I.

INTRO - [CANLAS]

In 2016, Republic Act No. 10883, otherwise known as the “New Anti-Carnapping Act of
2016” lapsed into law. The said law repeals Republic Act No. 6539 or the “Anti-Carnapping Act
of 1972”. Senator Grace Poe, the sponsor of the new law, hopes that the stricter penalties of the
new anti-carnapping law would hinder the commission of the crime and give vehicle owners
peace of mind.1 Carnapping is the act of taking, with intent to gain, of a motor vehicle belonging
to another without the latter’s consent, or by means of violence against or intimidation of
persons, or by using force upon things.2 According to the Senator, “Carnapping has become more
rampant, more blatant and more heinous over the past years. It is now time to plug the loopholes
in the law to adjust to the economic requirements of the present and to stop the reign of terror of
criminal syndicates engaged in carnapping”.3

There have been growing concerns regarding the rampant and odious cases of carnapping
as far as 2011. On January 24, 2011, former senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero introduced Senate
Bill No. 2651 which aims to increase the penalty for carnapping. In the explanatory note of the
Senate Bill, he claims that the current law at that time was insufficient, if not inutile. These
stolen vehicles were often used as a means to commit other crimes such as robbery, murder, and
kidnapping.4 In the same year, the Department of Justice released Advisory Opinion No. 6,
seeking to provide guidance to the public for there was an increase in carnapping incidents
characterized by the brazenness of criminals and even accompanied at times by extreme
violence.5 Carnapping syndicates were not only using high-powered rifles in the commission of
the crime, but were also employing deceptive paraphernalia like fake police uniforms and license
plates. There was also an increase in the funding for their operations.6

According to the 2011 Comprehensive Report on Carnapping by the Philippine National

Police Highway Patrol Group (PNP-HPG), there were three methods of carnapping employed by
the carnappers. First is “Stolen While Parked Unattended” (SWP). It covers instances where the
perpetrator steals a parked and unattended vehicle. Second is “Stolen at Gunpoint with
Intimidation” (SAGI). There is SAGI whenever the perpetrator forces or intimidates the owner to
yield their vehicle using a gun or some other weapon. The third method is “Failed to Return”
(FTR). Here, the perpetrator borrows a vehicle and fails to return it within the agreed time and
thereafter absconds with it. The DOJ added a fourth method which is “Stolen by other Means”

1 Section 3, Republic Act No. 10883

2 Section 3, Republic Act No. 10883
3 Section 14, Republic Act No. 6539
4 Section 3, Republic Act No. 10883
5 Section 4, Republic Act No. 10883
6 Section 7, Republic Act No. 10883
(STM). This covers all other instances not included in the foregoing categories which includes
modus operandi such as “Bukas Kotse” and “Bump and Rob”.7

The DOJ, citing the 2011 Comprehensive Report, said that a total of 286 incidents of
carnapping were reported from January to April of 2011. A higher number of carnapping
incidents were reported from January to April of the preceding year, amounting to a total of 684
cases.8 Senator Grace Poe cited statistics from the Philippine National Police (PNP) which
showed 3,170 carnapping cases from January to June 2014. There was a 68.5 percent increase
from the 1,881 carnapping incidents reported in the same period in 2013. In addition, an average
of two cars and 15 motorcycles were stolen per day in the first half of 2014. 9 According to the
data gathered by the PNP Directorate for Investigation and Detective Management (PNP-
DIDM), there were a total number of 13,284 carnapping incidents from January to December
2014. This, however, decreased by 2.89 percent during the same period of the following year, or
a total of 12,900. During both years, no syndicates were disbanded. The police also had a 14
percent recovery efficiency in 2014 and 15 percent in 2015.10 Despite the decrease in carnapping
incidents in 2015, it cannot be denied that the dangers posed by carnapping were still present.

As pointed out by former Senator Escudero, RA 6539 only imposes a punishment of

imprisonment fourteen years and eight months to seventeen years and four months if the crime
was committed without violence or intimidation of persons, or force upon things, which falls
short of the minimum period for reclusion perpetua. 11 Under the Rules on Criminal Procedure,
“No person charged with a capital offense, or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment, shall be admitted to bail when evidence of guilt is strong, regardless of the stage
of the criminal prosecution.”12 Thus, a person charged with the act of carnapping per se under
RA 6539 may be released on bail even if the evidence of guilt is strong. The new law aimed to
protect the interest of motor vehicle owners by imposing stiffer penalties to any person found
guilty of carnapping. This includes the denial of the application for admission of bail when the
evidence of guilt is strong.13

