This document discusses mitigating circumstances under Article 13 of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines. It defines mitigating circumstances as factors that lessen criminal liability and reduce the penalty for a crime. There are ordinary mitigating circumstances explicitly listed in the code as well as privileged mitigating circumstances like minority. The document examines several specific ordinary mitigating circumstances in detail, such as insufficient provocation, immediate vindication of a grave offense, and voluntary surrender. It also distinguishes ordinary from privileged mitigating circumstances in terms of how they affect penalties.

1. MITIGATING
CIRCUMSTANCE(ARTICLE 13 OF THE RPC)
BY: CHELDY S. ELUMBA-PABLEO,MPA,LLB
CRIMINAL LAW

2. MITIGATIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
Lowering the penalty/shows lesser perversity.
The commission of the crime, do not entirely free the
actor from criminal liability, but serve only to reduce
the penalty.
Matter of defense which do not have to be alleged in
the information.

3. BASIS
Based on diminution of either freedom of action,
intelligence, or intent, or on the lesser perversity of the
offender

4. CLASSES OF MITIGATING
CIRCUMSTANCE
 ORDINARY MITIGATING- those that are enumerated in
subsections 1-10 of Art. 13 of the RPC
 PRIVILEGE MITIGATING- Art. 68 (R.A. 9344-Juvenile Justice and
Welfare Act), Art. 69, Art. 64
 SPECIFIC MITIGATING-applies to specific felony like concealment
of dishonour in case of abortion by pregnant woman and could
either be ordinary or privilege depending upon the extent of
reduction of penalty.

5. DISTINCTION OF ORDINARY & PRIVILEGE
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
 ORDINARY MITIGATING-can be offset by aggravating circumstances; if
not offset by an aggravating circumstances, produces only the effect of
applying the penalty provided by law for the crime in its minimum
period.
 PRIVILEGE MITIGATING- cannot be offset by aggravating circumstance;
produces the effect of imposing upon the offender the penalty lower by
one or two degrees provided by the law for the crime.

6. ORDINARY MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Incomplete justifying or exempting circumstance
2. Offender is under eighteen (18) years old or over
seventy (70) years old. (minority or senility)
3. Offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong
as that committed.
4. Sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the
offended party immediately preceded the act.

7. ORDINARY MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
5. Immediate vindication of a grave offense
6. Passion or obfuscation (lawful sentiments)
7. Offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a
person in authority or his agents, or that he had
voluntarily confessed his guilt

8. ORDINARY MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
8. Voluntary plea of guilt
9. Deaf and dumb, and blind or other physical defect
10. Illness
11. Analogous circumstance

9. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(MINORITY)
Minority is always a privileged mitigating circumstance.
The offender must be a minor under 18 at the time of
the commission of the crime; If he were 18 or over, he
is no longer a minor in the eyes of the law.
Penal Laws should be liberally construed in favour of
the offender.

10. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION)
ELEMENTS:
1. Provocation must be sufficient
2. It must be immediate to the commission of the
crime
3. It must originate from the offended party

11. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION)
 SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION (as a requisite of incomplete self-defense) is
different from sufficient provocation (as a mitigating circumstance).
As an element of:
 SEL-DEFENSE –requires ABSENCE on the part of the person defending
himself.
 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE—pertains to its PRESENCE on the part of
the offended party.

12. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF GRAVE OFFENSE)
Offense need not be a crime. It may be an act or event
which offends the accused causing mental agony to him
and moves him to vindicate himself in such offense.
EXAMPLE:
1. Eloping with the offender’s daughter
2. Insulting an old man

13. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF GRAVE OFFENSE)
IMMEDIATE means proximate, unlike in sufficient
provocation, and allows an interval of time between
the commission of the offense and its vindication as
long as the offender is still suffering from the mental
agony brought about by the offense to him (PP vs
Parana)

14. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(PASSION AND OBFUSCATION)
 Obfuscation is analogous to “jealousy”. It is necessary to arose from the
offender’s lawful sentiments>
 There must be an act on the part of the offended which is unlawful and
sufficient to excite passion and obfuscation on the accused.
EXAMPLE:
ART. 332- Adulterous wife caught in flagrante delicto having sexual
intercourse with the paramour. (the act of the husband is legal and lawful)

15. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(PASSION AND OBFUSCATION)
Overreaction on the part of the accused, if
done with revenge and lawlessness, there is
no passion or obfuscation will arise. (PP vs
Tiongco), (PP vs CA)

16. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(VOLUNTARY SURRENDER)
Voluntary surrender can be appreciated EVEN if the accused
turned themselves one week after the crime. The fact is they
voluntarily surrendered to the police before arrest could be
effected. (PP vs Amaguin)
(Spontaneous purpose: 1. save expenses of the government
in arresting, 2. admission of guilt)

17. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(VOLUNTARY SURRENDER)
 ELEMENTS:
1. Plea was made in open court. (judicial confession)
2. It was spontaneous and unconditional
3. Made before presentation of the evidence by the prosecution.
NOTE: An extra-judicial confession is not mitigating because it is not
made in open court.

18. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(VOLUNTARY SURRENDER)
 Confession of guilt made before the media is not within this provision.
 Voluntary plea of guilt is mitigating because it is an act of repentance and
respect for the law.
 Plea of guilt in capital offense must not be accepted with alacrity but the
accused must be made to understand fully the nature of his plea and its
consequences.
 Accused did not plead to a lesser offense but pleaded guilty to the offense
charge –he should be sentenced to the penalty to which he pleaded. (It is the
essence of a plea of guilt that the accused admits absolutely and
unconditionally his guilt and responsibility for the offense imputed to him)

19. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(DEAF AND DUMB OR BLIND)
Physical defects must be related to the offense committed
because the law requires that the defects has the effect of
restricting his means of action, defense, or communication to
his fellow beings.
ILLNESS must only diminish and not deprive the offender of the
consciousness of his acts. (otherwise he will be exempt from
criminal liability)

20. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(DEAF AND DUMB OR BLIND)
 Analogous circumstances must be similar to:
1. Restitution of the questioned funds by petitioner may be considered
mitigating circumstance in malversation of public funds. (Nizurtado vs
Sandigan bayan)
2. Petitioner voluntarily took the cow to the municipal hall to place it
unconditionally of the authorities and thus save them the trouble of
recovering the cow, can be analogous to voluntary surrender. (PP vs
CANTA)

21. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(DEAF AND DUMB OR BLIND)
3. Extreme poverty is not among the mitigating circumstances ART. 13 of
the RPC and it is doubtful whether it may be considered as circumstance of
similar nature or analogous to those mentioned therein. (Gallardo vs
Tabamo, Jr.)
4. Even if formal education were ignored, such attenuating circumstance is
nonetheless unavailing. –defendant belong to non-Christian cultural
minorities cannot reduce from the subjective point of view their awareness
of the gravity of the offense for robbery and killings are by their very nature
just as wrong to the ignorant as the enlightened.

22. THANK YOU FOR
READING!
CHELDHAYE