Short answer. Yes. Article 260 provides that the seconds shall in all events be punished as accomplices. Their liability does not depend on whether anyone was hurt — the article fixes their participation at the accomplice level once a duel within its terms has taken place, whatever the outcome of the fight itself.
What the law says
The seconds shall in all events be punished as accomplices.
Revised Penal Code, Article 260 — Responsibility Of Duellists. Read the full provision →
The combatants are graded by what happened
Article 260 deals first with the duellists themselves, and grades them by result. A person who kills his adversary in a duel takes the penalty the article names for that. One who inflicts physical injuries only takes the penalty provided for those injuries according to their nature. And in any other case the combatants are still punished, although no physical injuries have been inflicted. So the fight is punishable in itself. The Code does not wait for harm before treating a prearranged armed encounter as a criminal act.
The seconds are treated differently — and fixed
Then comes the sentence that answers the question: the seconds shall in all events be punished as accomplices. Two things are notable. Their classification is stated flatly rather than left to the ordinary rules on participation, so there is no separate inquiry into how much each contributed. And the phrase in all events attaches their liability to the duel itself, not to the outcome. Whether the encounter ended in death, in injuries or in nothing at all, the seconds are punished as accomplices to whichever offence the combatants' conduct produced.
What counts as a duel
The article is about a formal encounter, not an ordinary fight. A duel in this sense is a prearranged combat between two persons, agreed in advance and fought on conditions settled beforehand, which is exactly why the arrangement can have seconds at all. A spontaneous brawl, however serious, is not a duel; it is dealt with under the general provisions on homicide and physical injuries. So the first question in any case under this article is whether there was an agreement to fight on fixed terms, and that is proved from what the participants said and arranged.
The point that outlives the duelling age
Duels are a historical form, but the structure of the article is not antiquarian. It shows the Code punishing the organisation of violence as well as the violence, and refusing the argument that a person who only arranged matters and stood by was a bystander. Anyone who helped set up a prearranged fight — chose the place, carried the terms, held the weapons — is within the article's contemplation rather than outside it. The evidence in such a case is the arrangement itself: the messages, the go-betweens, the agreed conditions.