THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. DOMINGO CAPACETE, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the People’s Court sentencing Domingo
Capacete to reclusion perpetua and to pay P10,000 fine and costs for
treason.

The information contains four counts, to wit:

I

“That in or about the month of December, 1944, in the municipality of San
Pedro, Province of Laguna, the accused for the purpose of giving and with intent
to give aid and comfort to the enemy, did then and there enlist, join and serve
the “MAKABAYAN KATIPUNAN NG MGA PILIPINO” (MAKAPILI), an organization of
military character, founded and organized for the purpose of giving material
support and physical or moral assistance and aid to the Empire of Japan and the
Imperial Japanese Forces in the Philippines; and as such member thereof, the
accused, did, moreover, fight side by side with the enemy, participate in the
procurement and confiscation of foodstuffs and other provisions for the same,
and finally join and flee with the latter in his retreat to the mountains of
Luzon.

II

“That on or about December 4, 1944, the accused, acting as informer or agent
of the Imperial Japanese Forces, for the purpose of giving and with intent to
give aid and comfort to the enemy, led and assisted an armed patrol of Japanese
soldiers and municipal policemen, all being members of the Makapili
organization, in a raid to the barrio of San Antonio, municipality of San Pedro,
Province of Laguna, and then and there caused and participated in the arrest and
apprehension of one Feliciano Casacup, suspected of being a guerrilla, whom the
accused thereafter delivered and turned over to the enemy to the latter’s
garrison in the barrio of San Vicente in the same municipality, where the said
suspect was subjected to maltreatment and torture, and escaped eventual death
only by escaping from his executioners at the very time they were digging the
grave to bury him and three other victims.

III

“That on or about December 9, 1944, in the barrio of Santo Niño, municipality
of San Pedro, Province of Laguna, the accused, acting as informer or agent of
the Imperial Japanese Forces, accompanied by several members of the police force
who afforded him impunity, caused and participated in the arrest and
apprehension of Jacinto Polintan, whom the said accused later deHvered and
turned over to the Japanese soldiers in the barrio of San Vicente in the same
municipality, where the said victim was killed after undergoing brutal
maltreatment and torture.

IV

“That on or about December 9, 1944, in the barrio of San Antonio,
municipality of San Pedro, Province of Laguna, the accused, acting as informer
or agent of the Imperial Japanese Forces, accompanied several municipal
policemen, all members of the Makapili organization, whose presence and
assistance afforded him impunity, caused and participated in the arrest of
Ignacio Gilbuena and thereafter delivered the said victim to the enemy, who
failed to execute the same because of his being able to escape from them on the
way to the place designated for execution.”

The trial court found the defendant guilty of all the charges. In our opinion
the prosecution has not made out a case on the first count There is no proof,
except sweeping assertions of witnesses, that the defendant was a
makapili. The evidence utterly fails to prove that he was appointed or
inducted into the makapili organization. Nor is there any indication that
he “comported himself according to the expected pattern of behaviour” of
makapilis. He was never seen wearing insignia or uniform, only one
witness said he had seen him carry a rifle, and none saw him mount guard or
perform any duty usual in members of a military or semi-military outfit. There
is not even sufficient showing that a makapili branch was constituted in
San Pedro Tunasan or that there was an organized Filipino armed force there or a
barrack or quarter for any military contingent distinct from that of the
Japanese military garrison. One witness said the makapili came into being
in 1941. The men whom the prosecution witnesses pointed out as makapilis
were a handful of former sakdalistas or ganaps who openly
collaborated with the Japanese. The appellation of makapili, it seems,
was given these people only because they had been ganaps and
sakdalistas and had transferred their allegiance to the newcomers. For
instance, Feliciano Casacup, when asked what was the meaning of makapili,
said he did not know. Asked again, “When you said that the accused was a
Makapili, what do you mean?” he answered, “I mean that they were the ones
that ordered the killing of people.” Later he declared, “They said that the
Ganaps and Makapilis mean the same tiling.” He emphasized that this was
precisely what he understood.

