Philippine Bar review · Question

Practice question: Malum In Se and Malum Prohibitum

Multiple Choice Easy Jurisprudence

Practice question

Does placing an offense in a special penal statute necessarily make it malum prohibitum?
  1. Yes, without exception.
  2. Yes, if Congress uses a Republic Act number.
  3. No; a special statute may punish an inherently wrongful offense classified as malum in se.
  4. Yes, if imprisonment is available.
  5. No special statute can define any crime.

Legal references

  • Revised Penal Code, Act No. 3815, specified articles, as amended: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/28/20426; Article 3.
  • Estrada v Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2001, en banc main decision, plunder as malum in se: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2001/nov2001/gr_148560_2001.html
  • Dungo v People, G.R. No. 209464, July 1, 2015, main decision, classification distinction (general doctrine, not superseded hazing procedures): https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2015/jul2015/gr_209464_2015.html
  • People v Bayona, G.R. No. 42288, February 16, 1935, main decision, intent to do the prohibited act distinguished from criminal intent (general doctrine, not obsolete election-law details): https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1935/feb1935/gr_42288_1935.html

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