You are on page 1of 65




1. Police Power
2. Power of Eminent Domain
3. Power of Taxation

 They are inherent powers because they belong to the very essence of government and without them no
government can exist.

Similarities, Distinctions, and Limitation


 they are inherent in the State
 they are necessary and indispensable
 they are methods by which the State interferes with private rights
 they presuppose an equivalent compensation
 they are exercised primarily by the legislature


Police Power Eminent Domain Taxation
As to regulation regulates both liberty regulates property regulates
and property rights only property rights
As to who may only the government government and only the
exercise some private government
As to the destroyed because it is -wholesome -wholesome
property taken noxious or intended for -taken for a public -taken for a
noxious purpose use or purpose public use or
As to intangible altruistic full and fair protection and
Compensation feeling that the person equivalent of the public
has contributed to the property improvements
general welfare expropriated for the taxes


(a) Bill of Rights



Police Power – is an inherent power of the State to promote the welfare of society by restraining and
regulating the use of liberty and property.

Justification of existence:

 Salus populi est suprema lex – the welfare of the people is the supreme law;
 Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas – a person must use his own property so as not to injure


(a) cannot be bargained away through the medium of a treaty or contract (Stone v Mississippi)
(b) may use taxing power as its implement (Tio vs Videogram Regulatory Board)
(c) may use eminent domain as its implement (Assoc. of Small Landowners vs Sec. of Agrarian
(d) could be given retroactive effect and may reasonably impair vested rights or contracts (police
power prevails over contract)
(e) dynamic, not static, and must move with the moving society it is supposed to regulate

Who may exercise Police Power?

(a) the Legislature (inherent)
(b) President (by delegation)
(c) administrative boards (by delegation)
(d) lawmaking bodies on all municipal levels, including barangay (by delegation)
(e) Municipal governments / LGU's (conferred by statute – general welfare clause of RA 7160)

 Not being a political subdivision but merely an executive authority it has no police power.
(MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Assoc.)

Tests (Limitations):

(a) Lawful subject – interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular
class, require the exercise of police power
(b) Lawful means – the means employed are reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of
the purpose and not unduly oppressive upon individuals

Additional limitations (when exercised by delegate) [Nachura Reviewer]:

 express grant by law (e.g. RA 7160)
 within territorial limits (for LGU's)
 must not be contrary to law (City Government of Quezon City vs Ericta)
 for municipal ordinances -

1. must not contravene the Constitution or any statute
2. must not be unfair and oppressive
3. must not be partial and discriminatory
4. must not prohibit, but may regulate, trade
5. must not be unreasonable
6. must be general in application and consistent with public policy


 In Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association, Inc. v. Mayor of Manila, police
power has been characterized as the most essential, insistent and least limitable of powers
extending as it does “to all great public needs.”

“[T}he mere fact that some individuals in the community may be deprived of their business or a
particular mode of earning a living cannot prevent the exercise of police power. .. [P]ersons
licensed to pursue occupations which may in the public need and interest be affected by the
exercise of the police power embark in these occupations subject to the disadvantages which
may result from the exercise of that power. ”

Government can take away a license and increase the cost of license fees even to prohibitive
levels, if public interest dictates so, without any constitutional violations.

Licenses for regulating non-useful occupation are incidental to the exercise of police power and
the right to exact fees is may be implied from that power to regulate. In setting the fees,
municipal corporations are given wider discretion in this class of licenses (than for licenses
issued to regular business). Courts have generally upheld these because of the desirability of
imposing restraints on individuals who engage in these unuseful enterprises.

 In Ynot v. IAC, the Court here ruled that the ban on transportation of carabao under the
assailed ordinance and their outright confiscation and disposal without court hearing is a
violation of due process hence it is an invalid exercise of police power.
The court adopted the measures laid down in the Toribio case
Protection general welfare is a function of police power which both restrains and is restrained by due
process, which requires notice and hearing
Case emphasized the need to have a lawful method to follow due process requirement
Reasons why ordinance is invalid are:
◦ No reasonable connection between means employed (absolute ban on movement of
carabeef) and purpose sought to be achieved (conservation of carabao for general
◦ Unduly oppressive since petition not given due process or opportunity to be heard in
proper court


Eminent Domain – is the use of the government of its coercive authority, upon just compensation, to
forcibly acquire the needed property in order to devote the same to public use.

Eminent domain is also known as expropriation, or condemnation.

Who may Exercise?

1. The Congress (inherent)
2. President
3. various local legislative bodies
4. certain public corporations (e.g. National Housing Authority)
5. Quasi-public corporations (e.g. PLDT)

Private property 3. the state or benefit of the of self-preservation state  arises under the laws of society or society itself  cannot require the conversion of the property taken to public use. the right to bring an action to recover debt. Public use 5.e. and  must be of public character ◦ When exercised by legislature – political question ◦ When exercised by a delegate – justiciable question ▪ determine the: (a) adequacy of compensation. and (c) public use character 2. Necessity of exercise 2. and MELFA SALIDAGA Eminent Domain Distinguished from Destruction from Necessity Eminent Domain Destruction from Necessity  public right  private right vested in every  arises from the laws of individual with which the right of society and is vested in the state or state necessity has nothing state or grantee. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. Private Property  General Rule: anything that can come under the dominion of man is subject to expropriation  Exceptions: money and chose in action (personal right not reduced into possession. Necessity of Exercise  genuine necessity. acting to do under the right and power of  comes under the right of necessity. Taking 4. (b) necessity of taking. Requisites of Eminent Domain: 1. nor is there any need for the payment of just compensation  The Regional Trial Court (RTC) has the jurisdiction over a complaint for eminent domain. Taking Requisites (Republic vs Castellvi): (a) expropriator must enter a private property . money or thing)  Private property already devoted to public use cannot be expropriated by a delegate acting under a general grant of authority (City of Manila vs Chinese Community) 3. Just compensation 1. i.

