place when the

woman pretends to be pregnant when she in

fact is not, on the day of delivery, takes
anothers child as her own
o The woman defrauds the legitimate
heirs as she is introducing a stranger
in the family
o The woman who simulates the birth
and person who furnishes the child are
both responsible as principals
The simulation that is a crime is that which
alters the civil status; thus, if one simulates
birth for the purpose of belying the
reputation that she is sterile but introduces
no strange child in the family and causes no
child to lose his civil status and incurs no
damage does not incur criminal liability
The fact that the child will be benefited by
the simulation is not a defense; the law
punisjhes the act because it creates a false
status to the detriment of the rest of the
family
Substituting one child for another
committed when X is born of A and B; Y is
born of C and D; and offender with intent to
cause the loss of any trace of their filiation
exchanges X and Y without the knowledge
of their respective parents
Substitution may be done by placing a live
child of a woman in place of a dead one of
another
Concealing or abandoning of any legitimate
child, requisites:

o That the child is legitimate

o That the
offender
conceals
or
abandons such child and
o The offender has the intent to cause
such child to lose its civil status
The child must be legitimate and fully
developed and living, as the child not
capable of living has no civil status, unable
to transmit any rights
The unlawful sale of a child by its father is
not a crime under this article because
abandonment should be understood in Art.
347 as leaving a child at a public place
where other people may find it, causing the
child to lose his/her civil status
Ex. Leaving the child at the door of
hospitals, churches, religious institutions
Concealing a legitimate child must be for
the purpose of causing the child to lose its
civil status. Thus, if someone places a baby
at the door of an orphanage did it so
someone can take care of the baby it is
presumed that he doesnt act with the
purpose of losing the filiation of the child
Abandonment of a minor is crime against
security purpose is to avoid obligation of
rearing the child v. abandonment in Art. 247
(purpose of losing civil status)
A woman who has given birth to a child,
abandons the child in a certain place, to free
herself of the obligation and duty of rearing
and caring for the child. What crime is

committed by the woman? The crime is

abandoning a minor under Art. 276.
Suppose that the purpose of that woman in
abandoning the child is to preserve the
inheritance of her child by a former
marriage, what then is the crime? Evidently,
the purpose of the woman is to cause the
child to lose its civil status so that it may not
be able to share in the inheritance; hence,
the crime would fall under the second
paragraph ofArt. 347.
Suppose a child, one day after its birth, was
taken to, and left in, the midst of a lonely
forest, and it was found by a hunter who
took it home, what crime was committed by
the person who left it in the forest? It is
attempted infanticide, as the act of the
offender is an attempt against its life.
A physician or surgeon or public officer, who
cooperates in the execution of any of these
crimes, is also liable if he acts in violation of
the duties of his profession or office.
ARTICLE 348. USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS
The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed
upon any person who shall usurp the civil status
of another, should he do so for the purpose of
defrauding the offended part or his heirs;
otherwise, the penalty of prision correccional in its
medium and maximum periods shall be imposed.
Usurping the civil status of another is
committed by assuming the filiation, or the
parental or conjugal rights of another.

Committed when a person represents

himself to be another and assumes the
filiation or the parental or conjugal rights of
such another person.
Example: where A impersonates himself to
be C, the son of another, and assumes the
rights of C
Seems that the term "civil status" includes
one's profession, thus usurpation of
profession may also be punished under this
article.
It is absolutely necessary, however, in order
to constitute this crime that the intent of the
offender is to enjoy the rights arising from
the civil status of the person impersonated.
Otherwise, the case will be considered only
as a violation of Art. 178 for assuming or
using fictitious name, or as estafa under Art.
315
The purpose of defrauding the offended
party or his heirs qualifies the crime.
CHAPTER TWO: ILLEGAL MARRIAGES
ARTICLE 349. BIGAMY
The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed
upon any person who shall contract a second or
subsequent marriage before the former marriage
has been legally dissolved, or before the absent
spouse has been declared presumptively dead by
means of a judgment rendered in the proper
proceedings.
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender has been legally married.

