In the Philippines, the penalty for attempted arson depends on the kind of arson the accused allegedly tried to commit. It is not always one fixed prison term. If the attempted act would have been ordinary arson under Section 1 of Presidential Decree No. 1613, the penalty can be as low as arresto mayor, or imprisonment from 1 month and 1 day to 6 months. But if the attempted act would have been destructive arson under Article 320 of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty can reach prision mayor, or imprisonment from 6 years and 1 day to 12 years. The key questions are: What property was targeted? Did any part actually burn? Was the place inhabited, public, congested, or used for transport, utilities, government, business, or public assembly? And did the accused merely prepare, attempt, or already consummate the crime?

What attempted arson means under Philippine law

Under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code, a felony may be consummated, frustrated, or attempted. An attempted felony happens when the offender starts committing the crime directly by overt acts, but does not perform all acts of execution because of a cause or accident other than the offender’s own spontaneous desistance. (Supreme Court E-Library)

In simpler terms, attempted arson usually means the person has gone beyond mere planning and has already started the act of burning, but the fire or burning did not reach the point required for the completed crime.

Examples may include:

A person pours gasoline on a door and tries to ignite it, but is stopped before the flame catches.
A person lights a match near flammable material beside a house, but someone grabs the match before it reaches the material.
A person plants an ignition device, but it fails before any property is burned.

This is different from mere preparation. Buying gasoline, arguing with a neighbor, or saying “susunugin ko bahay mo” may be evidence of intent, threat, motive, or conspiracy in some situations, but those facts alone do not automatically make the crime attempted arson.

The basic penalty rule: two degrees lower

For principals in an attempted felony, Article 51 of the Revised Penal Code imposes a penalty two degrees lower than the penalty prescribed for the consummated felony. (Supreme Court E-Library)

This is why the first step is always to identify the penalty for the arson that would have been committed if the fire had succeeded. The court then lowers that penalty by two degrees, subject to the rules on graduating penalties under Article 61 and the penalty scale in the Revised Penal Code. (Supreme Court E-Library)

The Revised Penal Code also applies suppletorily to special penal laws unless the special law provides otherwise, so its rules on attempts and graduation of penalties may be used with arson offenses under Presidential Decree No. 1613 when appropriate. (Supreme Court E-Library)

Penalty for attempted arson in the Philippines

The most practical way to understand the penalty is through this table.

If the attempted act would have been…	Legal basis for consummated arson	Penalty if consummated	Likely penalty if attempted
Basic arson: burning or setting fire to another’s property, or one’s own property in a way that endangers life or property of another	Section 1, P.D. No. 1613	Prision mayor	Arresto mayor
Arson involving an inhabited house, government office, farm, warehouse, wharf, railway or bus station, airport, industrial establishment, and similar properties listed in Section 3	Section 3, P.D. No. 1613	Reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua	Generally prision correccional, after lowering by two degrees
Destructive arson involving buildings, edifices, public gathering places, public transport, public utilities, evidence-related buildings, insurance fraud burning, arsenals, shipyards, fireworks factories, and similar high-risk properties	Article 320, Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659	Reclusion perpetua to death, with death no longer imposable under R.A. No. 9346	Generally prision mayor, after lowering by two degrees

Section 1 of P.D. No. 1613 punishes a person who burns or sets fire to another’s property with prision mayor. The same penalty applies when someone sets fire to their own property under circumstances that expose another person’s life or property to danger. (Supreme Court E-Library)

Prision mayor runs from 6 years and 1 day to 12 years, while arresto mayor runs from 1 month and 1 day to 6 months. (Supreme Court E-Library) Because attempted felonies are punished two degrees lower, attempted basic arson under Section 1 may fall under arresto mayor.