After the effectivity of the New Anti-Carnapping Act, a total of 432 car theft incidents
were recorded in 2017, and a total of 326 were recorded in 2018, according to the PNP-HPG. 14
Also, from January to April 2019, a total of 81 car thefts and 1,115 motorcycle thefts were
reported as opposed to 114 car thefts and 1,631 motorcycle thefts during the same period of the
preceding year. This amounts to a 43.75 percent decrease in car thefts and a 31.64 percent
7 Section 8, Republic Act No. 10883
8 Section 8, Republic Act No. 10883
9 Section 13, Republic Act No. 10883
10 Section 15, Republic Act No. 10883
11 Section 16, Republic Act No. 10883
12 Section 17, Republic Act No. 10883
13 Section 19, Republic Act No. 10883
14 Section 20, Republic Act No. 10883
decrease in motorbike thefts.15 The PNP also claimed that the crime incidents in the country
“dipped sharply” during the community quarantine in the country. Two of the eight focus crimes
of the PNP were carnapping of vehicles and carnapping of motorcycles. 16 Based on statistics,
there was a dramatic decrease in carnapping incidents in the country especially after the
effectivity of the New Anti-Carnapping Act. This can be attributed to the harsher penalties
imposed by the new law or to other factors such as the community quarantine and the utilization
of the PNP of matrix that identifies the masterminds and financiers involved in the car thefts.17

This research paper aims to discuss the provisions of the New Anti-Carnapping Act,
compare the new law with the Anti-Carnapping Act of 1972, criticize certain changes made
under the New Carnapping Act, and suggest improvements from the current law to better achieve
the purpose of the lawmakers in amending R.A. No. 6539.

15 Reyes, Luis B. The Revised Penal Code: Criminal Law. Rex Book Store, 2021.
16 Maila Ager, “Stiffer anti-carnapping law for car owners’ peace of mind—Poe,” Inquirer, last modified July 20, 2016,
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/797497/stiffer-anti-carnapping-lawfor-car-owners-peace-of-mind-poe#ixzz7FGiOwZ00.
17 Section 3, Republic Act No. 10883.
II. OVERVIEW - [CANUEL]

Republic Act 6539 or the Anti-carnapping law was amended by Republic Act 10883
which provides that Carnapping is the taking with intent to gain, of motor vehicle belonging to
another without the consent of the latter, or by means of violence against or intimidation of
persons, or by use of force upon things.18

R.A. No. 10883, the New Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016, which lapsed into law on July
17, 2016, is the law applicable when the property taken in robbery is a motor vehicle. 19 R.A.
10883 defines carnapping and provides the penalty therefore. Carnapping is the taking, with
intent to gain, of a motor vehicle belonging to another without the latter’s consent,or by means of
violence against or intimidation of persons, or by using force upon things.

Section 3 of the said law provides that any person who is found guilty of carnapping
shall, regardless of the value of motor vehicle taken, be punished by imprisonment for not less
than twenty (20) years and one day but not more than thirty (30) years, when the carnapping is
committed without violence against or intimidation of person, or force upon things; and by
imprisonment for not less than thirty (30) years and one day but not more than forty (40) years,
when the carnapping is committed by means of violence against or intimidation of person, or
force upon things; and the penalty of life imprisonment shall be imposed when the owner, driver
or occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed or raped in the course of the commission of
the carnapping.20

The elements of Carnapping are the following:

1) Actual taking of motor vehicle;
2) The vehicle belongs to another;
3) There is intent to gain in the taking of the vehicle of another;
4) Said taking is without the consent of the owner or by means of violence or
intimidation or by means of force upon things.

Concept of carnapping is the same as that of theft or robbery by means of violence or

intimidation or by using force upon things. Thus, jurisprudence and rules that pertain to theft and
robbery are applicable to carnapping.21

Taking

18 Senate of the Philippines, “New Anti-Carnapping Law to curb flourishing carnapping industry,” last modified May 23, 2016,
https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/press_release/2016/0523_prib6.asp.
19 An act increasing the penalty for the crime of carnapping amending for that purpose Section 14 of Republic Act No. 6539,
Senate Bill No. 2651, 15th Cong. (2011).
20 Department of Justice, “Department of Justice Advisory on Preventive Measures Against Carnapping,” last modified
September 19, 2011, https://doj.gov.ph/news_article.html?newsid=78
21 Id.
 In theft, robbery, and carnapping, taking is deemed complete from the moment the
offender gains possession of the thing, even if he has no opportunity to dispose of the same. 22
The person, who is in possession of a recently stolen property without justifiable explanation, is
presumed to be the author of theft. Since the concept of carnapping is the same as that of theft,
this presumption of authorship of theft applies to carnapping.23

Motor Vehicle
Motor vehicle refers to any vehicle propelled by any power other than muscular power
using the public highways. Trailers having any number of wheels, when propelled or intended to
be propelled by attachment to a motor vehicle, shall be classified as a separate motor vehicle
with no power rating.

Belonging to Another Person

In Chua v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 79021, May 17, 1993, a criminal prosecution for
carnapping need not establish the fact that the complainant therein is the absolute owner of the
motor vehicle. What is material is the existence which would show that respondent took the
motor vehicle belonging to another. In robbery by means of intimidation or violence and
carnapping, it is not necessary that the person unlawfully divested of the personal property be the
owner thereof. What is simply required is that the property taken does not belong to the offender.
Actual possession of the property of the person dispossessed suffices.24

Intent to Gain
After taking the vehicle, the accused removed the wheels therefrom, and then abandoned
the vehicle. The crime committed is carnapping since the accused took the vehicle without the
consent of the owner with intent to gain although the criminal intention is merely to gain from
the parts of the vehicle taken. Intent to gain with respect to the vehicle in its entirety is not
required.25 In sum, in carnapping, the “taking” pertains to the motor vehicle while “intent to
gain” may pertain to the motor vehicle or parts thereof. If the accused merely took the wheels of
the vehicle, the crime committed is only theft.

A person, who possesses or deals with intent to gain property derived from the proceeds
of theft, or robbery is liable for fencing. However, the term “carnapping” can be considered as
within the contemplation of the word “theft” or “robbery” in P.D. No. 1612. Hence, buying a
carnapped vehicle with intent to gain is fencing.

22 Id.
23 Id.
24 Senate of the Philippines, “New Anti-Carnapping Law to curb flourishing carnapping industry,”
https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/press_release/2016/0523_prib6.asp.
25 Philippine National Police, Status of Implementation of Major Programs/Projects - PNP Operations Programs (January to
December 2015) (2015), https://pnp.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/MajorPrograms2015.pdf.
 The penalty for carnapping is higher when the owner, driver, or occupant of the
carnapped motor vehicle is killed or rapped in the commission of the carnapping. 26 The killing
(or rape) merely qualifies the crime of carnapping, which for lack of specific nomenclature may
be known as qualified carnapping or carnapping in an aggravated form. 27 However, qualified
carnapping is actually a special complex crime since the law prescribes a single penalty for
committing two crimes, to wit: carnapping and homicide or rape. In fact, the Supreme Court
sometimes described qualified carnapping as a special complex crime of carnapping with
homicide.28

26 An act increasing the penalty for the crime of Carnapping, Senate Bill No. 2651, 15 th Cong. (2011).
27 Section 7, Rule 114, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
28 Senate of the Philippines, “New Anti-Carnapping Law to curb flourishing carnapping industry,”
https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/press_release/2016/0523_prib6.asp.
III. UPDATES - [Carrasco]

The Republic Act No. 6539, otherwise known as the “Anti-Carnapping Act of
1972” has been expressly repealed in Section 22 of Republic Act No. 10883, also known
as the “New Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016”. This includes all laws, executive orders, rules
and regulations or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of Republic Act No.
10883. The new Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016 has amended certain sections of the old
law concerning definitions, penalties, procedures, requirements and duties of certain
departments.

With respect to amendments, it is noteworthy, however, that aside from

carnapping and concealment of carnapping, the new law doesn’t have a penal clause
providing for penalties for the commission of any of the punishable acts. In the old law,
such penal provision will be found in Section 13 of Republic Act No. 6539.

A. Carnapping and Concealment of Carnapping

“Carnapping” is the taking, with intent to gain, of a motor vehicle belonging to

another without the latter’s consent, or by means of violence against or intimidation of
persons, or by using force upon things. The definition has been maintained.29

The new law provides new penalties with respect to its commission. Section 3,
paragraph 2 of Republic Act No. 10883 states that “Any person who is found guilty of
carnapping shall, regardless of the value of the motor vehicle taken, be punished by
imprisonment for not less than twenty (20) years and one (1) day but not more than
thirty (30) years, when the carnapping is committed without violence against or
intimidation of persons, or force upon things; and by imprisonment for not less than
thirty (30) years and one (1) day but not more than forty (40) years, when the
carnapping is committed by means of violence against or intimidation of persons, or
force upon things; and the penalty of life imprisonment shall be imposed when the
owner, driver, or occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed or raped in the
commission of the carnapping.”30

29 Consuelo Marquez, “PNP-HPG: 326 car theft incidents recorded in 2018,” Inquirer, last modified May 22, 2019,

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1121958/pnp-hpg-326-car-theft-incidents-recorded-in-2018#ixzz7FGyTfIQ0.