not whatever gain would accrue to the expropriating agency. (Epza v. to satisfy the Constitution. the property owner need not file a claim for just compensation with the Commission of Audit.  In City Government v. Cuenca. Reyes. Just Compensation Just compensation – is fair and full equivalent payment for the loss sustained. prescribed that at least 6% of the total area of memorial parks must be developed and set aside for the burial of paupers. including both direct or indirect benefit or advantage to the public  In Heirs of Ardona v. That includes development of tourism. payment is allowed to be made partly in bonds because it deals with a revolutionary . 5. he may go directly to the court to demand payment. The Court held that such ordinance is not an exercise of police power but the taking of private property for public use. an ordinance of Quezon City. it is not compensable Taking Under Eminent Domain vs Taking in Police Power : Police Power Eminent Domain  the prejudice suffered by the  the individual suffers more than individual property owner is his aliquot part of the damages. in Assoc. of Agrarian Reform. Hence. where there is taking in the constitutional sense. the Court held that the Constitution understand public use in a broad sense as meaning public welfare. shared in common with the i. and MELFA SALIDAGA (b) entry must be for more than a momentary period (c) entry must be under the warrant of legal authority (d) entry is for public use (e) the owner is deprived of enjoying his property  if taking is under police power. 4. Public Use Public use – is whatever may be beneficially employed for the general welfare. of Small Landowners vs Sec. It is not market value per se.e. Arbitrary action of the government shall be deemed a waiver of its immunity from suit. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. under the guise of exercising police power. Ericta. which is the measure of the indemnity. there must be compensation. if any + consequential benefits must be deducted from the total compensation provided consequential benefits does not exceed consequential damages ◦ Payment of the correct amount + Payment within a reasonable time  Form of Compensation: Money (However. Dulay)  Where only part of the property is expropriated: entitlement to consequential damages. a special injury above that rest of the community sustained by the rest of the community  In Amigable v.

 Reckoning point of market value of property: either as of the date of taking or filing of the complaint. it is equally true that there is constitutional grant given to the State to take private property upon payment of just compensation.” The prior court decision is no obstacle for the legislature to make its own assessment of the circumstances that prevailed after the decision as well as supervening events and reaching a conclusion as to the propriety of undertaking the appropriation of the De Knecht property. 2209.  Right of the landowner in case of non-payment: ◦ General Rule: landowner is not entitled to recover possession of the property. BP 340. which called for the taking of the property. “Such expropriation proceedings may be undertaken by the [State] not only by voluntary negotiation with landowners but also by taking appropriate court action or by legislation. De Knecht argued that there was already a law of the case. which should not be disturbed. which will cost government less. the same property was ordered expropriated. was enacted after the 1 st De Knecht case.  But in Republic vs. during which the owner did not enjoy any beneficial use of the property. the court ruled that the expropriation proceeding against the property of petitioner was arbitrary and cannot receive judicial approval. and MELFA SALIDAGA kind of expropriation). affect lesser homeowners.  Transfer of Title: payment of just compensation before title is transferred. Bautista. ◦ No cogent reason appears why Eminent Domain may be availed of to impose only a burden upon the owner of condemned property without loss of title or possession for public use subject to just compensation ◦ Case highlights that even services may be subjected to eminent domain .  In the case Republic v. but only to demand payment ◦ Exception: when the government failed to pay just compensation within 5 years from the finality of judgment in expropriation proceedings. Apparently. Knecht. There was another area where the expansion of EDSA can be undertaken. there is a right to recover property  In De Knecht v. PLDT. are reimbursable by the expropriator. Court responded that while it is true that there was a law of the case. etc. there must be interest by way of damages (Art. CC) ◦ Exception: when waived by not claiming the interest  Payment of Taxes : taxes paid from the time of the taking until the transfer of the title. the Court ordered the PLDT to allow the reconnection of telephone lines of the Republic. whichever comes first  Entitlement of interest: ◦ General Rule: when there is delay. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR.

76. P. Art. local legislative bodies (conferred by direct authority [Sec.”  In Epza v. Legislature / Congress (inherent) 2.D. X. and MELFA SALIDAGA  In City of Manila v. C. the effect of the invalidated law was allowed to affect transactions completed before the declaration of nullity. Chinese Community of Manila. whether by citizens or aliens.  Obligation to pay taxes is a duty Taxes vs Licenses Tax License  to raise  for regulatory purpose only revenues  justified under police power  amount of fees required is usually limited to the cost of regulation Scope  all income earned in the taxing state. The Court agreed. CA. Dulay. the government argued that the nullification should only have prospective effect. and 1533 prescribed a formula for arriving at just compensation in expropriation proceedings . 464. Nos. VI. POWER OF TAXATION Power of Taxation – is a method by which contributions are exacted from persons and property for the support of government and for all public needs. Thus under the “operative fact” doctrine. The Court held that those decrees are unconstitutional and void for they constitute “impermissible encroachment on judicial prerogatives. dispense with the need to appoint commissioners to determine just compensation. 794. Consti]) 3. and all immovable and tangible personal properties found in its territory. the Court said that “[T]he very foundation of the right to exercise eminent domain is a genuine necessity and that necessity must be of public character. President (by delegation / tariff powers [Sec. 28 (2).”  In Republic v. Art. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. Consti]) . 5. as well as tangible personal property owned by persons domiciled therein Power to Tax Includes Power to Destroy (1) when used validly as an implement of the police power in discouraging and in effect ultimately prohibiting certain things or enterprises inimical to public welfare Power to Tax Does Not Include Power to Destroy  where the tax is used solely for the purpose of raising revenues Who May Exercise 1.

to both present and future conditions (d) classification applies equally well to all those belonging to the same class  Equitable taxation – based on the capacity to pay  Equality in taxation – tax shall be strictly proportional to the relative value of the property  Progressive system of taxation – the rate increases as the tax base increases 3. Public Purpose 1. 2. Equal Protection  embodied in Sec. However. 28 (1). double taxation will not be allowed if it results in a violation of the equal protection clause. where the tax to be collected is to be based on the value of the taxable property. and MELFA SALIDAGA Limitations of Taxation: 1. Due Process of Law 2.)  Uniformity – persons or things belonging to the same class shall be taxed at the same rate ◦ Requisites (Tan vs Del Rosario): (a) standards that are used are substantial and not arbitrary (b) categorization is germane to achieve the legislative purpose (c) the law applies. all things being equal. ◦ despite the lack of specific prohibition. The Congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation. VI. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR.  Tax Exemptions may either be: . Public Purpose  whatever may be beneficially employed for the general welfare  Double Taxation / Direct Duplicate Taxation ◦ when additional taxes are laid on the same subject by the same taxing jurisdiction during the same taxing period and for the same purpose. the taxpayer is entitled to be notified of the assessment proceedings and to be heard therein on the correct valuation of the property. Equal Protection 3. 1987 Constitution (The rule of taxation shall be uniform and equitable. Due Process  Substantive : tax should not be confiscatory except when used as an implement of police power  Procedural : due process does not require previous notice and hearing before a law prescribing specific taxes on specific articles may be enacted. Art.

