Inside Philippine politics & beyond

Dear Justice Secretary Aguirre, Senator Leila can’t be charged with “concubinage” unless you think she’s a man

Share:

Exclusive by Raïssa Robles

justice-secretary-vitaliano-aguirre

Today, Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre said Senator Leila de Lima could be charged with immorality and “concubinage” for having an affair with Ronnie Dayan.

A Philippine Daily Inquirer report stated Aguirre as saying that “De Lima is liable for concubinage for having an affair with a married man, and not adultery, which applies to a man for having an affair with a married woman.”

It’s the other way around, Sir. Only men can be charged with concubinage, meaning, they can only be charged if they house their lovers for an extended period of time. But it was not Ronnie Dayan who had housed De Lima. It was De Lima who had housed Dayan. So Dayan cannot be charged with concubinage. And since he cannot be charged with concubinage, De Lima cannot also be charged as Dayan’s “concubine”.

But a woman can be charged with adultery. Meaning, if a married woman happens to be seen coming out of a hotel room just once the husband could cite that as evidence that she just committed adultery.

UPDATE: According to Daisy Catherine Mandap, a lawyer, De Lima’s marriage has been annulled so she is single and unmarried.

However, only the aggrieved spouse of De Lima can charge her with adultery.

As for the wife of Ronnie Dayan, since Dayan did not commit concubinage, Dayan’s wife cannot charge him with that crime. But she could perhaps charge Ronnie Dayan and De Lima with adultery.

Our Penal Code is THAT screwed up when it comes to crimes like these. But congressmen, who are mostly men, do not want to amend it because it is in their favor.

I have copied and pasted the pertinent sections of the Penal Code below:

Title Eleven
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
Chapter One
ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE

Art. 333. Who are guilty of adultery. — Adultery is committed by any married woman who shall have sexual intercourse with a man not her husband and by the man who has carnal knowledge of her knowing her to be married, even if the marriage be subsequently declared void.

Adultery shall be punished by prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.

If the person guilty of adultery committed this offense while being abandoned without justification by the offended spouse, the penalty next lower in degree than that provided in the next preceding paragraph shall be imposed.

Art. 334. Concubinage. — Any husband who shall keep a mistress in the conjugal dwelling, or shall have sexual intercourse, under scandalous circumstances, with a woman who is not his wife, or shall cohabit with her in any other place, shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods.

The concubine shall suffer the penalty of destierro.

Now, obstruction of justice could be an altogether different charge against De Lima.

However, all these raises the question why Justice Aguirre did not say that now, Senator De Lima can be charged with violating the Dangerous Drugs Act. Which is the entire point of all these investigations.

Comments

  1. The Duterte regime seeks to pass on wrong for right; and right for wrong. His forked tongue seeks to corrupt and confuse the weak minded and to draw them into his world of co-conspirators to destroy our freedom and all that is good and decent in us. To make us as guilty as he himself is. Let us not succumb, hold our ground; until this tempest passes.

    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire, philosopher (21 Nov 1694-1778)

  2. Addressed the alumni homecoming of the University of the Philippines-College of Law in Makati City on Friday, the day thousands converged at the Rizal Park in Manila to protest the Nov. 18 burial of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (LNMB).

    Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales SLAMS and said these about Corruption, History and Martial Law:

    “Just because you can, does not mean you should,” apparently referring to President Duterte and the Supreme Court allowing the hero’s burial of Marcos.”

    ““For every type of abuse of public office, there is a counterpart abuse of human rights, albeit in varying degrees. What perhaps makes corruption uniquely worse is the element of private gain, which may pecuniarily translate to billions that should have trickled down to those deprived – as they already are – of the entitlements to their birthright as human beings,” she said.”

    ““Abuse of public office, as the core component of corruption, necessarily engenders an abuse of human rights, especially since public authority is supposed to be the first to observe human rights,” the anti-graft chief added.”

    “That Filipinos seems to have entered “the so-called ‘post-truth’ era where truth does not really matter anymore.”

    “Revising facts, particularly about martial law and the Marcos era, “is an affront to our collective consciousness as a nation, aside from adding insult to injury to the entire citizenry as collective victims of the kleptocratic act of stashing ill-gotten wealth as judicially ascertained.”

    ““A big part of the population would rather believe and share fake news sites and echo the baseless assertions of dubious bloggers and flamebaiters. They no longer care to verify the veracity of these allegations. When supposed ‘truths’ about martial law and the purported ‘progress’ that the Philippines enjoyed during the regime are considered more fact than fiction, then we see a transformation of our values as a people,”

    ” Battle against corruption is the battle for human rights, and vice versa.”

    Those who do not remember history are condemned to repeat it.