2. That the marriage has not been legally

dissolved or, in case his or her spouse is
absent, the absent spouse could not yet be
presumed dead according to the Civil Code.
3. That he contracts a second or subsequent
marriage.
4. That the second or subsequent marriage
has all the essential requisites for validity.
The first marriage must be a valid marriage.
o M and A married in 1936 and during the
marriage, M married L in 1941, which gave
rise to Ms prosecution for bigamy. Basis of
bigamy is marriage of M with L because
when M married P, A was already dead.
o SC: provisions of the marriage law make a
subsequent marriage contracted by any
person during the lifetime of his first spouse
illegal and void from its performance, and
no judicial decree is necessary to establish
its invalidity, as distinguished from mere
annullable marriages. as such, M was
acquitted.
Had M been prosecuted for bigamy having
contracted the 2nd marriage with L, M would
have been liable.
Family Code: parties cannot presume
marriage to be void; theres a need for a
judicial declaration of nullity of the second
marriage
Nullity of marriage is not a defense in a
bigamy charge; As with a voidable marriage,
there must be a judicial declaration of the

nullity of a marriage before contracting the

second marriage. Article 40 of the Family
Code of the Philippines states that "The
absolute nullity of a previous marriage may
be invoked for purposes of remarriage on
the basis solely of a final judgment
declaring such previous marriage void."
Supreme Court held that there is need of a
judicial declaration of the fact that the
marriage of a person is void before that
person can marry again; otherwise, the
second marriage will be void.
The subsequent judicial declaration of the
nullity of the first marriage was immaterial
because prior to the declaration of nullity,
the crime had already been consummated.
Recall the marriages which are considered
VOID AB INITIO. (Art. 35, 36, 37, 38 of the
Family Code)
Note that what Art. 349 punishes is the act
of contracting a second or subsequent
marriage before the former marriage had
been dissolved.
Causes which may produce the legal
dissolution of the first marriage:
Death of one of the contracting parties;
Judicial declaration annulling a void
marriage; and
Judicial
decree
annulling
a
voidable
marriage. The death of the first spouse
during the pendency of the bigamy case
does not extinguish the crime, because

when the accused married the second

spouse, the first marriage was still
subsisting.
Divorce in foreign courts are not binding
among Filipino citizen couples
If the accused, in contracting the second
marriage, acting on the honest beliefthat he
was lawfully divorced from his first wife, he
is liable for bigamy through reckless
imprudence.
However, in another case, it was held to be
intentional bigamy. The reason for this ruling
is that the legal effect of divorce is a matter
of law and everyone is presumed to know
the law.
When a marriage between a Filipino citizen
and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a
divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad
by the alien spouse capacitating him or her
to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise
have capacity to remarry under Philippine
law.
Divorce by a Moro datu according to their
customs and usages, not recognized.
Once the prosecution has established that
the defendant was already married at the
time he contracted the second marriage,
the burden of proof to show the dissolution
of the first marriage is upon the defense.
Under Article 41 of the Family Code, a
summary proceeding for the declaration of
presumptive death of the absent spouse is

required before the surviving spouse can

remarry.
For the present spouse to contract a
subsequent marriage, an absent spouse is
presumed dead if he has been absent for
four consecutive years and the spouse
present had a well-founded belief that he is
already dead. In case of disappearance
where there is danger of death, an absence
of only two years will be sufficient. However,
a declaration of presumptive death should
first be obtained from the courts.
The second marriage, having all the
essential requisites, would be valid were it
not for the subsistence of the first marriage.
Art. 3ofthe Family Code enumerates the
three formal requisites for valid marriage. A
marriage license issued before or at the
time of marriage is one of them.
Thus, when the second marriage took place
one day before the issuance of the marriage
license, such marriage is void ab initio. If the
second marriage is void, there is no bigamy.
In order that petitioner may be held guilty of
the crime of bigamy, the marriage which he
contracted for the second time with the
second spouse must first be declared valid.
But its validity had been questioned in the
civil action. This civil action must be decided
before the prosecution for bigamy can
proceed
Judgment of annulment precludes verdict of

guilt in charge of bigamy.