Significance of the Bill of Rights Government is powerful. obedience to the dictates of justice  embodiment of sporting idea on fair play  guaranty against any arbitrariness on the part of the government Protection of Person . 28 (3) : when lands. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. charitable or educational purposes – entitled to exemption ◦ statutory. Social and Economic Rights. and MELFA SALIDAGA ◦ constitutional ▪ Art. and imposing limitations on the powers of the government as a means of securing the enjoyment of those rights. directly and exclusively for religious. A. liberty. Classification of Rights 1. The Bill of Rights is a guarantee that there are certain areas of a person's life. When unlimited. Civil Rights – rights which municipal law will enforce at the instance of private individuals for the purpose of securing them the enjoyment of their means of happiness. 4. liberty. 2.  no precise definition because it might prove constricting and prevent the judiciary from adjusting it to the circumstances of particular cases  responsiveness to the supremacy of reason. Human Rights. 3. or property without due process of law. buildings and improvements are actually. and. III. it becomes tyrannical. Political Rights – granted by law to members of community in relation to their direct or indirect participation in the establishment or administration of the government. Sec. DUE PROCESS Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life. CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS Bill of Rights – set of prescriptions setting forth the fundamental civil and political rights of the individual.discretion of legislature II.  Bill of Rights are generally self-implementing. and property which governmental power may not touch. Art. Vi. nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.

it is a prohibition of arbitrary laws. Art. Property  anything that can come under the right of ownership and be the subject of contract  all things within the commerce of man  However. a life of dignity and. 2.. If created by statue. 1.. a decent standard of living. Life  It is not just a protection of the right to be alive or to the security of one's limb against physical harm. Procedural Due Process  As a substantive requirement.. liberty or property .  When the State acts to interfere with life. what is prohibited is deprivation without due process of law. liberty. and MELFA SALIDAGA Covers Natural (citizen and alien) and Artificial Persons. liberty or property  not unconstitutional. or property. The right to life is the right to a good life. 1. the presumption is that the action is valid.  Mere privileges are not property rights and are therefore revocable at will Aspects of Due Process 1. Substantive Due Process 2. As to the latter. it relates chiefly to the mode of procedure which government agencies must follow in the enforcement and application of laws.  As a procedural requirement. III)  connotes denial of right to life. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. with respect only to property because its life and liberty are derived from and subject to control of legislature Deprivation (in Sec.. It is a guarantee of procedural fairness. Substantive Due Process Substantive due process – requires intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with the rights of the person to his life. Liberty (1) freedom to do right and never wrong (Mabini) (2) right to be free from arbitrary personal restraint or servitude 3. one cannot have a vested right to a public office as this is not regarded as property. it may be abolished by the legislature at any time.

1. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. Judicial Due Process Requisites: (a) Impartial and Competent Court (b) Jurisdiction lawfully acquired over the person of t he defendant and/or property (c) Hearing  not necessarily trial-type hearing. Administrative Due Process Requisites: (a) Right to a hearing (b) Tribunal must consider the evidence presented (c) Decision must have something to support itself (d) Evidence must be Substantial . and MELFA SALIDAGA Requisites: (a) Lawful Subject (b) Lawful Means Procedural Due Process Procedural due process – is the restriction on actions of judicial and quasi-judicial agencies of government. Palanca) 2. submission of position papers is enough  right of a party to cross-examine the witness against him in a civil case is an indispensable part of due process  the filing of a motion for reconsideration cures the defect of absence of a hearing  Cases in which notice and hearing may be dispensed with without violating due process: ◦ abatement of nuisance per se ◦ preventive suspension of a civil servant facing administrative charges ◦ cancellation of passport of a person sought for the commission of a crime ◦ statutory presumptions (d) Judgment rendered upon lawful hearing (Banco Espanol Filipino v.

The statute interferes with the liberty of a person and the right of free contract between employer and employee by determining the hours of labor in the occupation of a baker without reasonable ground for doing so. It is repugnant to the Constitution in two respects: ▪ it violates due process for failure to accord persons fair notice of conduct to avoid. and can effectively interpose a defense against on his behalf. and MELFA SALIDAGA (e) Decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing. The Anti- Plunder law does not violate due process since it defines the act which it purports to punish.”  In Lochner v. Issue: Whether the statute is unconstitutional. “The First Amendment has a penumbra where privacy is penumbra where privacy is protected from governmental intrusion. or any of its judges must act on its or his own independent consideration of the facts and law of the controversy (g) Decision is rendered in such a manner that the parties to the proceeding can know the various issues involved. ▪ it leaves law enforcers unbridled discretion in carrying out its provisions and becomes arbitrary flexing of the Government muscle. The statute is unconstitutional. it was held that there was no violation of due process because the nature of the charges against the petitioner is not uncertain and void merely because general terms are used or because it employed terms that were not defined. Lochner was charged with violation of the labor laws of New York for wrongfully and unlawfully permitting an employee to work more than 60 hours in one week.  The law is vague when it lacks comprehensible standards that men “of common intelligence must necessarily guess as to its meaning and differ as to its application. and. The statute allegedly violated mandates that no employee shall contract or agree to work more than 10 hours per day. or at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected (f) Tribunal. New York. giving the accused fair warning of the charges against him. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. . such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.  In Estrada vs. Ruling: Yes. the quantum of proof required is only substantial evidence. and the reason for the decision rendered  In administrative proceedings. Sandiganbayan. body. ◦ Although the Bill of Rights does not mention ‘privacy’ the Court ruled that that the right was to be found in the "penumbras" of other constitutional protections.  A Connecticut statute making it a crime to use any drug or article to prevent conception violates the right of marital privacy which is within the penumbra of specific guarantees of the Bill of Rights.

