Dear PAO, 

My cousin, who was suffering from insanity, stabbed a person from the adjacent barangay. We informed the victim of my cousin’s mental condition in an effort to dissuade him from filing a criminal case. We also presented a psychological evaluation conducted after the incident to prove our claim. However, the victim was not convinced and demanded for a prior medical report or evaluation instead, claiming that it would serve as a more credible proof of insanity rather than the one taken after the incident. Is this correct?

Erline

Dear Erline, 

Insanity is an exempting circumstance pursuant to Article 12 (1) of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, as amended, which provides that:

“The following are exempt from criminal liability:

“(1) An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted during a lucid interval. xxx”

In People of the Philippines vs. Macalindong, GR 248202, Oct. 13, 2021, the Supreme Court, through Associate Justice Amy Lazaro-Javier, enumerated the elements of insanity, to wit:

“Verily, the exempting circumstance of insanity requires two (2) elements: (1) the insanity of the accused constitutes a complete deprivation of intelligence, reason, or discernment; and (2) such insanity existed at the time of, or immediately preceding, the commission of the crime.”

The aforestated elements need to be proven in order for insanity to be appreciated as an exempting circumstance.

Notably, medical record is not an element to prove insanity. This was clarified in the case of Ruiz vs People of the Philippines, GR 244692, Oct. 9, 2024, which was penned by Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamins Caguioa, wherein the Supreme Court categorically stated that:

“First, it should be stressed that having a documented history of a psychiatric condition is not, and should never be, an element required to prove legal insanity. In fact, it does not have any legal or evidentiary significance except to lend assistance in proving the second test under Paña, specifically, that the accused’s medical condition is the reason why the crime was committed.

“Furthermore, prior psychiatric records could not establish insanity at the precise time of the commission of the crime because, for obvious reasons, medical reports from doctors prior to the commission of the crime cannot be considered as having been rendered immediately before the commission of the crime, unless the facts clearly established so. Thus, the foregoing arguments are misplaced.

“To settle this, prior medical records are only relevant, but not the only smoking gun, in proving the second test in Paña. On the other hand, lack thereof, absolutely has nil effect in the defense’s burden to prove a deprivation of intelligence at the time of the commission of the crime, or Paña’s first and third tests.”

Applying the above-quoted decision to your situation, the claim of the victim that you need prior medical record to prove the insanity of your cousin has no legal basis. In fact, what is required to be proven are: (1) the insanity of the accused constitutes a complete deprivation of intelligence, reason, or discernment; and (2) such insanity existed at the time of, or immediately preceding, the commission of the crime. Thus, even in the absence of such prior medical records, the exempting circumstance of insanity may still be proven by any other means aside from the medical records.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice is based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.

We appreciate your trust and support.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected]