Separate Concurring Opinion .14 G.R. No. 224469 logging of a tree is c~oinmitted within the legitimate bounds of the exercise of an IP's rights_ and within their lands or domains, the act cannot be considered a violation of Sec. 77 of P.D . 705. At any. rate, petitioners' unique relations with their lands and the State's recognition of the same through various laws and international concessions put ind.oubt petitioners' culpability under P.D. 705. The fact that petitioners were apprehended while cutting a single tree, an act which is intrinsically tied to their life in the ICC and within their ancestral domain, puts in question the definition and coverage of the prohibition. I submit that such doubts should be resolved in favor of the accused. In dubio pro reo. When moral certainty as to culpability hangs in the balance, acquittal on reasonable doubt inevitably becomes a matter of right. 49 In summation, an acknowledgment of the Mangyan's unique way of life negates, or at the very least, casts doubt on petitioners' intent to perpetrate the prohibited act. Taken with the fact that petitioners were caught cutting only one (1) dita tree at the time they were apprehended, and that it was done in obedience to the orders of their elders, it is clear that the cutting of the tree was a casual, incidental, and harmless act done within the context of their customary tradition. As the ~Court of last resort, We are called upon to look into the meaning and scope of the prohibition beyond the literal wording of the law. In view thereof, I vote to GRANT the Petition and acquit the accused on reasonable doubt. 49 footnote 157 of Samahan ng mga Progresibong Kabataan v. Quezon City, G.R. No. 225442, 08 August 2017, 815 Phil. 1067-1174 (2017). Za'ray Dechosa v. Peoiple, G.R. No. l 90749, 25 April 2012.• 686 Phil. 1095-1110;. ':I' .. ·-~-·. A V~Mdi¼.~A-~s;!''''~ Deputy Clerk of Court En Banc OCC En Banc.Supreme Court