Substantial evidence means such a reasonable evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion (5) The decision must be based on the evidence presented at the hearting or at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected (6) The tribunal or body of any of its judges must act on its own independent consideration of the law and facts of the controversy and not simply accept the views of a subordinate (7) The Board or body should. Judge Dames.  Our cases include Court of Industrial Relations (Ang Tibay vs. National Labor Relations Commission or NLRC (DBP vs. The trade of a baker is not an alarmingly unhealthy one that would warrant the state’s interference with rights to labor and contract. as means to an end. Non vs. morals and general welfare of the society. In this instance. in all controversial questions. Des Moines Community School District) also are clothed with quasi-judicial function. Doctrine: The rule must have a more direct relation. It is a determination of what the law is and what the legal rights of the parties are with respect to a matter in controversy). and MELFA SALIDAGA The general right to make a contract in relation to one’s business is a liberty protected by the 14 th amendment. Alcuaz). CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. and the end itself must be appropriate and legitimate. These are: (1) the right to a hearing. render its decision in such manner that the parties to the proceeding can know the various issues involved and the reason for the decision rendered. the 14 th amendment cannot interfere. CIR) as an administrative court which exercises judicial and quasi-judicial functions in the determination of disputes between employers and employees. The state may interfere with and regulate both property and liberty rights to prevent the individual from making certain kinds of contracts in its exercise of police power which relates to safety. the Court laid down cardinal requirements in administrative proceedings which essentially exercise a judicial or quasi-judicial function. Alcuaz vs. National Telecommunications Company (PHILCOMSAT vs. . (Judicial function is synonymous to judicial power which is the authority to settle justiciable controversies or disputes involving rights that are legally enforceable and demandable or the redress of wrongs for violations of such rights. PSBA.  In Ang Tibay vs. CA-Board of Discipline. It is a question of whether the body or institution has a judicial or quasi-judicial function that makes it bound by the due process clause. which includes the right to present one’s case and submit evidence in support thereof (2) The tribunal must consider the evidence presented (3) The decision must have something to support itself (4) The evidence must be substantial. NLRC) and school tribunals (Ateneo vs. health. Tinker vs. CIR. before an act can be held to be valid which interferes with the general right of an individual to be free in his person and in his power to contract in relation to his own labor.

the equality of all persons before the law.  The Equality Protection Clause is a specific constitutional guarantee of the Equality of the Person. SEARCH AND SEIZURE . Comelec.  In Ormoc Sugar Central v. The singling out of election officers in order to “ensure the impartiality of election officials by preventing them from developing familiarity with the people of their place of assignment. both as to rights conferred and responsibilities imposed. petitioners theorize that Sec. EQUAL PROTECTION Section 1. liberty. as it is usually put. and MELFA SALIDAGA B. 44 of RA 8189 is violative of the equal protection clause because it singles out the City and Municipal Election Officers of the COMELEC as prohibited from holding office in the same city or municipality for more than four years. The Court held that such ordinance is not valid for it would be discriminatoory against the Ormoc Sugar Central which alone comes under the ordinance. Equality in enforcement of the law – law be enforced and applied equally Requisites of Valid Classification: (a) it must be based on substantial distinctions (b) it must be germane to the purposes of the law (c) it must not be limited to existing conditions only ◦ must be enforced as long as the problem sought to be corrected exists (d) it must apply equally well to all members of the class ◦ both as to rights conferred and obligations imposed  In De Guzman v. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. Ormos Sugar Central is the only sugar central in Ormoc City. nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. III. No person shall be deprived of life. The Court held that the law is valid. Art. or property without due process of law. Ormoc City imposes a tax on Ormoc Sugar Central by name. Ormoc City. C.  embraced in the concept of due process  embodied in a separate clause to provide for a more specific guaranty against undue favoritism or hostility from the government Due Process Clause attacks arbitrariness in general Equal Protection Clause attacks unwarranted partiality or prejudice Substantive Equality – all persons or things similarly situated should be treated alike. The equality it guarantees is “legal equality or.

III – Exclusionary Rule (which embodies the Doctrine of the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree) Exclusionary Rule – evidence obtained in violation of Sec. Diokno)  available to natural and artificial persons. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. (1)The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court. III. the item to be searched was within the arrestee's custody or area of immediate control 2. Rules of Court) – for dangerous weapons or anything that may have been used or constitute in the commission of an offense Requisites: 1. Art. III.)  This provision applies as a restraint directed only against the government and its agencies tasked with enforcement of the law. III – deals with intangibles Section 3 (2). but the latter's books of accounts may be required to open for examination by the State in the exercise of police power or power of taxation The right is personal (Stonehill vs Diokno)  General Rule: only a judge may issue a warrant. searches of moving vehicles  In Aniag v. The right of the people to be secure in their persons. the search was contemporaneous with the arrest 2. houses.III. (2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding. and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable. a citizen enjoys the right against official intrusion and is master of all the surveys within the domain and privacy of his own home. Section 3. Exception: orders of arrest may be issues by administrative authorities but only for the purpose of carrying out a final finding of a violation of a law Valid Warrantless Searches [NOTE: each of these requires probable cause. Section 2. twenty meters away from the gate of the Batasan. III – deals with tangibles. searches incidental to lawful arrest (rule 126. It does not protect citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures perpetrated by private individuals. Art. shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding (Fruit of Poisonous Tree Doctrine). Comelec. Art. Art. as prescribed by law. 2. and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce. a truck was . Section 3 (1). or when public safety or order requires otherwise. Art. except stop and frisk] 1. embodies the “castle” doctrine (a man's house is his castle. papers. Art. and MELFA SALIDAGA Section 2. (Stonehill v. and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

stop and frisk (limited protective search of outer clothing for weapons)  In Terry v. hot pursuit 3. routine searches at borders and ports of entry 8. the stop-and-frisk rule is stated thus: “(W)here a police officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to conclude in the light of his experience that criminal activity may be afoot and that the person with whom he is dealing may be armed and presently dangerous. he is entitled for the protection of himself and others in the area to conduct a carefully limited search of the outer clothing of such persons in an attempt to discover weapons which might be used to assault him.”  Stop-and-frisk rule serves a two-fold interest: (1) the general interest of effective crime prevention and detection. in flagrante delicto 2. the offender escaped from the penal establishment Requisites of a valid warrant Arrest Warrant Search Warrant . evidence was inadvertently discovered by the police who has the right to be there 3. searches of businesses in the exercise of visitorial powers to enforce police regulations Valid Warrantless Arrest 1. where in the course of investigation of this behavior he identifies himself as a policeman and makes reasonable inquiries. (2) the more pressing interest of safety and self-preservation. and MELFA SALIDAGA stopped and searched. The Court held that the search was not justifiable as a warrantless arrest of a moving vehicle as there was no probable cause. there is no further search 4. and where nothing in the initial stages of the encounter serves to dispel his reasonable fear for his own or others' safety. evidence is immediately apparent 4. 3. Ohio. enforcement of customs law 5. searches of prohibited articles in plain view Requisites: 1. (Malacat) 7. prior valid intrusion to a place 2. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. The motorists had not given any evidence of suspicious behaviour nor had the searching officers received any confidential information about the car. consented searches 6.