30 Philippine National Police Directorate for Investigation and Detective Management. Quick Look Crime Environment Report
(2019), https://didm.pnp.gov.ph/images/sidebar_pdf/crimestat/Crime_Environment_2018_vs_2019_.pdf.
 Under Republic Act No. 6539, any person shall be punished by imprisonment of
14 years and 8 months to 17 years and 4 months when committed without violence
against or intimidation of persons, or force upon things; and by imprisonment for not
less than 17 years and 4 months and not more than 30 years, when the carnapping is
committed by means of violence against or intimidation of any person, or force upon
things; and the penalty of life imprisonment to death shall be imposed when the owner,
driver or occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed in the commission of the
carnapping.31

The new law added that it is non-bailable if any person charged with carnapping
or when the crime of carnapping is (a) committed by criminal groups, gangs or
syndicates or (b) by means of violence or intimidation of any person or persons or
forced upon things; or (c) when the owner, driver, passenger or occupant of the
carnapped vehicle is killed or raped in the course of the carnapping. 32

Republic Act No. 10883 has a newly defined offense provided in Section 4,
punishing any person who conceals carnapping as defined under the law. The provision
states that, “Any person who conceals carnapping shall be punished with imprisonment
of six (6) years up to twelve (12) years and a fine equal to the amount of the acquisition
cost of the motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, or any other part involved in the
violation; Provided, That if the person violating any provision of this Act is a juridical
person, the penalty herein provided shall be imposed on its president, secretary, and/or
members of the board of directors or any of its officers and employees who may have
directly participated in the violation.

Any public official or employee who directly commits the unlawful acts defined in
this Act or is guilty of gross negligence of duty or connives with or permits the
commission of any of the said unlawful acts shall, in addition to the penalty prescribed in
the preceding paragraph, be dismissed from the service, and his/her benefits forfeited
and shall be permanently disqualified from holding public office.” 33

B. Defacing or Tampering with Serial Numbers

The new law provides a similar definition provided in R.A. 6539. This refers to
altering, changing, erasing, replacing, or scratching of the original factory-inscribed serial

31 Vince Ferreras, “PNP says 8 focus crimes 'dipped sharply' during community quarantine,” last modified June 10, 2020,
https://cnnphilippines.com/news/2020/6/10/Focus-crimes-dipped-sharply-community-quarantine-PNP-.html.
32 Marquez, “326 car theft incidents recorded in 2018,” https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1121958/pnp-hpg-326-car-theft-incidents-
recorded-in-2018#ixzz7FGyTfIQ0.
33 Section 3, Republic Act No. 10883
 number on the motor vehicle engine, engine block or chassis of any motor vehicle. This
has been expressly stated as unlawful in Section 14 of R.A. 10883, formerly in Section 12
of R.A. 6539.

C. Registration Requirements, Duties and Clearance under R.A. 10883

Provisions providing registration requirements, duties and clearance merely

change the referral to the ‘Philippine Constabulary’ to the ‘Philippine National Police’.

Section 7 of R.A. 10883, the law added in Permanent Registry of Motor Vehicle,
Motor Vehicle Engines, Engine Blocks and Chassis, “that the original copy of the
certificate of registration shall be given to the registered owner, the second copy shall be
retained with the LTO and the third copy shall be submitted to the PNP. Moreover, it
shall be unlawful for any person or employee who willfully encodes in the registry of
motor vehicles a non-existing vehicle or without history, new identity of an already
existing vehicle or double/multiple registration ("KAMBAL") of vehicle”. 34

The new law also provides in Section 8 the allowable period to register every
sale, transfer, conveyance of a motor vehicle, substitution or replacement of a motor
vehicle engine, engine block or chassis of a motor vehicle with the LTO within twenty
(20) working days upon purchase/acquisition of a motor vehicle and substitution or
replacement of a motor vehicle engine, engine block or chassis. 35

It also added under the same provision the presumption that a motor vehicle,
motor vehicle engine, engine block or chassis not registered with the LTO shall be
presumed as a carnapped vehicle, an untaxed imported vehicle, or a vehicle proceeding
from illegal sources unless proven otherwise and shall be confiscated in favor of the
government.36

The new Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016 also requires that prior to engraving the
engine or chassis number, there shall be a PNP clearance. This is provided under the
duty of Collector of Customs to Report.

