Oct. 12, 1995
FACTS
Respondent Judge Lorenzo Veneracion of the RTC of Manila presided two consolidated criminal cases of Rape with Homicide.
Trial ensued and it was proven that the two accused in the criminal cases committed Rape with Homicide.
At that time, 1995, if Rape is committed with Homicide, it is punishable only by Death.
However, Judge Veneracion refused to impose the death penalty and instead meted out reclusion perpetua, even though he found the two accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
The City Prosecutor of Manila filed a motion for reconsideration, to which Judge Veneracion denied.
Hence, petitioner People of the Philippines filed a petition against him for grave abuse of discretion for not imposing the death penalty.
Judge Veneracion, meanwhile, invoked his religious convictions for refusing to impose the said penalty.
ISSUE
Whether or not Judge Veneracion committed grave abuse of discretion.
RULING
YES, Judge Veneracion committed grave abuse of discretion.
Obedience to the rule of law forms the bedrock of our system of justice.
A government of laws, not of men excludes the exercise of broad discretionary powers by those acting under its authority. Under this system, judges are guided by the Rule of Law, and ought “to protect and enforce it without fear or favor,” resist encroachments by governments, political parties, or even the interference of their own personal beliefs.
While this Court sympathizes with his predicament, it is its bounden duty to emphasize that a court of law is no place for a protracted debate on the morality or propriety of the sentence, where the law itself provides for the sentence of death as a penalty in specific and well-defined instances. The discomfort faced by those forced by law to impose the death penalty is an ancient one, but it is a matter upon which judges have no choice. Courts are not concerned with the wisdom, efficacy, or morality of laws.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the instant petition is GRANTED. The case is hereby REMANDED to the Regional Trial Court for the imposition of the penalty of death upon private respondents in consonance with respondent judge’s finding that the private respondents in the instant case had committed the crime of Rape with Homicide under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659, subject to automatic review by this Court of the decision imposing the death penalty.
SO ORDERED.
Full text of this decision.
