Theft and the Law
My first job as a lawyer was as an associate in a tiny law firm in Alabang. One of our clients was a real estate firm with lots of developments around the country, including Cavite. During my first appearance at the Municipal Trial Court in Bacoor, Cavite, I was surprised when a few minutes before 8AM, a court staff asked the crowd inside the courtroom to group themselves as follows: SM to the left and non-SM to the right. The crowd dutifully complied and moved seats. After a few minutes, the left side of the courtroom was packed, with people even standing at the back, and the right side, where I was, had less than a dozen people.
As it turned out, the people on the left side had been caught shoplifting at the nearby SM Bacoor and since SM did not have a policy of settling criminal cases, even the smallest act of thievery was prosecuted.
The penalty for theft under Article 309 of the Revised Penal Code is based on the value of the thing(s) stolen. The range of values go from Php5 to Php102,000, with the corresponding penalties ranging from a fine not exceeding Php50, to imprisonment of not more than 20 years. However, Article 309(8) takes into consideration the economic hardship that may have driven a person to steal:
Art. 309. Penalties. — Any person guilty of theft shall be punished by:
...
8. Arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine not exceeding 50 pesos, when the value of the thing stolen is not over 5 pesos, and the offender shall have acted under the impulse of hunger, poverty, or the difficulty of earning a livelihood for the support of himself or his family.
It should be noted though that the Revised Penal Code came into existence in 1930, when Php102,000 could probably be a substantial downpayment for a house or could even pay for a house. However, that's no longer the case now since Php102,000 is only good for an Iphone X, a powerbank, and a protective case. Thus the amendment of the Revised Penal Code with Republic Act No. 10951 which was signed by President Duterte into law on August 29, 2017. Under Republic Act No. 10951, the original range of values of Php5 to Php102,000 for theft, were increased to Php500 to Php10,200,000, with the corresponding penalties remaining the same.
Back in the Bacoor courtroom, I noticed that some of the SM shoplifters were already released after their arraignment because of time served. Since the Revised Penal Code had not been amended at that time, I'm assuming that the value of the item stolen from SM was either between Php5-Php200 (punishable by arresto mayor or imprisonment of 1 month and 1 day to 6 months) or Php201-Php12,000 (punishable by prision correccional or imprisonment of 6 months and 1 day to 6 years).
This post was triggered by news of an SM supermarket employee who was jailed for stealing a can of corned beef. The media has already gone to town with the news, depicting the SM employee as a poor victim and SM as a heartless and evil conglomerate. But pilferage is a serious crime in any business and SM is well within its rights to refuse to settle incidents of theft or qualified theft, as was the case with the SM employee. Furthermore, as the jampacked Bacoor courtroom proved, theft is very prevalent in SM and their policy of non-settling of criminal cases has not deterred other acts of theft from happening.
My softie heart says that theft borne out of desperation and committed by someone who is clearly not a habitual criminal, should be forgiven as a Christian gesture. But that's exactly why I'm not the one running a multi-billion peso enterprise like SM. I'm sure Henry Sy and his children are decent individuals, but a line has to be drawn and they drew that line at theft and pilferage.
Poverty should never be seen as an excuse to commit crime, no matter how petty it might be. This is an insult to the millions of poor and honest Filipinos who strive to better their lives without resorting to crime. But at the same time, we cannot close our eyes to the fact that poverty pushes people to do acts that they normally wouldn't do.
Maybe SM could offer employee discounts and items bought by employees can be paid in installment through salary deduction to minimize pilferage? Or what if SM utilizes a three-strike policy for its employees, with pilferage of anything below Php100 considered as a strike against the employee? But this is just me and my bleeding heart thinking out loud. I really don't know how to run a company with thousands of employees, millions of customers, and daily incidents of theft and pilferage.
As for the SM employee who stole a can of corned beef worth Php31, he was charged with qualified theft under Article 310 not just simple theft, so his penalty is increased by two degrees from arresto menor minimu to prision correccional in its minimum period (imprisonment of 6 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months)
That's right, imprisonment for at least 6 months and 1 day for stealing a can of corned beef. It boggles the mind and breaks the heart.
:(
Comments
Real life case in point: reduction of previously-issued prison sentences on MR /motion for reconsideration by accused
And one more thing, still no sweldo?! How many months has it been?
I remember reading a report that the young man thought that he would probably be charged 3x the price of the corned beef or docked a day's worth of his salary. But arrested and jailed for corned beef. But my heart breaks for that young man. 24601 lang ang peg.
