Philippine Bar review · Question

Practice question: Malum In Se and Malum Prohibitum

Multiple Choice Easy Jurisprudence

Practice question

Which description best captures malum prohibitum?
  1. Every inherently wrongful act regardless of statute.
  2. Conduct made punishable because the law prohibits it for the relevant regulatory or public-policy purpose.
  3. Conduct that never involves a voluntary act.
  4. Conduct exempt from proof beyond reasonable doubt.
  5. Only conduct by government employees.

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  • Dungo v People, G.R. No. 209464, July 1, 2015, main decision, classification distinction (general doctrine, not superseded hazing procedures): https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2015/jul2015/gr_209464_2015.html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.