Practice question
A new harmful practice is proved in court. The parties agree that no penal statute criminalized it when performed and no existing offense's elements fit. The judge proposes borrowing the penalty for another crime and then reporting the gap to the President. Which is correct?
- A later report retroactively authorizes the invented conviction.
- Similarity of harm always supplies missing elements.
- The court must render the proper decision without inventing an offense; the report recommends legislation rather than creating past criminal liability.
- Public outrage supplies a statute.
- The complainant may cure the gap by signing consent to the penalty.
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/acts/act1930/act_3815_1930.html — Revised Penal Code Articles5 and21.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2020/oct2020/gr_237982_2020.html — People v. Santos, G.R.237982, October14 2020, main opinion on Article5 and limits of judicial legislation.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.