    ““Much worse, there are a lot of people who simply do not want to read their history. Period,” Morales said, adding, “This alarming attitude is appalling.”

  3. What if Duterte is into drugs? by Jude Josue Sabio

    WHAT if it is Duterte who is the drug lord? What if the slain Mayor Espinosa knew Duterte as the top drug lord but was forced to admit de Lima to be the drug lord? What if Mayor Espinosa was killed because he would squeal on Duterte, and retract his statement against Sen. Leila de Lima? What if Duterte’s “I hate drugs” is downright false, a hypocrisy, cover up?

    In the Senate, Edgar Matobato alleged that Vice Mayor Paolo Duterte is a drug user and is a friend to big Chinese drug lords. He also testified that no big-time drug lords or personalities were ever harmed or killed in Davao. In one of her remarks on media, Sen. de Lima was quoted as asking why Duterte has to pivot to China when most of the drugs in the country come from China.
    ———————
    In the drug war recently, two alleged high-profile drug lords–Mayor Dimaukom of Maguindanao and Mayor Espina of Leyte–were killed. From the looks of it, these twin killings were projected to showcase Duterte’s strategy in the Oplan Double Barrel that not only drug pushers but also high-profile drug lords would be neutralized in the war against drugs.

    But is Duterte’s public pronouncement that “I hate drugs” really true? Does he appear to be what he really is based on his words? Or is his statement just for a cover-up? Or is there something cleverly hidden behind those words that makes him not really what he professes to be in public? To be blunt about it, is there something that shows him to be a drug personality himself?
    ———————————–
    It is indeed scary to think that maybe Duterte is not what he appears to be. Behind the façade of his strong and violent hatred against the drug menace may lie something sinister or evil about Duterte. One may just look at how he easily blurts out names from his drug list as if he knows them from Adam.

    Why does he know them that well? Is it because he is very familiar with the trade and the personalities behind it? Why does he pursue and neutralize some among many? Is it because he wants only people who are friends to him to continue with the trade? Or does he hate shabu but plays favorite with other drugs in the market?

    http://mindanaogoldstardaily.com/what-if-duterte-is-into-drugs/
    (Jude Josue Sabio is a lawyer who hails from Misamis Oriental. He is lawyering for Edgar Matobato.)

    • Answers is simple and plain. Duterte is mayor of Davao in 22 yrs and got Davao rid of most drug activity. If so, one can be an expert in this area. Visit Davao dear..

      • talaga? kya pala taga davao ang pinadala kaya napatay sa kulungan si mayor espinosa. truly “an expert in this area”.

        • digong will not win drug war if he continues to believe in the lies of kapolisan. he believes na tama kuno ang ginawa ng kapolisan. tama! no wonder parami and drug lords, parami ang supply. the kapolisan mismo is into drug trade, ask kerwin.

          on top of that, dadagdagan in digong ang sahod ng kapolisan!

      • Bakit may lugar pa rin sa Davao na ayaw ng mga taxi driver magdala ng pasahero?

        Just after the election a niece on a business trip in Davao asked a taxi driver to drive her to one of these known ihaw-ihaw places. She was refused twice by taxi drivers and advised her not to venture into that place. So I thought it is safe in Davao? Or the story of safety just superficial, a facade?

        • many are waiting for the intended in dabaw and vicinity, put a wrong foot and you end up abducted and held for ransom.

          sa dabaw, you’ll get followed, observed, and if hindi taga dabaw at iba ang pananalita, you’ll be marked.

          digong has freed 70 rebels and already lanao is getting hotterbed. rebels are re-grouping and joining other rebels groups, and lanao is their litmus testing ground, see how well they stack up against the military. all thanks to digong, so gullible to believe rebels will reform. they regroup instead and do what it is they do best: extortion, raping, kidnapping, bombing, etc. and misuari is loose.

          the peace digong is harping on resulting on the release of rebels is not mounting to peace at all, but piss! on him. the rebels are pissing on digong! so thankful sila, they overtook lanao and raised terrorists flag, the way misuari once raised rebel flag in zamboanga.

          digong never learned from the past, and is repeating past mistakes. crazy man is taking the country to the dark days of the past.

    • The article is very foretelling of Du30’s recent admission on reinstating CIDG’s Marcos. Du30 is drug lords’ lord protector.

  4. Morales describes ‘trying times’ amid Marcos burial, disrespect for rights
    http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/848116/morales-describes-trying-times-amid-marcos-burial-disrespect-for-rights

    ——————————————————–
    Morales said that “the people should be bothered when the leaders themselves equally could not figure out what is right and wrong.”

    “When leaders seem to send the message of promoting, rather than condemning, reprehensible acts that transgress basic human rights, the people ought to be concerned about it–rather than cheering for it either out of sheer ignorance, callous conscience, blind loyalty, or gorgonized fanaticism,” she said.