Republic Act No. 10883 also amended the provision with respect to clearance
required for shipment of Motor Vehicles, Motor Vehicle Engines, Engine Blocks, Chassis
or Body. “The Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) shall submit a report to the PNP within

34 Section 3, Republic Act No. 10883

35 People v. Sia, G.R. No. 137457, November 21, 2001
36 Section 3, R.A. No. 10883
 seven (7) days upon boarding all motor vehicles being boarded the "RORO", ferry, boat,
vessel or ship for interisland and international shipment. The PPA shall not allow the
loading of motor vehicles in all interisland and international shipping vessels without a
motor vehicle clearance from the PNP, except cargo trucks and other trucks carrying
goods, Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB)-accredited public
utility vehicles (PUV) and other motor vehicles carrying foodstuff and dry goods.” 37

D. Other Newly-Defined Offenses under R.A. 10883

1. Identity Transfer

As provided in Section 15, “It shall be unlawful for any person, office or
entity to cause and/or allow the sale, registration, and/or transfer into another
name, the chassis number, engine number and plate number of a motor vehicle
declared as "total wreck" or beyond economic repair by concerned insurance
company, and/or law enforcement agencies, due to its involvement in a vehicular
accident or for some other causes. The LTO shall cancel the registration of total
wreck vehicles as reported by the PNP and/or as declared by the Insurance
Commission.”38

2. Transfer of Vehicle Plate

Section 16 states that “It shall be unlawful for any person, office or entity
to transfer or use a vehicle plate from one vehicle to another without securing the
proper authority from the LTO.”39

3. Sale of Second Hand Spare Parts

It is also provided in Section 17 that “It shall be unlawful for any person,
office or entity to buy and/or sell any second hand spare parts taken from a
carnapped vehicle.”40

E. Foreign Nationals and Reward

There has no change in the substance regarding rules on the conviction of foreign
nationals. The new law merely replaced terms from “aliens” to “foreign nationals”.

37 People v. Mejia, G.R. Nos. 118940-941

38 People v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 230909, June 17, 1909
39 People v. Sia, supra.
40 People v. Garcia, G.R. No. 138470, April 1, 2003
 Section 19 of R.A. No. 10883 provides rewards for those who voluntarily give
information leading to the recovery of carnapped vehicles and for the conviction of the
persons charged with carnapping. The Philippine National Police (PNP), originated from
the Philippine Constabulary, shall include in their annual budget the amount necessary to
provide for a “monetary reward as the PNP may determine” with respect to this
provision.41

F. Implementing Rules and Regulations

To effectively carry out the provisions of the Republic Act No. 10883, including
the setting up of a coordinated online access and the effective clearance system
mentioned in Section 12 of the same act to expedite motor vehicle data and details
verification, R.A. 10883 added this provision wherein the PNP shall work together with
the Department of Transportation and Communications, LTO, Philippine Coast Guard,
Maritime Industry Authority, Bureau of Customs and relevant motorists and automotive
sectors.42

IV. RECOMMENDATION -

A. Simple carnapping committed by group, gang, or syndicate or carnapping by means

of violence or intimidation or by using force upon things under Sec. 3 of RA 10883
being non-bailable should be declared unconstitutional.

Sec. 3 of R.A. No. 10883 provides that simple carnapping committed by group,
gang, or syndicate, or carnapping by means of violence or intimidation or by use of force
upon things when evidence of guilt is strong is not bailable. On the other hand, Art. III,

41 People v. Garcia, supra.

42 People v. Ellasos, G.R. No. 139323, June 6, 2001
 Sec. 13 of the 1987 Constitution provides that only offenses punishable by reclusion
perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong is not bailable.
The penalty for simple carnapping is imprisonment for not less than 20
years and 1 day, but not more than 30 years while carpnapping by means of violence or
intimidation or by using force upon things is imprisonment for not less than 30 years and
1 day, but not more than 40 years. These cannot be considered as reclusion perpetua
within the contemplation of the constitutional provision on bail.

