Coup d’etat as Distinguished from Rebellion

A continuing crime is a crime whose elements are committed in different localities, such that the accused may be charged in any place where an element of the crime is committed.

In Umil v. Ramos(1), several members of the NPA were arrested by the police without a warrant. The court held that the arrests during that the arrests were lawful, for the offenders were caught in flagrante delicto — that is, committing a crime in the presence of the police officers. To begin with, they were rebels and this was coupled with the fact that they possessed unlicensed firearms and explosives when they were apprehended by the police. Rebellion is a continuing crime, for it has an ideological base which fuels the rebellion. To wit:

Subversion and rebellion are anchored on an ideological base which compels the repetition of the same acts of lawlessness and violence until the overriding objective of overthrowing organized government is attained.

But rebellion and coup d’etat are completely different crimes. True, a coup d’etat is usually undertaken through rebellious means, but their aims are completely different.