For more serious arson categories, the penalty rises sharply. Section 3 of P.D. No. 1613 covers properties such as an inhabited house or dwelling, government office, industrial establishment, plantation, farm, railway or bus station, airport, wharf, or warehouse, and imposes reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua if consummated. (Supreme Court E-Library)

For destructive arson, Article 320 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659, imposes reclusion perpetua to death for burning certain high-risk properties, including buildings or edifices, public gathering places, public transport, public utility buildings, buildings burned to conceal another violation of law, arsenals, shipyards, and factories or storehouses of inflammable or explosive materials in inhabited places. (Lawphil)

The death penalty is no longer imposed in the Philippines. Republic Act No. 9346 prohibits the imposition of death and provides that, where the violated law uses Revised Penal Code penalty names, reclusion perpetua is imposed in lieu of death. (Lawphil)

Attempted, frustrated, or consummated arson: why the distinction matters

In arson cases, a common mistake is assuming the case is only “attempted” because the fire was put out quickly. That is not always correct.

The Supreme Court has held that arson may already be consummated even if the entire building was not destroyed. In People v. Gutierrez, the Court said that although a two-storey house was not completely gutted, the crime was still consummated arson because it was enough that a portion of the house was destroyed. (Lawphil)

The Court also explained that, in arson, the corpus delicti, or body of the crime, is generally shown by proof of the occurrence of the fire and that it was intentionally caused. (Lawphil)

On the other hand, older jurisprudence recognized frustrated arson where the accused had already set fire to kerosene-soaked materials placed beside a house, but no part of the building itself had yet started to burn because the fire was put out in time. In United States v. Valdes, the Court treated the act as frustrated arson because the offender had performed the acts intended to burn the house, but the intended burning was not produced for reasons independent of his will. (Lawphil)

A practical distinction looks like this:

Situation	Likely legal treatment
The person only bought gasoline and made threats	Usually preparation, threat, or possible evidence of intent; not automatically attempted arson
The person starts the direct act of burning but is stopped before completing the acts needed to cause the fire	Attempted arson
The person lights combustible material placed to burn the structure, but no part of the structure burns because others intervene	Possibly frustrated arson, depending on facts
Any part of the house, building, or target property is actually burned or charred	Often consummated arson, even if quickly extinguished

Simple arson versus destructive arson

Philippine law treats arson more seriously when the property or circumstances create a broader public danger.

The Supreme Court in People v. Macabando explained that Article 320 covers destructive arson involving structures such as buildings, hotels, vessels, aircraft, factories, government or commercial establishments, and similar properties, while P.D. No. 1613 governs simple arson. The Court emphasized that simple arson has less significant social, economic, political, and national security implications than destructive arson. (Supreme Court E-Library)

This distinction can dramatically change the penalty.

Basic arson under Section 1 of P.D. No. 1613

This is the more general form: burning or setting fire to another person’s property. It can also apply when a person burns their own property but endangers another person’s life or property. (Supreme Court E-Library)

For attempted basic arson, the penalty may be arresto mayor, because the consummated penalty is prision mayor and an attempt is punished two degrees lower.

Other cases of arson under Section 3 of P.D. No. 1613

Section 3 is more serious. It includes the burning of:

An inhabited house or dwelling
A government office
An industrial establishment, shipyard, oil well, mine shaft, platform, or tunnel
A plantation, farm, pastureland, growing crop, grain field, orchard, bamboo grove, or forest
A rice mill, sugar mill, cane mill, or mill central
A railway or bus station, airport, wharf, or warehouse

If consummated, the penalty is reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua. (Supreme Court E-Library) If attempted, the court lowers the penalty by two degrees.

Destructive arson under Article 320

Destructive arson is the gravest category. It includes burning one or more buildings or edifices, buildings where people usually gather, public transport, public utility buildings, buildings burned to conceal a crime or defraud creditors or insurers, and certain government or explosive-related facilities. (Lawphil)

If the charge is attempted destructive arson, the penalty may still be prision mayor, meaning imprisonment of 6 years and 1 day to 12 years, before the court applies the proper period, modifying circumstances, and the Indeterminate Sentence Law.

Special aggravating circumstances in arson

P.D. No. 1613 lists special aggravating circumstances that can push the penalty to its maximum period. These include:

Arson committed with intent to gain
Arson committed for the benefit of another
Arson motivated by spite or hatred toward the owner or occupant
Arson committed by a syndicate, meaning planned or carried out by three or more persons

These circumstances matter even in attempted arson because they can affect how the prosecutor frames the charge and how the court fixes the proper penalty period. (Supreme Court E-Library)

P.D. No. 1613 also punishes conspiracy to commit arson with prision mayor in its minimum period. This is important because, under Article 8 of the Revised Penal Code, conspiracy is punishable only when the law specifically provides a penalty for it. (Supreme Court E-Library)

What evidence matters in attempted arson cases

Attempted arson cases are often evidence-heavy. The issue is usually not only “Was there a fire?” but also “Who caused it?” and “Was there intent to burn?”

