THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. PIO ANULAT, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

In a well considered decision the Fourth Division of the People’s Court under
date of November 12, 1946, convicted appellant Pio Anulat of the high crime of
treason without any modifying circumstance, and imposed upon him the penalty of
reclusion perpetua, with the accessories of the law, and a fine of
P10,000, plus the costs of the action.

About midnight of July 8, 1943, appellant, a Filipino citizen, unexpectedly
and in company with two Japanese soldiers in plain clothes, entered a building
called “nepa” in Biñan, Laguna, where people who had access therein used to
gamble. Each of the three carried a revolver. Upon entering the building,
revolver in hand, appellant asked the crowd. “Is Amado de Ocampo here? Don’t run
all of you, or else you would be killed.” Amado de Ocampo, who was there, in
turn inquired: “Why will you apprehend me? I have not done anything wrong.” To
which appellant retorted: “You are needed by our captain in Garrison No. 2,”
making evident reference to the schoolhouse in the poblacion of Biñan, which was
then being utilized as a Japanese garrison. Forthwith, appellant and his
Japanese companions arrested Ocampo and took him away. Ocampo was a member of
the local ROTC guerilla unit, and of him nothing has ever seen or heard again.
These facts have been duly and beyond reasonable doubt established under count
1.

Under count 2, the evidence proves also beyond reasonable doubt that in the
month of December, 1944, a unit of the Makapili was organized in Biñan, Laguna,
among the purposes of which the prosecution in this case specifically points to
the following: “* * * to fight the common enemies side by side with * * * Asians
on any front of the present war;” “to collaborate unreservedly and unstintedly
with the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy in the Philippines in such ways and
means as may in the joint judgment of the Imperial Japanese Forces and the
Association be deemed necessary and fruitful”, and otherwise to give every
possible moral, material and military aid to the enemy for the attainment of his
victory in the last war. (See also Exhibit A-1.) Appellant was one of
the organizers of that unit, the headquarters of which was located in the old
municipal building. He was the head of that unit and was called “captain” by his
men, who were mostly recruited from the different barrios of the municipality.
He conducted their military drills and exercises, giving his commands in the
Japanese language. Armed with a revolver, he was constantly in the company of
Japanese soldiers, some of whom would visit the Makapili headquarters, or of
other Makapili members, armed like him, going around confiscating foodstuffs and
other supplies from the civilians. He lead and accompanied patrol units for the
apprehension and arrest of guerrilla suspects, among whom were Segundo
Pagtakhan, Martin Austria, Gaspar Peña, and Martin Castila. And when the arrival
of the American liberation forces in Biñan became imminent, appellant, with
other Makapili members, retreated with the Japanese forces to the mountains.

In view of the above facts, which the Fourth Division of the People’s Court,
whose members saw and heard the witnesses for the prosecution as well as those
for the defense testify, found to have been established beyond reasonable doubt,
with full compliance with the two-witness rule as regards the overt acts, said
court passed sentence as above mentioned.

The defense, in our opinion, has not succeeded in showing any error of fact
or of law in the judgment appealed from, and we find none in the record.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. So ordered.

Moran, C.J., Feria, Pablo, Bengzon, and Tuason, JJ.,
concur.

PARAS, J.:

In the result. Appellant is co-responsible for
the disappearance of Amado de Ocampo.

---

PERFECTO, J.:

We concur in the decision in so far as it finds appellant guilty of treason
under count No. 1 of the information, for his intervention in the arrest of
guerrilla Amado de Ocampo. His guilt under said count is enough under the law to
justify the sentence of the lower court, which we affirm.

We are not,
however, in a position to agree with the majority decision finding appellant
guilty under count No. 2 of the information, as the evidence on record is not
sufficient to prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that he joined the
Makapili in December, 1944, as one of the organizers thereof, and as to
his retreating with the Japanese forces to the mountains upon arrival of the
American forces of liberation, the only evidence on record is the hearsay
testimony of one witness.