Dear PAO,

Is it possible to be charged, and eventually be convicted for the crime of grave threats even in the absence of any direct words spoken/uttered evidencing the alleged threat?

Rolando

Dear Rolando,

The answer to your query is yes. To elucidate this answer, allow us to lead your attention to the provisions of Act No. 3815, otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, as amended. Succinctly, Article 282 of the said law reads:

“Art. 282. Grave threats. - Any person who shall threaten another with the infliction upon the person, honor or property of the latter or of his family of any wrong amounting to a crime, shall suffer:

“1. The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the crime he threatened to commit, if the offender shall have made the threat demanding money or imposing any other condition, even though not unlawful, and said offender shall have attained his purpose. If the offender shall not have attained his purpose, the penalty lower by two (2) degrees shall be imposed.

“If the threat be made in writing or through a middleman, the penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period.

“1. The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000), if the threat shall not have been made subject to a condition.”

Related with the above-mentioned law, the Supreme Court in the case of Calaug v. People (G.R. No. 171511, 4 March 2009) penned by the late Honorable Associate Justice Leonardo A. Quisumbing, held that the crime of grave threats can be committed when the action speaks louder than words, viz:

“In grave threats, the wrong threatened amounts to a crime which may or may not be accompanied by a condition. In light threats, the wrong threatened does not amount to a crime but is always accompanied by a condition. In other light threats, the wrong threatened does not amount to a crime and there is no condition.

“The records show that at around 7:30 in the evening, Julia Denido left her house to go to the barangay hall to report the mauling of her husband which she witnessed earlier at around 4:00 o’clock in the afternoon. On her way there, petitioner confronted her and pointed a gun to her forehead, while at the same time saying “Saan ka pupunta, gusto mo ito?” Considering what transpired earlier between petitioner and Julia’s husband, petitioner’s act of pointing a gun at Julia’s forehead clearly enounces a threat to kill or to inflict serious physical injury on her person. Actions speak louder than words. Taken in the context of the surrounding circumstances, the uttered words do not go against the threat to kill or to inflict serious injury evinced by petitioner’s accompanying act.

“Given the surrounding circumstances, the offense committed falls under Article 282, par. 2 (grave threats) since: (1) killing or shooting someone amounts to a crime, and (2) the threat to kill was not subject to a condition.” (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)

Applying the foregoing to your query, it is clear that the crime of grave threats can still be committed even in the absence of a direct word uttering an alleged threat amounting to a crime. As jurisprudence puts it, “when the action speaks louder than words,” a direct utterance of threat is not necessary to prove the commission of the crime.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. Please be reminded that this advice is based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.