Common evidence includes:

BFP fire investigation report The Bureau of Fire Protection investigates the cause of fires and may file the proper complaint with the city or provincial prosecutor. (Lawphil)
Photos and videos These can show gasoline containers, burn marks, ignition devices, timing, entry points, or the accused’s actions.
Witness affidavits Neighbors, security guards, barangay officials, tenants, or responding firefighters may describe what they saw, heard, smelled, or recovered.
Recovered materials Gasoline, kerosene, lighters, matches, improvised ignition devices, wires, timers, or containers can become important physical evidence.
Motive evidence Prior threats, disputes over land, unpaid rent, insurance claims, domestic conflict, business rivalry, or revenge may help prove intent, but motive alone is not enough.
Insurance and property records P.D. No. 1613 treats certain insurance-related facts as prima facie evidence of arson, such as over-insurance, repeated fires during the policy period, or withdrawal of insured effects shortly before the fire. (Supreme Court E-Library)

Step-by-step process after an attempted arson incident

1. Report the incident immediately

Call the nearest fire station, barangay, police station, building security, or emergency hotline. Even if the fire did not spread, the scene should be documented quickly.

2. Preserve the scene

Do not throw away bottles, rags, lighters, wiring, burnt materials, or CCTV recordings. In practice, many arson cases weaken because the scene is cleaned too early.

3. Request BFP documentation

The local BFP may prepare a fire incident report, fire investigation report, or certification, depending on the facts and local procedure. These documents are often needed by the prosecutor, insurer, property owner, building administrator, or court.

4. Prepare sworn affidavits

Witnesses usually execute affidavits narrating what they personally saw, heard, smelled, or did. Affidavits should avoid exaggeration. A witness should not say “he intended to burn the house” unless the witness can explain the factual basis, such as threats, actions, or admissions.

5. File the complaint with the prosecutor

The complaint is usually filed with the Office of the City Prosecutor or Provincial Prosecutor with jurisdiction over the place where the incident happened. The BFP may also file the proper complaint when its investigation supports arson. (Lawphil)

6. Preliminary investigation

If the offense charged requires preliminary investigation, the prosecutor will usually require counter-affidavits from the respondent. The prosecutor then determines whether there is probable cause to file an Information in court.

7. Court proceedings

If probable cause is found, the prosecutor files the Information in the proper court. The accused is arraigned, bail issues are resolved if applicable, and the case proceeds to pre-trial and trial.

Documents commonly needed

Document or evidence	Why it matters
BFP fire investigation report or certification	Establishes cause, origin, and technical findings
Barangay blotter or police blotter	Shows prompt reporting and initial facts
Witness affidavits	Supports intent, identity, and overt acts
Photos and videos	Preserves the condition of the scene and suspect’s actions
CCTV footage	Often crucial for identity and timeline
Medical records, if anyone was injured	May affect related charges and damages
Property documents, lease, title, or occupancy proof	Shows ownership, possession, or that the place was inhabited
Repair estimates, receipts, and valuation documents	Supports civil damages
Insurance policy and claims documents	Relevant if insurance fraud is suspected

For Filipinos or foreigners abroad, affidavits, special powers of attorney, and similar documents intended for Philippine use are commonly signed before a Philippine Embassy or Consulate, where personal appearance is generally required for consular notarization. (losangelespcg.org) For Philippine public documents intended for use abroad, the DFA Apostille system applies; foreign documents for use in the Philippines follow the authentication or apostille rules of the issuing country and the receiving Philippine office’s requirements. (Apostille Online)

Common real-life scenarios

“He tried to burn my house, but we stopped him before anything burned.”

This may be attempted arson if there were direct overt acts, such as pouring gasoline, lighting material, or placing an ignition device. If there were only threats or preparation, prosecutors may need more evidence before charging attempted arson.

