Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 17

IMMORAL DOCTRINES,

OBSCENE PUBLICATION
AND EXHIBITIONS AND
INDECENT SHOWS
The purpose of the law is to protect
the morals of the public
(People vs Aparici)

WHO ARE LIABLE?


Those who shall publicly expound or
proclaim doctrines openly contrary to
public morals
The authors of obscene literature,
published with their knowledge in
any form; the editors publishing such
literature; and the owners/operators
of the establishment selling the same

NOTE: THE AUTHOR OF OBSCENE LITERATURE IS LIABLE


ONLY WHEN IT IS PUBLISHED WITH HIS KNOWLEDGE

NOTE: THE CRIME OF ILLEGAL PUBLICATION IS


ALSO COMMITTED WHEN THE REAL PRINTERS
NAME IS NOT DIVULGED (RPC, ART 154 (4)

Those who, in theaters, fairs,


cinematographs or any other place,
exhibit indecent or immoral plays,
scenes, acts or shows which are
proscribed and shall include those
which

1. Glorify criminals or condone crimes


2. Serve no other purpose but to satisfy the market for
violence, lust or pornography
3. Offend any race or religion
4. Tend to abet traffic in and use of prohibited drugs
5. Are contrary to law, public order, morals, good
customs, established policies, lawful orders, decrees
and edicts

Those who shall sell, give away or exhibit


films, prints, engravings, sculptures or
literature which are offensive to morals

DEFINITIONS
MORALSImply conformity with the
generally accepted standards of
goodness or rightness in conduct or
character, sometimes, specifically, to
sexual conduct

OBSCNEIt means something offensive


to chastity, decency or delicacy
(People vs Kottinger)

INDECENCY It is an act against the


good behavior and a just delicacy

GIVE AWAY necessarily includes the act


of
exhibiting obscene pictures or
literature, because when one
gives away obscene pictures or
literature, he has the intention
and purpose of exhibiting or
showing the same to the
recipient. (People v. Licuden,
C.A., 66 O.G. 3173)

THE TEST OF OBSCENITY


The test whether the tendency of the
matter charged as obscene, is to deprave
or corrupt those whose minds are open to
such immoral influences, and into whose
hands such a publication may fall

Whether or not such publication or act


shocks the ordinary and common
sense of men as an indecency

CASES
PEOPLE VS TEMPONGKO
What is punished is the distribution of
indecent literature, etc., to many
people and not merely the isolated,
casual or occasional act of giving
such kind of literature to a single
recipient

PEOPLE VS SERRANO
Mere nudity in pictures or paintings is
not an obscenity. The proper test is
whether the motive of the picture, as
indicated by it, is pure or impure or
whether it is naturally calculated to
excite impure imaginations

FERNANDO VS CA
Mere possession of obscene materials,
without intention to sell, exhibit, or give
them away, is not punishable under
Art.201, considering the purpose of the
law is to prohibit the dissemination of
obscene materials to the public

People v. Go Pin
paintings and pictures of women in the
nude, including sculptures of that
kind are not offensive because they
are made and presented for the sake
of art. We agree with counsel for
appellant in part. If such pictures,
sculptures and paintings are shown
in art exhibits and art galleries for
the cause of art, to be viewed and
appreciated by people interested in
art, there would be no offense

However, the pictures here in question


were used not exactly for art's sake
but rather for commercial purposes.

Disposition of prohibited
articles.
a. Upon conviction of the offender to
be forfeited in favor of the
government to be destroyed.
b. Where the criminal case against the
violator of the decree results in an
acquittal to be forfeited in favor of
the government to be destroyed, after
forfeiture proceedings conducted by
the Chief of Constabulary.

c. The person aggrieved by the


forfeiture action of the Chief of
Constabulary may, within fifteen (15)
days after his receipt of a copy of the
decision, appeal the matter to the
Secretary of National Defense for
review. The decision of the Secretary
of National Defense shall be final and
unappealable. (Sec. 2, P.D. No. 969)

BAR QUESTION (1993)


Question 8:
Juan and Petra are officemates. Later,
intimacy developed between them.
One day Juan sent to Petra a booklet
contained in a pay envelope which
was securely sealed. The booklet is
unquestionably indecent and highly
offensive to morals. Juan was
thereafter charged under

Par. 3 of Art 201 of the RPC, as


amended by P.D. 969, which provides
that the penalty of prision mayor or a
fine from P6,000 to P12,000, or both
such imprisonment and fine shall be
imposed upon those who shall sell,
give away or exhibit films, prints,
engravings, sculpture or literature
which are offensive to morals. Is Juan
guilty of the crime charges?

Answer:
No. Juan is not guilty of the crime
charged because the law covers only
the protection of public morals and
not the moral of an individual