    Morales added that “when denial of human rights continues, corruption persists.”
    ——————————————————–

    • Ombudsman: Probe goes on for Trillanes’ raps vs Duterte

      Senator Antonio Trillanes IV and President Rodrigo Duterte. INQUIRER FILE PHOTOS
      Senator Antonio Trillanes IV’s plunder and graft complaints against President Rodrigo Duterte remain under investigation despite his presidential immunity from suit, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales said on Friday night.

      She pointed out that Trillanes’ complaints were filed before Duterte was elected president in May, citing it as a reason that an investigation can still be pursued even with his presidential immunity against suit.

      “At the time the case was filed, he was not yet president,” Morales said. “See, under the law, even if a person has immunity or even if he’s impeachable, you still continue the investigation for purposes of determining whether there is misconduct.”

      Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/848184/ombudsman-probe-goes-on-for-trillanes-raps-vs-duterte#ixzz4R68sFlOh
      Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

  5. It was weird to hear and see Harry Roque lashing out at De Lima for her immorality while beside him was the great kabit of FVR, Baby Arenas. Before Harry Roque questions the credibility of De Lima, he should look at the mirror and ask himself why did he supported Jejomar Binay, a known thief and plunderer, in the recent election. Sobra sobra mag grandstanding si Roque, abogadong pulpol naman. And to hear Rudy Farinas, the grand old daddy of Pinoy Sex Scandals and the original Mang Kanor, questioning Dayan on his love affair with De Lima was, at the very least, the most hypocritical part of that hearing. Sobra sobra na ang mga bobotante sa Pilipinas for giving us this type of public officials. I think we should also declare a War on Bobotante’s to cleanse our nation.

  6. While Sen. De Lima appears to be guilty of concubinage (she admits the ménage a trois), I don’t believe one bit that she was into drug protection or received payola from drug lords. All of these testimonies from ex-convicts, suspected felons, persons with an axe to grind, persons arrested and under the custody of government authorities have one common denominator-they are subject to duress and intimidation by the powers-that-be hellbent on convicting Sen. Delima.

    • Ah, men.

      You not only want to charge women of adultery.

      You also want to charge them of concubinage.

      You like it both ways.

      But the law is clear. Only husbands can be charged with concubinage. The mistress is an accessory to the crime.

      Men are so lucky under the law.

  7. speaking of obstruction of justice … remember during the senate hearing? … Tiangco openly said that he did advice the former VP Binay not to attend the hearing too? But non did bring out that the obstruction of justice.

    • … because VP Binay didnt have any subpoena and only an invitation was sent to him to attend the Senate hearing… this is different.. because.. you know… there is a subpoena and De Lima clearly instructed his ex-lover not to attend and go into hiding.

      If that is not obstruction of justice… I don’t know what to call it anymore.

    • Obstruction of Justice – isnt’ this violation applicable only to criminal proceedings and criminals per se? Since Congressional Hearings are only “in aid of legislation”, and Dayan is not wanted for a criminal offense, De Lima’s advise to his daughter cannot be viewed as obstruction of justice, technically speaking. Am I missing something here?

  8. Kaya ba ng kunsiyensa ni De Lima na noong DOJ secretary siya ay maging protector at
    tumanggap ng million/payola sa mga Druglord? Siya ang nagpakulong kay Napoles, sa PDAF Politician, dahil sa kanya ay hindi nakatakas si Gloria Arroyo. siya rin ang nakalaban ng INK. Siya rin ang nag imbistiga sa DDS, siya ang head ng NBI at marami siyang pinatanggal na corrupt sa NBI.

    Kaya ba ni De Lima na gawin iyon na katulong ang isang Driver, Bodyguard, Lover na inutil. Sa palagay ba ni De lima yung mga tao na nasagasaan nya at nakakulong ay tatahimik na lamang.

    Si De LIma po ay nag-iisa, wala po siyang katulong sa paglaban sa mga kampon ng kadiliman. wala siyang Lawyer na tagapagtanggol ng mga corrupt gaya ni Hitlerfan/topacio ni Arroyo, Mendoza ng mga Marcos, Panelo ni Duterte.

    Akala ko ng lumabas si Druglord Espinoza at Dayan ay “shoot na sa balde si De lima.
    Conspiracy Grand Design Druglord Protector accusation… naging Obstruction of Justice na lamang with a BIG question mark…

  10. Talk about trials & tribulations! I can’t imagine how de Lima can stand it…she was quite meticulous as Sec of Justice, always striving for air-tight cases, trying to make sure any charges filed were likely to prosper even in our shaky, patchwork judiciary. Now, while cases she worked on for years are getting thrown out one by one as a result of political patronage & corruption, she herself must sit at the table with these lame-brained nincompoops while they demonstrate their ignorance over & over in their dumbass politically motivated attacks.

    The president appointed a legal ignoramus as DOJ head & the people elected as “lawmakers” a bunch of jerks who, instead of being qualified to *write* laws, wouldn’t recognize a law if it bit them on the butt. The very fact that the scandalous 19th century adultery/concubinage complex of gender-discriminating laws are still on the books speaks volumes…that our top gov’t officials remain so ignorant of the particulars of such discriminatory outrage–which has been at the top of feminist agendas for years–says even more. The whole situation…the idiot drug wars; the persecution of de Lima; the incompetence of the legislators & the DOJ… it’s flabbergasting!

    • What do expect if actors and actresses, their descendants, sports people, entertainers, and their ilk are elected to the legislature. Filipinos only have themselves to blame. How can these people contribute to the law-making process if they don’t have the specialised knowledge, understanding, ability, and skills? They get elected on the basis of popularity and money, not on ability. My heart bleeds for my old country.

      • an old country with a bunch of kiddie pulpoliticians and off-ficers.
        no wonder the blinded-fanatic mob is barking at any insignificant mole.

    • I agree with d Sec. AGUIRRE. DE LIMA CAN BE CHARGE WITH CONCUBINAGE being d concubine of Dayan or the other men she cohabited scandalously only if Dayan’s (or d other men’s) wife will file a case against Dayan since this concubinage case affects the lovers or former lovers. Please read Revised Penal Code for other requirements… the penalty for d concubine is Destierro..

      • YOu and I know very well that in this case, De Lima is not the concubine, the way the law envisioned a concubine.

        She’s a cougar. And we have no law against cougars, whether you like it or not because it was just beyond the imagination of male lawyers.

  13. Paki-explain nga itong sinulat ni Atty. Reeza SIngzon:

    In the case of a two-timing husband, he and his mistress can be JOINTLY charged with concubinage if any of the following is present: (1) he keeps his mistress in the house he shares with his wife; or (2) he lives with his mistress in any other place; or (3) he has sexual intercourse with his mistress under scandalous circumstances.

    Kapag itong si Atty. Reeza Singzon ay mali mali din, what kind of lawyers do we have and what schools did they come from?

    • Of course, De Lima can be charged with concubinage as a principal by direct participation.

    • That is what I learned also in law school. One of the 3 lang ang kailangan. Also, hindi requirement na binahay nung lalaki ang kabit. This is clear from the codal (“…or shall cohabit with her in any other place”) and Atty. Singzon’s explanation. Hindi na inaalam kung sino ang nambahay kung kanino. as long as they cohabited together in any place.

      So hindi ko alam kung bakit hindi pwede kasuhan ng concubinage si Dayan ng asawa nya, kung gusto nito magkaso. Dalawa lang elements ng crime na yan, and alam na ng lahat yung existence ng pareho.

      • Pls look at the Subject-Verb-Direct Object of the sentence on concubinage.

        The subject in th sentence is “Any husband”. So the full punishment for concubinage applies to the husband.

        Not to the concubine who will simply be exiled. Why did the law distinguish the punishment for the man and the woman? Because it is the man committing the greater fault in concubinage. Now, will you say that Dayan is more at fault in this case than De Lima? Yes, because he abandoned his own wife to have an affair with De Lima.

        Now pls look at what the Justice Secretary Vit Aguirre said – “De Lima is liable for concubinage for having an affair with a married man, and not adultery, which applies to a man for having an affair with a married woman.”

        Aguirre got it reversed.

        Concubinage is the crime committed by men. Adultery is the crime committed by women. That’s our law, no matter how twisted.

        Of course Dayan’s wife can legally file a case of concubinage against him. But in the real world, she won’t be able to afford such a litigation. Unless someone funds her.

        However, if a case of concubinage is filed against Dayan, that would make the alleged offer of immunity to him really funny.

        It would also signal that the Duterte government really has no case against De Lima insofar as illicit drugs are concerned.

    • Its fun to play like a lawyer.. until real lawyers steps in and show how ignorant you are…

      Atty Raissa Robles VS Atty. Reeza Singzon

      Anyway… its clear that the mistress can be sued for concubinage with a penalty of disterrio.

      “The concubine shall suffer the penalty of destierro. (Any person sentenced to destierro shall not be permitted to enter the place or places designated in the sentence, nor within the radius therein specified, which shall be not more than 250 and not less than 25 kilometers from the place designated. Its duration is from 6 months and 1 day to 6 years.)”

      https://mateogimenezlaw.com/2013/01/18/adultery-and-concubinage/

      • But only if the husband-lover is sued as principal.

        One cannot sue the mistress alone. Takes two to tango.