“Only the curtain, door, or wall was burned. Is that still attempted?”

It may already be consummated arson if a portion of the property or structure was burned. The Supreme Court has treated arson as consummated even when the whole house was not destroyed, as long as a portion was burned. (Lawphil)

“The person burned his own house. Can that be arson?”

Yes, if burning one’s own property exposed another person’s life or property to danger. Section 1 of P.D. No. 1613 expressly covers this situation. (Supreme Court E-Library)

“The fire happened in a crowded residential area.”

That can make the case more serious. P.D. No. 1613 includes buildings in populated or congested areas under destructive arson, and Article 320 separately punishes dangerous burnings involving buildings, public places, transport, utilities, and other high-risk properties. (Supreme Court E-Library)

“The accused is a foreigner.”

Philippine criminal law applies to crimes committed in Philippine territory, regardless of whether the accused is Filipino or foreign. A foreign accused may face arrest, bail proceedings, immigration consequences, and trial in Philippine courts.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the penalty for attempted arson in the Philippines?

The penalty depends on the type of arson attempted. Attempted basic arson under Section 1 of P.D. No. 1613 may be punished by arresto mayor, or 1 month and 1 day to 6 months. Attempted destructive arson may be punished by prision mayor, or 6 years and 1 day to 12 years, because Article 51 lowers the consummated penalty by two degrees. (Supreme Court E-Library)

Is attempted arson bailable?

Many attempted arson charges may be bailable, especially when the imposable penalty is not reclusion perpetua. However, bail depends on the exact charge, penalty, evidence, and court determination. Destructive arson and cases involving death or very serious facts require closer analysis.

Is there still a death penalty for arson in the Philippines?

No. Article 320 and older arson laws may still contain the phrase “death,” but Republic Act No. 9346 prohibits the imposition of the death penalty. Where the law uses Revised Penal Code penalties, reclusion perpetua is imposed in lieu of death. (Lawphil)

When is arson considered consummated?

Arson may be consummated once the target property or a portion of it is actually burned. It is not necessary that the entire house or building be destroyed. (Lawphil)

What if the fire did not damage the house?

If no part of the house or structure burned, the case may be attempted or frustrated arson depending on what acts were completed. If the accused merely prepared but did not begin direct acts of burning, attempted arson may be difficult to prove.

Can a threat to burn a house be charged as attempted arson?

A threat alone is usually not attempted arson. There must be direct overt acts toward burning. However, threats may support other charges, help prove motive, or support an arson complaint if followed by acts such as pouring gasoline or lighting combustible material.

Who investigates arson in the Philippines?

The Bureau of Fire Protection investigates the causes of fires and may file the proper complaint with the city or provincial prosecutor. The PNP, barangay, building security, and private complainants may also be involved depending on the incident. (Lawphil)

What is the difference between attempted arson and conspiracy to commit arson?

Attempted arson requires direct overt acts toward burning. Conspiracy to commit arson involves an agreement and decision to commit arson, and P.D. No. 1613 specifically punishes conspiracy to commit arson with prision mayor in its minimum period. (Supreme Court E-Library)

Can the complainant recover damages?

Yes, civil liability may be pursued in the criminal case or separately when allowed. Actual damages should be proven with competent evidence such as receipts, estimates, photos, valuation records, or repair documents. The Supreme Court has emphasized that actual damages require competent proof and reasonable certainty. (Supreme Court E-Library)

Key Takeaways

Attempted arson is punished two degrees lower than the penalty for the consummated arson offense.
The penalty can range from arresto mayor to prision mayor or higher-related graduated penalties, depending on the property and circumstances involved.
If any part of the property actually burned, the case may already be consummated arson, not merely attempted arson.
The most important legal distinction is whether the case involves basic arson, other serious arson under P.D. No. 1613, or destructive arson under Article 320.
The BFP fire investigation report, witness affidavits, photos, CCTV, and recovered materials are often crucial.
The death penalty is not currently imposed in the Philippines because of Republic Act No. 9346.
A person who burns their own property may still be liable for arson if the act endangers another person’s life or property.