The second spouse is not necessarily liable
for bigamy.
Whether or not the second spouse should be
included in the information is a question of
fact that was determined by the fiscal who
conducted the preliminary investigation in
this case.
The second husband or wife who knew of
first marriage is an accomplice.
The witness who falsely vouched for the
capacity of either of the contracting parties
is also an accomplice.
In the crime of bigamy, it is immaterial
whether it is the first or the second wife who
initiates the action, for it is a public offense
which can be denounced not only by the
person affected thereby but even by a civic
spirited citizen who may come to know the
same.
This is an offense against the State, not
against the second wife.
A person convicted of bigamy may still be
prosecuted for concubinage.
They are two distinct offenses in law and in
fact, as well as in the mode of their
prosecution. The first is an offense against
civil status which may be prosecuted at the
instance of the State; the second, an
offense against chastity and may be
prosecuted only at the instance of the
offended party. The celebration of the

second marriage, with the first still existing,

characterizes the crime of bigamy; on the
other hand, the mere cohabitation by the
husband with a woman who is not his wife
characterizes the crime of concubinage
ARTICLE 350. MARRIAGE CONTRACTED AGAINST
PROVISIONS OF LAWS
The penalty of prision correccional in its medium
and maximum periods shall be imposed upon any
person who, without being included in the
provisions of the next proceeding article, shall
have not been complied with or that the marriage
is in disregard of a legal impediment.
If either of the contracting parties shall obtain the
consent of the other by means of violence,
intimidation or fraud, he shall be punished by the
maximum period of the penalty provided in the
next preceding paragraph.
ELEMENTS:
That the offender contracted marriage.
That he knew at the time that the requirements
of the law were not complied with; or the marriage
was in disregard of a legal impediment.
o Circumstance qualifying the offense: If
either of the contracting parties obtains the
consent of the other by means of violence,
intimidation or fraud.
o Under this article, the offender must not be
guilty of bigamy.
o Example, getting married without a
marriage license.
o Recall the requisites of the law for valid

marriage
o legal capacity of the contracting
parties who must be a male and a
female;
o consent freely given in the presence
ofthe solemnizing officer;
o authority of the solemnizing officer;
o a valid marriage license except in
marriages of exceptional character
o a marriage ceremony which takes
place with the appearance of the
contracting
parties
before
the
solemnizing officer and their personal
declaration that they take each other
as husband and wife in the presence
of not less than two witnesses of legal
age.
o Conviction of a violation of Art. 350 involves
moral turpitude, a disqualification for being
admitted to the bar.
ARTICLE 351. PREMATURE MARRIAGES
Any widow who shall marry within three hundred
and one day from the date of the death of her
husband, or before having delivered if she shall
have been pregnant at the time of his death, shall
be punished by arresto mayor and a fine not
exceeding 500 pesos.
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any
woman whose marriage shall have been annulled
or dissolved, if she shall marry before her delivery
or before the expiration of the period of three
hundred and one day after the legal separation.

Persons liable for premature marriages:

A widow who married within 301 days
from the date of the death of her
husband, or before having delivered if
she is pregnant at the time of his death.
A woman who, her marriage having been
annulled or dissolved', married before
her delivery or before the expiration of
the period of 301 days after the date of
the legal separation.
The law in fixing the said 301 days(10
months), admits the possibility that a
woman may be in pregnancy for more than
nine months.
This provision is intended to prevent
confusion in connection with filiation and
paternity, inasmuch as the widow might
have conceived and become pregnant by
her late husband.
The purpose of the law is to prevent
doubtful paternity.
The period of 301 days may be disregarded
if the first husband was impotent or sterile.
The period of 301 days is important only for
cases where the woman is not pregnant. If
she is pregnant at the time she becomes a
widow, the prohibition is good only up to her
delivery.
ARTICLE
352.
PERFORMANCE
OF
ILLEGAL
MARRIAGE CEREMONY
Priests or ministers of any religious denomination
or sect, or civil authorities who shall perform or

authorize any illegal marriage ceremony shall be

punished in accordance with the provisions of the
Marriage Law.
The offender under Art. 352 must be
authorized to solemnize marriages.
A clergyman who performed a marriage
ceremony, not knowing that one of the
contracting parties is a minor, is not liable.
TITLE THIRTEEN: CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
1. Libel by means of writings or similar means.
(Art.355)
2. Threatening to publish and offer to prevent
such publication for a compensation. (Art.
356)
3. Prohibited publication of acts referred to in
the course of official proceedings. (Art. 357)
4. Slander. (Art. 358)
5. Slander by deed. (Art. 359)
6. Incriminating innocent person. (Art. 363)
7. Intriguing against honor. (Art. 364)
CHAPTER ONE: LIBEL
SECTION ONE. DEFINITION, FORMS, AND
PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME
ARTICLE 353. LIBEL
A libel is public and malicious imputation of a
crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or
any
act,
omission,
condition,
status,
or
circumstance tending to cause the dishonor,
discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical
person, or to blacken the memory of one who is
dead.

