does not relieve the prosecution from its duty to establish the lack of a license or permit to carry the firearm by clear and convincing evidence,

While the prosecution was able to establish the fact that the subject firearm was seized by the police from the possession of the petitioner, without the latter being able to present any license or permit to possess the same, such fact alone is not conclusive proof that he was not lawfully authorized to carry such firearm. In other words, such fact does not relieve the prosecution from its duty to establish the lack of a license or permit to carry the firearm by clear and convincing evidence, like a certification from the government agency concerned.²⁴

Thus, for failure of the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that petitioner was carrying a firearm without prior authority, license or permit, the latter must be exculpated from criminal liability under P.D. No. 1866, as amended.

G.R. No. 156320             February 14, 2007

RODOLFO ABENES y GACUTAN, Petitioner,
vs.
HE HON. COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.