The evidence on the alleged intervention of the accused in the confiscation
of foodstuffs and firearms suffers from the same defects as the evidence on his
alleged affiliation with the makapili association. The evidence is vague
and general. At least it does not pass the test of the two-witness rule in that
no two eye-witnesses testified to any specific part or bit or date of the
alleged overt act of seizing arms and supplies for the Japanese.

But the evidence is definitely positive and convincing that the accused was a
Japanese informer and agent. Together with other former ganaps and
sakdalistas in San Pedro Tunasan he, from the advent of Japanese
occupation, consorted with the invaders stationed in that municipality. On at
least three occasions he accompanied them in their night raids on Filipino homes
to apprehend guerrilla suspects. Victims of these raids were Feliciano Casacup,
Jacinto Polintan and Ignacio Gilbuena. The arrests of these men and execution of
one of them are averred in the information and narrated in the decision under
review.

Following is a resume of the circumstances relative to those arrests and
appellant’s part therein. It should be made clear that if in the summation of
the findings we mention the arrests of one Benjamin Manas and one Felino Cruz,
who were seized by the Japanese also upon the indication or with the aid of the
appellant, it is only because they are inseparably linked with the arrests of
Casacup, Gilbuena and Polintan and the eventual disappearance of the last.

On December 9, 1944, about midnight, a squad of Japanese soldiers accompanied
by armed Filipinos, one of whom was the appellant, came to the house of Ignacio
Gilbuena and roused him from sleep. Gilbuena’s hands were afterward bound, and
with him in tow, the Japanese and their Filipino companions proceeded to the
house of Polintan who lived in another barrio of the same town. From his house
Polintan was also talian with his hands tied. The Japanese and their Filipino
followers next transferred to the house of Felino Cruz whom they likewise seized
and whose hands they bound in spite of his protestations of innocence. From
Felino’s house the Japanese moved to the house of Policarpo Manas whom they
wanted to arrest, and when they did not find Policarpo Manas they got his son
Benjamin instead. Benjamin’s hands were likewise tied and he was herded with
Gilbuena, Polintan and Cruz. Then the four prisoners were marched off to the
barrio of San Vicente of the same town where the Japanese garrison was located,
reaching that place at four o’clock in the morning. Soon after, Feliciano
Casacup, who on December 4, had been arrested by Japanese troops accompanied by
the same group of Filipinos, was brought out of the barracks and joined to the
other four suspected guerrillas. Once the five men were assembled, the Filipino
members of the group, including the accused, withdrew, and the Japanese alone
carried the prisoners to a rice-field for execution. On the way, Benjamin Manas
and Feliciano Casacup were able to escape and Ignacio Gilbuena managed to run
away, defying a volley of fire, while the Japanese were digging a grave. Jacinto
Polintan and Felino Cruz were not so fortunate and have never been heard from
ever since.

The arrests of Gilbuena, Polintan and Casacup have each been established by
the testimony of two or more witnesses, testimony which, in this respect, leaves
no room for doubt. We are satisfied that with these arrests Domingo Capacete was
connected in the manner stated by the said witnesses—that he was with the
Japanese captors when the arrests were made and carried a pistol. We think it
far-fetched to suppose that the defendant happened to be in the places above
mentioned as a mere spectator or by accident. Openly carrying a firearm while
going with Japanese soldiers can only be reconciled with the idea that the man
was in league with and had the confidence of the enemy. There is not the
slightest pretense that the accused was in any way connected with underground
movements or that he feigned cooperation in order the better to carry out a
patriotic objective. The defendant’s collaboration appeared to be wholehearted,
absolute and undisguised, neither justified nor mitigated by any ulterior lofty
motive.

The acts thus proven constitute both adherence to the enemy and overt acts of
treason.

The defense of alibi cannot be taken seriously. Assuming that the defendant
had business in Manila which he came daily to attend, this fact did not deprive
him of time and opportunity to commit the deeds charged in the second, third and
fourth counts.

The judgment of the lower court will be affirmed with costs. It is so
ordered.

Moran, C.J., Feria, Pablo, Perfecto, Hilado, Bengzon, Briones, and
Padilla, JJ., concur.

PARAS, J.:

I concur in the result. The appellant is
guilty of murder.