. complainant and his the complainants and his witnesses (Soliven vs witnesses. Procedure: and attach to the record their sworn statements and affidavits. After Not merely routinary but must Not merely routinary but must examination be probing and exhaustive be probing and exhaustive under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce 4. it is not searching questions and cause by the necessary that he should answers..... judge personally examine the in writing and under oath. Personal The judge personally The judge must personally determination determines the existence of examine in the form of of probable probable cause.. disregard it and require the submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses Preliminary inquiry (task of the judge) – determination of probable cause for the issuance of warrant of arrest Preliminary investigation proper (task of the prosecutor) – ascertainment whether the offender should be held for trial or be released 3. Makasiar) on facts personally known to them.Particularity General Rule: it must General Rule: when the of description contain the name/s of the description therein is as specific persons to be arrested as the circumstances will ordinarily allow. . (1) personally evaluate the (Silva vs Presiding Judge) fiscal's report. Probable Such facts and Such facts and circumstances Cause circumstances which would which would lead a reasonably lead a reasonably prudent prudent man to believe that an must refer to man to believe that an offense has been committed one (1) specific offense has been committed and the objects sought in the offense and the person sought to be connection of the offense are in arrested had committed it the place sought to be searched 2.. or (2) if [1] is insufficient.. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA 1.

” The Court held that such allegation is not sufficient to establish probable cause. vouchers.. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. The judge must look at the report. The search warrant particularly states:”all printing equipment. It is a mere conclusion of law unsupported by particulars. Routine inspection and few questions do not constitute unreasonable searches.. The Court also held that the search warrant description has the “sweeping tenor” making the document a general warrant. the transcripts of stenographic notes (if any).” . typewriters. The Court held that the affidavit does not establish probable cause. the Court held that the judge in issuing a warrant of arrest cannot rely solely on the certification or recommendation of a prosecutor that probable cause exists. Jr. Lising.” It is not required that the property to be searched should be owned by the person against whom the search warrant is directed. the Court held that not all searches and seizures are prohibited. it is justifiable as a warrantless search of a moving vehicle.. In the latter situation. the Court clarified the meaning of “personally” in the search and seizure clause.and other documents showing all business transactions. we found that the said publication in fact foments distrust and hatred against the government of the Philippines. the Affidavit of Col. It is sufficient that the property is under the control or possession of the person sought to be searched. Diokno. If the inspection becomes more thorough to the extent of becoming a search. is “in possession of printing equipment and other paraphernalia. and MELFA SALIDAGA Exception: if there is some descriptio personae which Exception: when no other more will enable the officer to accurate and detailed identify the accused description could have been given... financial records. Checkpoints are not illegal per se... what is required is personal determination and not personal examination.  In Soliven v. of the WE Forum newspaper and any other documents.. and is nothing but conclusions of law... Felix. a search warrant for the newspaper WE Forum is issued on the basis of a broad statement of the military that Burgos. this can be done when there is deemed to be probable cause. It stated that in arriving at a conclusion as to the existence of existence of probable cause. Those which are reasonable are not forbidden. A reasonable search is not to be determined by any fixed formula but is to be resolved according to the facts of the case. Gen. Judge Makasiar. Probable Cause – facts and circumstances antecedent to the issuance of a warrant that are in themselves sufficient to induce a cautious man to rely upon them. used as means of committing the offense of subversion. the Court held that the following description is insufficient for it amounts to a general warrant authorizing the officer to pick up anything he pleases: “ Book of accounts...  In Burgos v.  In Valmonte v. Castillo stated that in several issues of the Philippine Times:”.. and all other supporting documents behind the Prosecutor's certification... Chief of Staff. De Villa.  In Lim v. the affidavits.  In Stonehill v.  In Corro v.

and that he has the right to the presence of an attorney. D. solitary. No torture. Purpose of the Doctrine In Miranda v Arizona. 4. 1. MIRANDA RIGHTS Section 12. 3. that any statement he gives may be used as evidence against him. (3) he has the right to talk to an attorney before being questioned and to have his counsel present . Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice. threat. Requisites of the Miranda Doctrine (1) any person under custodial investigation has the right to remain silent. Secret detention places. (2) anything he says can and will be used against him in a court of law. either retained or appointed. force. provided the waiver is made voluntarily. intimidation. III. the Court held that “the prosecution may not use statements.  called the “Miranda Doctrine” (Miranda vs Arizona) Miranda Doctrine – prior to any questioning during custodial investigation. to provide practical safeguards for the practical reinforcement for the right against compulsory self-incrimination. stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self- incrimination. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel. 2. The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this Section as well as compensation to the rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices. Thus. the person must be warned that he has a right to remain silent. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. or other similar forms of detention are prohibited. knowingly. and their families. and MELFA SALIDAGA The Court further held that the objection to an unlawful search or seizure and to evidence obtained thereby is purely personal and cannot be availed by third parties. Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall be inadmissible in evidence against him. violence. The defendant may waive effectuation of these rights. Art. whether exculpatory or inculpatory. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel. incommunicado. and intelligently. the US Supreme Court established rules to protect a criminal defendant's privilege against self-incrimination from the pressures arising during custodial investigation by the police. or any other means which vitiate the free will shall be used against him. he must be provided with one.

 Shall include the practice of issuing an invitation to a person who is investigated in connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed. (People v. one will be provided before any questioning if he so desires. and (4) if he cannot afford an attorney. anything he says can and will be used against him (c) To remain silent (d) To have competent and independent counsel preferably of own choice (e) To be provided with counsel if the person cannot afford the services of one (f) No torture. and MELFA SALIDAGA when being questioned. Extrajudicial confession is Admissible when: (a) Voluntary (b) With assistance of counsel (c) In writing. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. Agustin) (b) To be reminded that if he waives his right to remain silent. without prejudice to the liability of the inviting officer for any violation of law. threat. and (d) Express Rights Under Custodial Investigation (a) To be informed of right to remain silent and to counsel  Carries the correlative obligation on the part of the investigator to explain and contemplates effective communication which results in the subject understanding what is conveyed. solitary. force. violence. Custodial investigation defined  Any questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way. intimidation or any other means which vitiate the free will shall be used against him (g) Secret detention places. or other similar forms of detention are prohibited (h) Confessions or admissions obtained in violation of these rights are inadmissible as evidence (exclusionary rule) Rights That May Be Waived . and direction is then aimed upon a particular suspect who has been taken into custody and to whom the police would then direct interrogatory questions which tend to elicit incriminating statements.  Begins as soon as the investigation is no longer a general inquiry unto an unsolved crime. incommunicado.

