Philippine Bar review · Question

Practice question: Malum In Se and Malum Prohibitum

Multiple Choice Easy Jurisprudence

Practice question

Does calling BP22 malum prohibitum remove Section 1’s express knowledge requirement?
  1. No
  2. Yes, classification deletes the statutory wording
  3. Yes, every dishonor proves all facts automatically
  4. Yes, knowledge can never matter under a special law
  5. Yes, only civil intent matters

Legal references

  • BP 22, Sections 1-2, express knowledge and issuance elements: https://lawphil.net/statutes/bataspam/bp1979/bp_22_1979.html
  • People v. Bayona, GR 42288, February 16, 1935, general intent distinction only: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1935/feb1935/gr_42288_1935.html
  • Ladonga v. People, GR 141066, February 17, 2005, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/feb2005/gr_141066_2005.html
  • Carlos v. People, GR 277047, April 15, 2026, en banc main decision, BP22 classification and statutory elements: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/18/70562

Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.