Ignorantia Legis Non Excusat

“Ignorantia Legis Non Excusat”

Ignorance of the law excuses no one from the compliance therewith. This has been a well-settled rule that traces its roots back from the Old Civil Code. It entails that nobody can invoke the defense of “ignorance” insofar as exonerating an individual from his liability is concerned. Hence, neither the laws’ complexity/simplicity nor one’s familiarity/non familiarity are enough to warrant his or her acquittal.
This strict construction of the law should be correlated with the maxim, “dura lex sed lex”. With all the problems encountered by the Philippine Judicial System, the notion that “The law maybe harsh but it is still the law” is the most appropriate response in order to justify such strict construction.

I came to know about the development of the Garcia Case on my way to the Office of the Ombudsman. I was utterly disappointed with the news that Garcia’s case involving Perjury was dismissed by the court. The justification did not make me feel any better. Honest Mistake.

I was never fond of critiquing the courts’ decision be it the inferior courts’ nor that of the higher magistrates’. But this time, I feel that something was wrong with regard to the appreciation of evidences and the justification for the said dismissal. If Honest Mistake is justifiable, then why do we have to create the principle of non-justification of “ignorance” insofar as enforcement of laws is concerned? The higher tribunal should be mindful of every step that they’re going to take. After all, they are accountable to the public. Hence, no scintilla of doubt should cloud such sensitive case.