Dear PAO,
My neighbor always gets on my nerves because she frequently throws her garbage in front of my gate. I reported her to the barangay and she was reprimanded by the Lupon. Yesterday, when she saw me walking outside my house, she made a threatening gesture — as if she was holding a gun and pulling the trigger, then drawing a line across her neck using her index finger. When I reported her to the police, she argued that grave threats are limited only to spoken or oral threats. Is she legally correct?
Rafjo
Dear Rafjo,
No, your neighbor is not legally correct.
Foremost, Article 282 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) provides:
“Article 282. Grave Threats. — Any person who shall threaten another with the infliction upon the person, honor or property of the latter or of his [or her] 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 [or she] 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 [or her] purpose. If the offender shall not have attained his [or her] purpose, the penalty lower by two degrees shall be imposed.
If the threat be made in writing or through a middleman, the penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period. xxx”
It is evident that the above-mentioned provision did not distinguish threats performed through verbal and non-verbal gesture. Thus, in the case of Israel vs. People of the Philippines, G. R. No. 265736, 19 November 2025, penned by Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa, the Supreme Court ruled that the RPC punishes any mode of communication of threat made with the intention of intimidating its recipient, saying:
“First, Article 282 does not distinguish between threats performed through verbal and non-verbal gestures, and neither should the Court. Ubi lex non distinguit, nec nos distinguere debemus. Article 282 punishes "[a]ny person who shall threaten another with the infliction upon the person, honor or property of the latter or of his [or her] family of any wrong amounting to a crime." The second paragraph also qualifies the threat if the same was made in writing, to wit: "If the threat be made in writing or through a middleman. ". At its core, therefore, what Article 282 punishes is the communication of a threat made with the intention of intimidating its recipient. Evidently, there is nothing in Article 282 that distinguishes between verbal and non-verbal threats. While the second paragraph qualifies the mode of performing verbal threats (i.e., those made in writing and those made orally), it is no argument for the exclusion of non-verbal gestures as "threats."
Evidently, the law was designed to penalize the entire range of human interactions through which a threat is properly and effectively conveyed. Thus, it is not legally accurate to argue that grave threats are limited to spoken or oral threats.
We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice was solely based on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.
Thank you for your continued trust and support.