The Constitution says.  In Gutang v. the State must bring the individual to a place where there is one. be bailable by sufficient sureties. shall. E. “These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel. the Court held that urine sample is admissible. an accused may be validly compelled to be photographed or measured. He must be provided with counsel de oficio. to guaranty his appearance before any court as may be required . People. In fact. without running afould of the proscription against testimonial compulsion. before conviction. III. or his garments or shoes removed or replaced. as part of the res gestae. Art.  RA 7309: victims of unjust imprisonment may file their claims with the Board of Claims under DOJ  Res Gestae: The declaration of the accused acknowledging guilt made to the police desk officer after the crime was committed may be given in evidence against him by the police officer to whom the admission was made. or to move his body to enablke the foregoing things to be done. All persons.  Termination of rights under custodial investigation: When Charges are filed against the accused (in such case.” In localities where there are no lawyers. Accused cannot repeatedly ask for postponement. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. Bail – is security given for the release of a person in custody of law. rights under custodial investigation may be waived. The right to bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. but not an inclusion of his body in evidence. and MELFA SALIDAGA [waiver must be in writing and in the presence of counsel] (a) Right to remain silent (b) Right to Counsel Rights That Cannot Be Waived (a) Right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to counsel (b) Right to counsel when making the waiver of the right to remain silent or to counsel  Right to counsel de parte is not unlimited.  In People v. or be released on recognizance as may be provided by law. Excessive bail shall not be required. when it may be material. Galit. Sections 14 and 17 come into play). except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong. furnished by him or a bondsman. “What the Constitution prohibits is the use of physical or moral compulsion to extort communication from the accused. RIGHT TO BAIL Section 13.

Rules of Court) Who Are Entitled? (a) Persons charged with offenses punishable by Reclusion Perpetua or Death.  In Paderanga v. CA. all persons actually detained. Other Rights in Relation to Bail  The right to bail shall NOT be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. before conviction. Bail is only discretionary pending appeal. One is under the custody of the law either when he has been arrested or has surrendered himself to the jurisdiction of the court.  Excessive bail shall not be required. and MELFA SALIDAGA Kinds of Bail (a) Cash bond (b) Security bond Who May Invoke? A person under detention even if no formal charges have yet been filed (Rule 114. as in the case where through counsel petitioner for bail who was confined in a hospital communicated his submission to the jurisdiction of the court. shall. when evidence of guilt is strong (b) Persons convicted by the trial court. be bailable bu sufficient sureties. except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua or death when evidence of guilt is strong. Factors in Fixing Amount of Bail (a) Ability to post bail (b) Nature of the offense (c) Penalty imposed by law (d) Character and reputation of the accused (e) Health of the accused (f) Strength of the evidence (g) Probability of appearing at the trial (h) Forfeiture of previous bail bonds . (c) Persons who are members of the AFP facing a court martial.

to meet the witnesses face to face. (b) The constitutional right is available only in criminal cases. Puruganan. The Rights of the Accused Include 1. since bail is available only in criminal proceedings. However. and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel. soldier under court martial does not enjoy the right to bail. the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved. Presumption of innocence. 4. and MELFA SALIDAGA (i) Whether accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested (j) If accused is under bond in other cases Implicit Limitations on the Right to Bail (a) The person claiming the right must be in actual detention or custody of the law. He should apply for a bail in the court where he will be tried. RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED Section 14.  In US v. Hence. and public trial. Right to be heard by himself or counsel. and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf. trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused: Provided. 1. III. to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. 5.. Salas nevertheless agreed “to remain in legal custody during the pendency of the trial of his criminal case. a bailable offense. 2. Art. impartial. It is because of the disciplinary structure of the military and because soldiers are allowed the fiduciary right to bear arms and can therefore cause great havoc. because bu his act he has waived his right. to have a speedy. that he has been duly notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable. 6. 3. Right to speedy. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law. after arraignment. a respondent in an extradition proceeding is not entitled to a bail. e. 2. De Villa. Note: (a) Right to bail is not available in the military. the Court held that extradition is not a criminal proceeding.  In Comendador v. Right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. charged with rebellion. (b) Apart from bail. F.” The Court held that he does not have the right to bail. not. in deportation and extradition proceedings.g.. In all criminal prosecutions. Criminal due process. Donato. a person may attain provisional liberty through recognizance. Nor can appeal be made to the equal protection clause ebcause equal protection applies only to those who are equally situated. impartial and public trial.  In People v. Right to meet the witnesses face to face. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. .

Comelec. 2. section 4 of BP Blg.g unexplained flight may lead to an inference of guilt. Criminal Due Process Criminal process includes a) Investigation prior to the filing of charges b) Preliminary examination and investigation after charges are filed c) Period of trial Requirements of Criminal Due Process 1.”)  The constitutional presumption will not apply as long as there is some rational connection between the fact proved and the ultimate fact presumed. Presumption of Innocence  Burden of proof to establish the guilt of the accused is with the prosecution. Right to compulsory process to secure attendance of witnesses and production of evidence. Proper observance of all the rights accorded the accused under the Constitution and the applicable statutes (example of statutory right of the accused: right to Preliminary investigation)  Mistrial may be declared if shown that proceedings were held under circumstances as would prevent the accused from freely making his defense or the judge from freely arriving at his decision. for the purposes of disqualification in an election. not on the weakness of the defense  The presumption may be overcome by contrary presumption based on the experience of human conduct. and the inference of one fact from proof of another shall not be so unreasonable as to be a purely arbitrary mandate.  In Dumlao v.  There is violation of due process when law not published and a person is impleaded for violation of such law. and MELFA SALIDAGA 7. but the righteous are as bold as a lion. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. 52 says that” the filing of charges for the commission of such crimes before civil court or . (e.  There is violation of due process when appeal is permitted by law but there is denial thereof. – Cooley  No inference of guilt may be drawn against an accused for his failure to make a statement of any sort.  Conviction depends on the strength of prosecution. Impartial and competent court in accordance with procedure prescribed by law. trial in absentia 1. and 8. 2. as “the wicked flee when no man pursueth.

