G.R. Nos. 64323-24; May 31, 1991
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. COL. VICENTE D. LUCERO, JR. and LT. BENJAMIN SANTIAGO, accused-appellants.

FACTS

Accused-appellants Col. Vicente Lucero, Jr. and Lt. Benjamin Santiago, officers of the 36th Infantry Battalion, were charged with two counts of Murder for the deaths of Tarzan Sahiddi and Sahiddi Adjuk on November 27, 1978, on Dasalan Island, Basilan. The prosecution alleged that soldiers under their command herded male villagers into a schoolhouse, where the two victims were separately taken outside and shot. Their ears were then mutilated and the community leaders were forced to eat them. Multiple prosecution witnesses testified that Lt. Santiago directly ordered the shootings and that Col. Lucero was present inside the schoolhouse, identifying himself as the leader, during the incidents.
The defense presented a contrasting version. They asserted that the military operation was a legitimate response to reports of armed lawless elements. They claimed that during the operation, Tarzan Sahiddi attempted to escape and was shot, while Sahiddi Adjuk was killed after he tried to seize a soldier’s rifle. The defense denied that the accused ordered the killings or the mutilations, attributing these acts to the chaos of the moment. Both accused interposed the defense of alibi, with evidence suggesting they were leading separate units in different parts of the island at the time of the shootings.

ISSUE

Whether the guilt of the accused-appellants for the crime of Murder was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court REVERSED the trial court’s decision and ACQUITTED the accused-appellants on the ground of reasonable doubt. The Court emphasized that a conviction must rest on the strength of the prosecution’s evidence, which must produce moral certainty. It found the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses conflicting and incredible on material points. The claim that the victims were killed for no reason was deemed implausible given the context of a military operation. The Court noted significant doubts regarding the physical presence and direct participation of the accused, particularly Col. Lucero. The defense’s narrative—that the shootings occurred during attempted escape and disarmament—introduced reasonable doubt as to the existence of treachery or a deliberate order to kill. While the subsequent mutilations were deplorable, they did not, by themselves, establish the accused’s culpability for murder. Any doubt must be resolved in favor of the accused, upholding the constitutional presumption of innocence.