I'm sure SM must be getting a lot of backlash now because of what happened. But I'm curious why this was the only incident of pilferage or theft that garnered media attention. I'm 100% sure SM has also prosecuted theft of less valuable items than corned beef.
Again, I respect SM's management prerogative, but the number of instances of pilferage and theft must show that their current policies are not working.
Though napaisip din ako, if your are an employee of SM, bakit mo ipagpapalit ang pangalan mo sa value of P31?
Parang mas gagawin yun ng tambay.
I started working in a retailing company just a few months ago and there are some companies that implement a shared loss for the employees from which the goods of the branch were stolen (e.g. If a shoplifting syndicate gang ends up getting P60k merchandise in one blow, the the people in the operations and the security will split the cost of the losses). If you were part of that team who would have to pay for the merchandise that was stolen then you would also want the shoplifters to be caught and prosecuted.
The amount of which is more than 100k (she returned portion of the money when we discovered she created an online acct for our deceased mother to funnel the money to her own acct), is qualified theft applicablr in the sense that the money is an estate and belongs to the heirs (her included)? What is the penalty for theft more than 100k? Thanks in advance for the answer.
The crime committed here was estafa by abuse of confidence and not qualified theft because qualified theft requires an employer-employee relationship where the employee abused his/her position to steal from the employer.
You said that the amount involved was Php100,000, so the penalty for that can be found in the third paragraph of Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code:
'3rd. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional. in its minimum period, if such amount is over Forty thousand pesos (P40,000) but does not exceed One million two hundred thousand pesos (P1,200,000)
That's a range of imprisonment between 4 months and 1 day to 6 months minimum to 2 years and 4 months as maximum.
I hope your family will be able to resolve this internally without resorting to the judicial system. Good luck po.
Ask ko lang po theft din po ba ang pwedeng ikaso kung yung kuya ko nagpapadala po ng pera sa dati nyang leave in partner dahil sa may anak sila nito. Pero nitong huli nalaman namin na wala naman pala silang anak at since 2016 pa nagpapadala ng pera ang kuya ko po na 3,000 ka da buwan. I hope masagot nyo po ang tanong ko. Maraming salamat po.
Ask ko lang po, friend ko po kasi nakulong dahil nahuli syang maglalabas ng gamit ng kompanya na worth 600, dahil daw company policy pinakulong sya kaso is qualified theft, gaano po kaya sya katagal sa jail pagkaganoon? Ang kung papyansahan naman magkano po ang aabutin?
That's not theft but a violation of consumer protection laws.
Kung simple theft yan, the penalty is prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods o pagkakulong between 6 months and 1 day to 4 years and 2 months. Kung qualified theft, mas mataas ang penalty so ang pagkakulong ay betwen 12 years and 1 day to 17 years and 4 months.
I am really clueless and doesn’t have the money to do legal council. I dont want to let this past because he might do this with others and its not about the money its the contacts and other impt documents I lost.
No hate from anyone but I just need advice so I can weigh on things.
Thanks and God bless.
You can only make a settlement in exchange for not filing a criminal case against the man who stole your phone. Your settlement will not affect the administrative proceedings against him because that's between him and your place of employment.
If you do decide to file a case of simple theft against him (not qualified theft because there's no employer-employee relationship between the two of you as you're both employees) technically you can no longer settle the case but if he decides to settle and you accept, then the case will be dropped and the criminal case will also be good as dismissed for not having a witness.The penalty for the price involved is imprisonment of a minimum of one (1) day to a maximum of six (6) months.
https://www.doj.gov.ph/files/2018/DC/DC013-2018MAR%202018%20New%20Bail%20Bond%20Guide%20dtd%2008%20Mar%202018(1).pdf
Maari po bang gawin nila iyon kahit nakipagsettle na ang pwmangkin ko.. maraming salamat po..
Pinagbabawal po sa mga tindahan ang pag-paskil ng litrato o ID ng mga nahuling shoplifters kasi ito ay pagpapahiya lamang (shaming) at hindi kasama sa karapatan ng tindahan na protektahan ang establishment niya. Hindi "commensurate" o "proportional" ang pagpaskil ng litrato ng shoplifter sa krimen na nagawa, mas lalo na kung nakapag-areglo na ang shoplifter at ang tindahan.
Pwedeng ikalat ng tindahan ang litrato ng mga shoplifters sa mga security guards or employees niya para maging alerto sila sa mga shoplifters, ito ay pasok sa right to security ng tindahan. Pero ang pagpaskil ng litrato ng shoplifter sa public place ay walang kinalaman sa right to security at lumalabag pa sa karapatang pantao ng shoplifter.
Post a Comment