The penalty provided under R.A. 10883 for simple carnapping and carnapping by
means of violence or intimidation or by using force is subject to ISLAW. The penalty for
carnapping is divisible. The Supreme Court ruled in the case of People v. Castillo, G.R.
No. 118912, May 28, 2004, that ISLAW, which required the fixing of minimum and
maximum penalty, is not applicable to the penalty of reclusion perpetua because it is an
indivisible penalty. Thus, divisible penalty for carnapping cannot be treated as reclusion
perpetua.

It is therefore humbly submitted that Sec. 3 of R.A. No. 10883 making simple
carnapping committed by group gang or syndicate or carnapping by means of violence or
intimidation or by using force upon things non-bailable should be declared
unconstitutional.

B. In qualified carnapping, the victim must extend to 3rd persons not only to the
driver, owner, or occupant of the carnapped vehicle.

In qualified carnapping under R.A. No 10883 the victim of homicide or rape must
be the driver, owner, or occupant of the carnapped vehicle. On the other hand, in robbery
with homicide, as held in the case of People v. Barut, G.R. No. L-42666 March 13, 1979,
the victim of homicide can be a person other than the victim of robbery such as a
bystander.

It is therefore humbly recommended that when a person dies aside from the
driver, owner, or occupant of the carnapped vehicle, in the occasion or as a result of
carnapping, the crime committed must be qualified carnapping in the same way as in the
crime of robbery with homicide considering that the nature of the crimes of robbery and
carnapping are substantially the same.

C. R.A. 10883 should adopt the penalties from the RPC to apply attempted stage in
carnapping
 R.A. No. 10883 did not borrow the penalties from RPC on attempted felony,
therefore, it cannot be applied to carnapping. Thus, the crime of carnapping has no
attempted stage.

In the case of People v. Dela Cruz, C.A., 43 O.G. 3202, where the accused already
commenced to carry out the felonious intention when he was found inside a parked jeep,
forcing open the padlock locking the gearshift. He was not able to perform all acts of
execution for the timely arrival of the owner of the jeep, the crime committed is only
attempted theft.

In the present, the act committed in case mentioned above cannot be considered
attempted carnapping because the new anti-carnapping law does not punish attempted
carnapping. The accused will still be liable for attempted qualified theft. To avoid this
situation, it is humbly recommended that R.A. 10883 should borrow the penalties from
the RPC, Afrt. 6 in relation to Art. 51 of the Code in order that attempted felony can be
applied to carnapping.
V. CONCLUSION -

In light with the aforementioned information, Republic Act. No. 10883, otherwise known
as the “New Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016” is designed to punish those who commit the criminal
act of Carnapping which is the taking, with intent to gain, of a motor vehicle belonging to
another without the latter’s consent, or by means of violence against or intimidation of persons,
or by using force upon things. The intent of the law makers in enacting this law is to prevent the
rampant and odious cases of Carnapping and to provide a higher penalty as this crime manifests
the greater criminal perversity of the person who shall commit this crime. Here, we should be
able to distinguish the applicable penalty in the presence of certain circumstances such as when
the act of Carnapping is accompanied with or without violence against or intimidation of
persons, or force upon things, when the act of Carnapping is committed by criminal groups,
gangs or syndicates or when there is presence of another criminal offense such as when the
owner, driver, passenger, or occupant of the carnapped vehicle is killed or raped during the act of
carnapping and all other means to commit such crime which shows the viciousness, atrocity and
perversity of the offender.

The crime of Carnapping is derived from the crimes of Theft and Robbery and the
determining factor of the perfection of such crime is the moment the offender gains possession of
the thing, even if he has no opportunity to dispose of the same. Further, the complainant in a case
of carnapping need not establish the fact that the complainant is the absolute owner of the motor
vehicle, what is important is the taking of the motor vehicle with intent to gain by the offender.
Furthermore, there are a lot of ways to commit Carnapping as provided in the New Anti-
Carnapping Act of 2016 which are as follows:

a. Carnapping and concealment of carnapping;

b. Defacing or Tampering with Serial Numbers;
c. Dismantling of the motor vehicle parts;
d. The transferring of identity of the vehicle such as its engine number, chassis number and etc.;
e. The act of overhauling, repainting and remodeling the stolen vehicles; and
f. Unlawfully transferring the vehicle plates originally registered to the owner.

The introduction of these amendments is in line with the use of the offenders of different
tools and equipment to commit the act of carnapping as well as in concealing such crime.
Additionally, this enables the PNP as well as the respective authorities to make sure that the law
will be enforced successfully. Upon exploring the situation from multiple perspectives, we are
highly in favor of the continuous progression of the law on Carnapping as this will suit the
continuous evolution of modern technology.