▪ This is not subject to waiver. the judge must: (a) Inform the accused that he has a right to a counsel before arraignment.” The Court held that this provision violates the guarantee of presumption of innocence. a counsel de oficio must be appointed. the proximity of elections and consequent risk of not having time to rebut the prima facie evidence already in effect make him suffer as though guilty even before trial. Right to be Heard by Himself and Counsel  Indispensable in any criminal prosecution where the stakes are the liberty or even the life of the accused  Assistance of counsel begins from the time a person is taken into custody and placed under investigation for the commission of a crime. 4. the court must give him a reasonable time to get one.  The description and not the designation of the offense is controlling (The real nature of the crime charged is determined from the recital of facts in the information. but cannot afford one. Equipoise Rule – evidence of both sides are equally balanced. (b) Ask the accused if he desires the aid of counsel. (d) If the accused desires to obtain his own counsel. (3) To inform the court of the facts alleged.) . CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR.  Right to counsel means the right to effective representation. It is not determined based on the caption or preamble thereof nor from the specification of the provision of law allegedly violated. 3. Nature and Cause of Accusation Purpose for the Right to be informed of the Nature and Cause of Accusation (1) To furnish the accused with a description of the charge against him as will enable him to make his defenses. (c) If the accused desires counsel. and MELFA SALIDAGA military tribunal after preliminary investigation shall be prima facie evidence of such fact (disqualification).  If the accused appears at arraignment without counsel. (2) To avail himself of his conviction or acquittal against a further prosecution for the same cause. Although filing of charges is only prima facie evidence and may be rebutted. in which case the constitutional presumption of innocence should tilt the scales in favor of the accused.

either with the consent of the accused or if failed to object thereto.  Effect of dismissal based on violation of this right: it amounts to an acquittal and can be used as basis to claim double jeopardy. if the evidence to be adduced is “offensive to decency or public morals”. shall be avoided.  The right to be present covers the period from arraignment to promulgation of sentence. the public may be excluded.  The right of the accused to a public trial is not violated if the hearings are conducted on Saturdays. where the statute itself is couched in such indefinite language that it is not possible for men of ordinary intelligence to determine therefrom what acts or omissions are punished and hence. the Court held that the Void for Vagueness Doctrine merely requires a reasonable degree of certainty and not absolute precision or mathematical exactitude. However.  In Estrada vs Sandiganbayan. This would be the effect even if the dismissal was made with the consent of the accused Remedy if the Right is Violated (1) He can move for the dismissal of the case. the accused cannot be convicted thereof even if the prosecution is able to present evidence during the trial with respect to such elements. The Trial Factors in Determining Whether There Is Violation (a) Time expired from the filing of the information (b) Length of delay involved (c) Reasons for the delay (d) Assertion or non-assertion of the right by the accused (e) Prejudice caused to the defendant.  Public trial: The attendance at the trial is open to all irrespective of their relationship to the accused. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. 5. Void for Vagueness Rule – accused is denied the right to be informed of the charge against him and to due process as well. (2) If he is detained. he can file a petition for the issuance of writ of habeas corpus. . capricious and oppressive delays 2. Speedy trial - 1. It is an element of due process. To relieve the accused from needless anxieties before sentence is pronounced upon him Impartial trial – the accused is entitled to the “cold neutrality of an impartial judge”. Free from vexatious. and MELFA SALIDAGA  If the information fails to allege the material elements of the offense.

 The right to confrontation may be waived. Compulsory Process  The accused is entitled to the issuance of subpoena ad testificandum and subpoena duces tecum for the purpose of compelling the attendance of witness and the production of evidence . the court can still compel the attendance of the accused if necessary for identification purposes. ▪ Exception: If the accused. his direct testimony cannot be stricken off the record. the witness is to be understood as referring to him.  Trial in Absentia is mandatory upon the court whenever the accused has been arraigned. has stipulated that he is indeed the person charged with the offense and named in the information. and MELFA SALIDAGA  General Rule: the accused may waive the right to be present at the trial by not showing up. 7. However. the absence of his counsel during such promulgation does not affect its validity  The trial in absentia does not abrogate the provisions of the Rules of Court regarding forfeiture of bail bond if the accused fails to appear at his trial. provided the material points of his direct testimony had been covered on cross. and that any time a witness refers to a name by which he is known. after arraignment.  A court has the power to prohibit a person admitted to bail from leaving the Philippines as this is a necessary consequence of the nature and function of a bail bond 6.  If a prosecution witness dies before his cross-examination can be completed.  There is also Promulgation in Absentia  While the accused is entitled to be present during promulgation of judgment. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. The Right to Meet the Witnesses Face to Face Purposes of the Right to Meet the Witnesses Face to Face (1) To afford the accused an opportunity to cross-examine the witness (2) To allow the judge the opportunity to observe the deportment of the witness Principal Exceptions to this Right (1) The admissibility of “dying declarations” (2) Trial in absentia under Section 14(2)  With respect to child testimony  Testimony of witness who was not cross-examined is not admissible as evidence for being hearsay.

The President may suspend the privilege: (1) in cases of invasion or rebellion (2) when public safety requires it. III. and (4) His failure to appear is unjustifiable. Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus – the right to have an immediate determination of the legality of the deprivation of physical liberty. when the public safety requires it. HABEAS CORPUS Section 15.  There are exceptional circumstances when the defendant may ask for conditional examination. and MELFA SALIDAGA that he may need for his defense.  Habeas corpus lies only where the restraint of a person's liberty has been judicially adjudged to be illegal or unlawful (In re: Sumulong)  The writ is a prerogative writ employed to test the validity of detention  To secure the detainee’s release  The action shall take precedence in the calendar of the court and must be acted upon immediately When available (enumeration not exclusive)  restoration of liberty of an individual subjected to physical restraint  may be availed of where. G. (2) Accused has already been arraigned. Writ of Habeas Corpus – is a written order issued by a court. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. Trial in Absentia Trial in Absentia May Only Be Allowed If the Following Requisites Are Met: (1) the accused has been validly arraigned. (3) Accused has been duly notified of the trial. directed to a person detaining another. as a consequence of a judicial proceeding: . 8. Art.  Failure to obey – punishable as contempt of court. provided the expected testimony is material of any witness under circumstances that would make him unavailable from attending the trial. commanding him to produce the body of the prisoner at a designated time and place with the day and cause of his caption and detention. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in cases of invasion or rebellion.

