Dear PAO,

Cito was warned that Lino, who was armed with a bolo, was looking for him. They met along the road, and Lino killed Cito. Appropriate charges were filed against my friend Lino, but the relatives of Cito insisted that the manner in which he was killed is considered treacherous, and thus, carries a heavier penalty. Lino maintained that there is no treachery because the deceased was already forewarned and the attack was frontal. Is he correct?

Makoy

Dear Makoy,

The presence of treachery aggravates crimes against persons. This is in consonance with Article 14 (16) of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, as amended:

“The following are aggravating circumstances: xxx

“• That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia).

“There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.”

For better understanding of the said aggravating circumstance, please be guided by the pronouncement of the high court in the case of People of the Philippines vs. Racal, GR 224886, Sept. 4, 2017, penned by Chief Justice Diosdado Peralta:

“Paragraph 16, Article 14 of the RPC defines treachery as the direct employment of means, methods, or forms in the execution of the crime against persons which tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to the offender arising from the defense which the offended party might make. The essence of treachery is that the attack is deliberate and without warning, done in a swift and unexpected way, affording the hapless, unarmed and unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or escape. In order for treachery to be properly appreciated, two elements must be present: (1) at the time of the attack, the victim was not in a position to defend himself; and (2) the accused consciously and deliberately adopted the particular means, methods, or forms of attack employed by him. xxx”

A frontal attack per se does not automatically eliminate treachery. Neither does the fact that the victim was forewarned. The reasons for these were succinctly explained by the high court in People of the Philippines vs. Singcol, GR 275139, May 7, 2025, where the Supreme Court, speaking through Associate Justice Ramon Paul Hernando, stated that:

“A frontal attack may be regarded as treacherous when it was so sudden on an unsuspecting, or an unarmed victim, who had no chance to repel the attack or avoid it.

“The trial court is incorrect when it ruled that there was no treachery on the ground that the victim, Egmedia, was already warned that accused appellant was mad at her. In People vs. Napalit, the High Court ruled that even when the victim was forewarned of the danger to his person, treachery may still be appreciated since what is decisive is that the execution of the attack made it impossible for the victim to defend himself/herself or to retaliate.”

Applying the above-quoted jurisprudence to your situation, frontal attack may still be considered as treacherous when it was so sudden that the unarmed or unsuspecting victim has no chance to repel the attack. On the other hand, the victim’s knowledge of the impending attack is of no moment because what is important in treachery is the execution of the attack which would make it impossible for the victim to defend or retaliate.

Thus, Lino is not correct in his claim that the killing is not treacherous. Treachery may still be appreciated as long as he deliberately employs manner, means, or method which would place the victim in a position where he cannot repel or defend himself.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice was 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]