Facts:
Pedro was tried and convicted for, among others, Usurpation of Authority under Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code for posing as a lawyer and appearing in court using the name of a deceased lawyer.
Issue:
May the act of posing as a lawyer constitute usurpation of authority under Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code
Ruling:
“To be convicted of the crime of usurpation of official functions, the following elements must concur:
- The offender may be a private person or a public officer.
- The offender performs any act pertaining to any person authority in authority or public officer of the Philippine government, any of its agencies, or of a foreign government.
- The offender performs the act without being legally entitled to do so.
In this case, the second element is wanting.
Contrary to the findings of the MTC, as affirmed by the RTC and the CA, a lawyer is not deemed a person in authority for purposes of Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code, the provision the MTC applied in the case at bar.
Who are deemed persons in authority. Article 152 of the Revised Penal Code is clear on this point, thus:
Article 152. Persons in authority and agents of persons in authority. Who shall be deemed as such. – In applying the provisions of the preceding and other articles of this Code, any person directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as an individual or as a member of some court or government corporation, board or commission, shall be deemed a person in authority.
Any person, who, by direct provision of law, or by election or by appointment by competent authority, is charged with the maintenance of public order and the protection and security of life and property, such as barrio councilman, barrio policeman and barangay leader, and any person who comes to the aid of persons in authority, shall be deemed an agent of a person in authority.
In applying the provisions of Articles 148 and 151 of this Code, teachers, professors, and persons charged with the supervision of public or duly recognized private schools, colleges and universities, and lawyers in the actual performance of their professional duties or on the occasion of such performance shall be deemed persons in authority. (Emphasis suppled)
As aptly stated in the third paragraph of this provision, while lawyers are deemed to be “persons in authority,” they are so only for purposes of Article 148 (Direct Assault upon a Person in Authority), and 151 (Resistance and Disobedience to a Person in Authority or the Agents of Such Person) of the Revised Penal Code. In marked contrast, the first paragraph pf above-quoted provision does not identify specific articles of the Revised Penal Code for the application of which any person “directly vested with jurisdiction, etc.” is deemed “a person in authority.” Thus, it is this specific paragraph that applies to Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code.
Under this paragraph, a lawyer is not deemed a person in authority. Obviously, lawyers are not directly vested with jurisdiction either individually or as members of some court or public corporation. Lawyers are likewise not agents of a person in authority as defined in the second paragraph of the above-quoted provision, as they are not charged with the task of executing the orders of any such person. While a lawyers is an “officer of the court” and is “an agency to advance the ends of justice,” it is not considered a person in authority under the first paragraph of Article 152 of the Revised Penal Code.
Since a penal statute is not to be given a longer reach and broader scope than is called for by the ordinary meaning of the ordinary words used by such statute, to the disadvantage of an accused, the Court holds and so rules that a lawyer may note be regarded as a “public authority” or as a “person in authority” within the meaning of Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code, the provision which Pedro stands charged of.” (Citations omitted)
PEQUERO v. PEOPLE, G.R. No. 263676, August 7, 2024