SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

Prepared by: ACHILLES NEIL G. EBRON

REPUBLIC ACT No. 8049 as amended by REPUBLIC ACT No. 11053

“Anti-Hazing Act of 2018”

I. Definition
 What is Hazing?
o Any act that:
1. Results in physical or psychological suffering, harm, or injury;
2. Inflicted on a recruit, neophyte, applicant, or member;
3. As part of an initiation rite or practice;
a. Made as a prerequisite for admission or a requirement for continuing
membership in a fraternity, sorority, or organization.
4. Means employed includes, but not limited to:
a. paddling,
b. whipping,
c. beating,
d. branding,
e. forced calisthenics,
f. exposure to the weather,
g. forced consumption of any food, liquor, beverage, drug or other substance, or
h. any other brutal treatment or forced physical activity which is likely to
adversely affect the physical and psychological health of such recruit, neophyte,
applicant, or member.
i. Activities that intentionally tends to humiliate or embarrass, degrade, abuse, or
endanger, such as doing menial, silly, or foolish tasks.1

 What is an Initiation or Initiation Rite?

o Ceremonies, practices, rituals, or other acts, whether formal or informal, that a person
must perform or take part in order to be accepted into fraternity, sorority, organization
as a full-fledged member.

o It includes ceremonies practices, rituals, and other acts in all stages of membership in a
fraternity, sorority, or organization.2

II. Prohibitions
 What is the rule on the prohibition of Hazing?
o General Rule: All forms of hazing shall be prohibited in fraternities, sororities, and
organizations, whether school-based or not, including citizen’s military training and
citizen’s army training.3

o Exception: That the physical, mental, and practices to determine and enhance the physical,
mental, and psychological fitness of prospective regular members of the AFP and the PNP
as approved by the Secretary of National Defense and National Police Commission.4
 Applicable also to procedures and practices of other uniformed learning
institutions and customary athletic events or other similar contests for a legal and
legitimate objective. 5
 Medical clearance or certificate is necessary.

1
Section 2(a), Republic Act No. 11053
2
Section 2(b).
3
Section3.
4
Id.
5
Id.
III. Liability

 Who are liable under the Anti-Hazing Law?

1. Those who planned or participated in the hazing if, as a consequence of the hazing,
death, rape, sodomy or mutilation resulted therefrom;6

2. Persons who planned or participated in the conduct of the hazing;7

3. Officers of the fraternity, sorority, or organization who are actually present during the
hazing; 8

4. The adviser of a fraternity, sorority, or organization who is present when the acts
constituting the hazing were committed and failed to take action to prevent the same
from occurring or failed to promptly report the same to the law enforcement
authorities if such adviser or adviser or advisers can do so without peril to their person
or their family;9

5. All former officers, nonresident members, or alumni of the fraternity, sorority, or

organization who are also present during the hazing;10
a. If member of the Philippine Bar, shall immediately be subjected to disciplinary
proceedings by the Supreme Court;
b. If belonging to profession subject to the PRC, subjected to disciplinary
proceedings PRC;

6. Officers who knowingly cooperated in carrying out the hazing by inducing the victim
to be present thereat;11

7. Members who are present during the hazing when they are intoxicated or under the
influence of alcohol or illegal drugs;12

8. Persons present in the conduct of the hazing;13

9. Former officers, non-resident member, alumni who, after commission of any of the
prohibited acts proscribed herein, will perform any act to hide, conceal, or otherwise
hamper or obstruct any investigation that will be conducted thereafter.
a. If member of the Philippine Bar, shall immediately be subjected to disciplinary
proceedings by the Supreme Court;
b. If belonging to profession subject to the PRC, subjected to disciplinary
proceedings PRC;14

10. Any person who shall intimidate, threaten, force, or employ, or administer any form of
vexation against another person for the purpose of recruitment in joining or promoting
a particular fraternity, sorority, or organization.
a. Persistent and repeated proposal or invitation made to a person who had
refused twice shall be prima facie evidence of vexation;15

11. School if an application to conduct an initiation was approved by the same and hazing
occurred or when no representatives from the school were present during the
initiation;16

6
Section 14 (a).
7
Section 14(b)(1).
8
Section 14(b)(2).
9
Section 14(b)(3).
10
Section 14(b)(4).
11
Section 14(b)(5).
12
Section 14(b)(6).
13
Section 14(c).
14
Section 14(d).
15
Section 14(e).
16
Section 14(f).
 12. Owner or lessee of the place where hazing is conducted when the same has actual
knowledge of the hazing conducted therein but failed to take any action to prevent the
same from occurring or failed to promptly report the same to the law enforcement
authorities if they can do so without peril to their persons or their family.17

13. Parents of the officers who held the hazing in their home when they have actual
acknowledge of the hazing conducted therein and failed to take any action to prevent
the same from occurring or failed to report the same to the law enforcement
authorities.18

14. Faculty members, barangay, municipal or city officials who allowed or consented to the
conduct of hazing but failed to prevent the same from occurring or failed to report the
same to the law enforcement.19

15. Incumbent officers are jointly liable with those members who actually participated in
the hazing.20

 Are persons charged under this Act entitled to mitigating circumstance that there
was no intention to commit so grave a wrong?
o No. Any person charged under this Act shall not be entitled to the mitigating
circumstances that there was no intention to commit so grave a wrong. 21

 Are waivers made by the recruit or neophyte valid?

o They are void. Any form of approval, consent, or agreement, whether written or
otherwise, or of an express waiver of the right to object to the initiation rite or
proceeding which consists of hazing, made by a recruit, neophyte, or applicant
prior to an initiation rite that involves inflicting physical or psychological
suffering, harm, or injury, shall be void and without any binding effect on the
parties.22

 Is the consent made by the recruit or neophyte admissible?

o No. The defense that the recruit, neophyte, or applicant consented to being
subjected to hazing shall not be available to persons prosecuted under this Act.23

IV. Case Doctrines

 Is excessive intake of alcohol in the fraternity initiations considered as hazing?
o Yes. In People vs Dungo24, citing a foreign jurisprudence Oja vs Grand Chapter of
Theta Chi Fraternity, Inc., a 17-year-old college freshman died as a result of
aspirating his own vomit after consuming excessive amounts of alcohol in a
fraternity initiation ritual. The defendants in the said case contended that they
only furnished the alcohol drinks to the victim. The court denied the defense
because such acts of the fraternity effectively contributed to the death of the
victim as part of their hazing.

 What is the presumption on the person who merely is present during hazing?
o In People vs Dungo25, the Supreme Court held that the presence of any person
during the hazing is prima facie evidence of actual participation, unless he
prevented the commission of the acts punishable herein.

17
Section 14(f) 2nd paragraph.
18
Section 14(f) 2nd paragraph.
19
Section 14(f) 3rd paragraph.
20
Section 14(f) 5th paragraph.
21
Section 14(f) 6th paragraph.
22
Section 12.
23
Id.
24
G.R. No. 290464, July 1, 2015
25
Id.
  Is intoxication and presence of alumni and non-residents fraternity members an
aggravating circumstance?
o Yes. In People vs Dungo26, citing Villareal v. People, the Court suggested that the
fact of intoxication and the presence of nonresident or alumni fraternity
members during hazing should be considered as aggravating circumstances that
would increase the applicable penalties.

26
Id.