Defamation, which includes libel and

slander, means the offense of injuring a
person's character, fame or reputation
through false and malicious statements. It is
that which tends to injure reputation or to
diminish the esteem, respect, goodwill or
confidence in the plaintiff or to excite
derogatory feelings or opinions about the
plaintiff. It is the publication of anything
which is injurious to the good name or
reputation of another or tends to bring him
into disrepute. Defamation is an invasion of
a relational interest since it involves the
opinion which others in the community may
have, or tend to have, of the plaintiff.
"Libel" is a defamation committed by means
of writing, printing, lithography, engraving,
radio, phonograph, painting or theatrical or
cine matographic exhibition, or any similar
means (Art. 335).
Oral defamation is called slander.
Seditious libel is punished, not in this
Chapter, but in Art. 142.
The enjoyment of a private reputation is as
much a constitutional right as the
possession of life, liberty or property. It is
one of those rights necessary to human
society that underlie the whole scheme of
civilization. The law recognizes the value of
such reputation and imposes upon him who
attacks it, by slanderous words or libelous
publications, the liability to make full

compensation for the damages done.

Elements of defamation:
1. That there must be an imputation of a
crime, or of a vice or defect, real or
imaginary, or any act, omission, status or
circumstance.
2. That the imputation must be made
publicly.
3. That it must be malicious.
4. That the imputation must be directed to a
natural or juridical person, or one who is
dead.
5. That the imputation must tend to cause
the dishonor, discredit or contempt of the
person defamed.
The imputation may cover:
1. Crime allegedly committed by the offended
party;
2. Vice or defect, real or imaginary of the
offended party;
3. Any act, omission, condition, status of, or
circumstance relating to the offended party.
In determining whether a statement is
defamatory, the words used are construed
in their entirety and taken in their plain,
natural and ordinary meaning as they would
naturally be understood by persons reading
them, unless it appears that they were used
and understood in another sense.
A charge is sufficient if the words are
calculated to induce the hearers to suppose
and understand that the person against
whom they were uttered was guilty of

certain offenses, or are sufficient to impeach

the honesty, virtue or reputation, or to hold
him up to public ridicule.
It is not the intention of the writer or
speaker, or the understanding of the
plaintiff or of any hearer or reader by which
the actionable quality of the words is to be
determined, but the meaning that the words
in fact conveyed on the minds of persons of
reasonable understanding, discretion and
candor, taking into consideration the
surrounding circumstances which were
known to the hearer or reader. The alleged
defamatory statement should be construed
not only as to the expression used but also
with respect to the whole scope and
apparent object of the writer or speaker.
In other words, the article must be
construed in its entirety including the
headline, as they may enlarge, explain, or
restrict, or be enlarged, explained or
strengthened or restricted by the context.
Whether or not it is libelous depends upon
the scope, spirit, and motive of the
publication taken in its entirety.
Where the comments are insincere and
intended to ridicule rather than praise the
plaintiff, the publication is libelous. Praise
undeserved is slander in disguise.
Publication, even if intended for humor, may
be libelous when the language used passed
from the bounds of playful jest and intensive

criticism into the region of scurrilous

calumniation and intemperate personalities.
FIRST ELEMENT: THERE MUST BE AN IMPUTATION
OF A CRIME, OR OF A VICE OR DEFECT, OR ANY
ACT,
OMISSION,
CONDITION,
STATUS
OR
CIRCUMSTANCE
IMPUTATION OF A CRIMINAL ACT
o Examples: portraying someone as a
swindler; branding someone as having
murder, etc.
o Imputation of a crime may be implied
from the acts and statements of the
accused.
o Imputation of criminal intention not
libelous because intent to commit a
crime is not a violation of the law
o An expression of opinion by one
affected by the act of another and
based on actual fact is not libelous.
IMPUTATION OF A VICE OR DEECT
o Example: lascivious and immoral
habits
IMPUTATION OF AN ACT OR OMISSION
o Ex. Imputed that X borrowed money
without intending to pay, etc.
IMPUTATION OF CONDITION, STATUS OR
CIRCUMS TANCE
o Ex. Calling someone a bastard,
coward, mangkukulam, etc.