G.R. No. 167683 – 551 Phil. 755 – 524 SCRA 320 – Criminal Law – Justifying Circumstances – Self-defense – Burden of Proof
In January 1996, in Bauang, La Union, Federico Calica and Romeo Calica approached a group of men fencing their properties. The Calica’s went there to check if the boundary is correct (as it involved their properties too). Thereafter, Sergio Beninsig emerged from his house and shouted at the Calica’s. An argument ensued and thereafter, Beninsig stabbed Romeo with a bolo. Romeo died as a result.
During trial, Beninsig averred that he acted in self-defense. He claimed that Romeo threatened to kill him and that Romeo brought out a razor which the latter thrusted towards Beninsig. Beninsig said he had to defend himself.
ISSUE: Whether or not self-defense is to be appreciated in favor of Beninsig.
HELD: No. In this case, Beninsig only had his self-serving testimony as the sole proof for the alleged self-defense.
By claiming self-defense, Beninsig necessarily admitted killing Romeo. The burden of proof is upon him to prove that the killing is justified by self-defense. He failed to do this. On the contrary, the prosecution was able to present a witness (Federico Calica) who testified that Romeo was unarmed. Federico did testify that there was an argument but the same cannot be said to be an unlawful aggression on the part of Romeo which justified Beninsig to kill him. Note that Federico is a relative of both the accused and the victim and he has no ill-motive to testify against Beninsig which is why his testimony was given due credit.