(Gumabon vs Director of Prisons)  Unlawful denial of bail When not available (enumeration not exclusive)  the person alleged to be restrained is in the custody of an officer under a process issued by the court which has jurisdiction to do so  desaparecidos (disappeared persons) – persons could not be found.  May be extended to cases by which rightful custody of any person is withheld from the person entitled thereto  When moral restraint is exerted (Caunca vs Salazar)  Right was accorded a person was sentenced to a longer penalty than was subsequently meted out to another person convicted of the same offense. the President shall submit a report in person or in writing to the Congress. disobedience thereof constitutes contempt Who may suspend the privilege The President Grounds for Suspension of the privilege 1. if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it. The Congress. by a vote of at least a majority of all its Members in regular or special session. In case of invasion or rebellion. he may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence. convene in accordance with its rules without need of a call. invasion or rebellion. extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to be determined by the Congress. Upon the initiative of the President. shall. when the public safety requires it. and MELFA SALIDAGA 1. within twenty-four hours following such proclamation or suspension. he may. which revocation shall not be set aside by the President. remedy is to refer the matter to Commission on Human Rights Procedure Need to comply with writ. in the same manner. . there has been deprivation of a constitutional right resulting in the restraint of the person 2. for a period not exceeding sixty days. or 3. an excessive penalty has been imposed. the Congress may. voting jointly. The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary. VII. since such sentence is void as to the excess. when public safety requires it Section 18. if not in session. the court has no jurisdiction to impose the sentence. suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law. Within forty-eight hours from the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. invasion or rebellion 2. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. The Congress. Art. may revoke such proclamation or suspension.

Lansang doctrine (Lansang vs Garcia): SC has the power to inquire into the factual basis of the suspension of the privilege of the writ. The writ shall cover extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats thereof. Any concerned citizen. act or omission was committed or any of its elements occurred. Who May File. namely: the spouse. or . The filing of a petition by the aggrieved party suspends the right of all other authorized parties to file similar petitions. 2.M. The suspension of the privilege of the writ shall apply only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly connected with invasion. nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies. H. Any member of the immediate family. descendant or collateral relative of the aggrieved party within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity. the filing of the petition by an authorized party on behalf of the aggrieved party suspends the right of all others. 07-9-12-SC (25 September 2007) THE RULE ON THE WRIT OF AMPARO SECTION 1. in default of those mentioned in the preceding paragraph. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. in an appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen. The petition may be filed on any day and at any time with the Regional Trial Court of the place where the threat. 18 of the Constitution. otherwise he shall be released. the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ or the extension thereof. Where to File. WRIT OF AMPARO A. 3. children and parents of the aggrieved party. 2. liberty and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee. association or institution. or of a private individual or entity. and must promulgate its decision thereon within thirty days from its filing. or 3. Any ascendant. SEC. Sec. Petition. observing the order established herein. The petition for a writ of amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right to life. During the suspension of the privilege of the writ. if there is no known member of the immediate family or relative of the aggrieved party. No. and MELFA SALIDAGA The Supreme Court may review. It is written in Article VII. The petition may be filed by the aggrieved party or by any qualified person or entity in the following order: 1. SEC. any person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within three days. organization. nor authorize the conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to function. A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution. Likewise. nor automatically suspend the privilege of the writ.

liberty and security of the aggrieved party violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of the respondent. No Docket Fees. 3. When issued by a Regional Trial Court or any judge thereof. or a deputized person who refuses to serve the same. or. The actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to determine the fate or whereabouts of the aggrieved party and the identity of the person responsible for the threat. act or omission. Contents of Petition. 4. SEC. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. it may be returnable before such Court or any justice thereof. When issued by the Supreme Court or any of its justices. The writ shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines. and MELFA SALIDAGA with the Sandiganbayan. the court. justice or judge for contempt without prejudice to other disciplinary actions. or in case of urgent necessity. Issuance of the Writ. A clerk of court who refuses to issue the writ after its allowance. The clerk of court shall issue the writ under the seal of the court. Penalty for Refusing to Issue or Serve the Writ. 7. the Court of Appeals. 5. 2. shall be punished by the court. The petition may include a general prayer for other just and equitable reliefs. How the Writ is Served. The writ shall be served upon the respondent by a judicial officer or by a person deputized by the court. SEC. specifying the names. The investigation conducted. justice or judge shall docket the petition and act upon it immediately. if the name is unknown or uncertain. 6. act or omission was committed or any of its elements occurred. 8. act or omission was committed or any of its elements occurred. the justice or the judge may issue the writ under his or her own hand. it may be returnable before such court or any justice thereof. together with any report. or to any Regional Trial Court of the place where the threat. act or omission. The personal circumstances of the petitioner. The court. 5. the writ shall be returnable before such court or judge. and 6. and how such threat or violation is committed with the attendant circumstances detailed in supporting affidavits. SEC. or any justice of such courts. The relief prayed for. and may deputize any officer or person to serve it. The right to life. as well as the manner and conduct of the investigation. 4. The writ shall also set the date and time for summary hearing of the petition which shall not be later than seven (7) days from the date of its issuance. personal circumstances. justice or judge who shall retain a copy on which to make a return . justice or judge shall immediately order the issuance of the writ if on its face it ought to issue. the respondent may be described by an assumed appellation. or to any Regional Trial Court of the place where the threat. if any. The petition shall be signed and verified and shall allege the following: 1. The petitioner shall be exempted from the payment of the docket and other lawful fees when filing the petition. When issued by the Sandiganbayan or the Court of Appeals or any of their justices. The name and personal circumstances of the respondent responsible for the threat. or before the Sandiganbayan or the Court of Appeals or any of their justices. and addresses of the investigating authority or individuals. SEC. Upon the filing of the petition. the Supreme Court. SEC.

SEC. its resolution and the prosecution of the case. The steps or actions taken by the respondent to determine the fate or whereabouts of the aggrieved party and the person or persons responsible for the threat. 9. to identify witnesses and obtain statements from them concerning the death or disappearance. 11. iii. 10. and MELFA SALIDAGA of service. The return shall also state other matters relevant to the investigation. among other things. act or omission. Motion for a bill of particulars. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. 4. ii. 6. through any act or omission. 9. 2. the return shall further state the actions that have been or will still be taken: i. the rules on substituted service shall apply. All relevant information in the possession of the respondent pertaining to the threat. location and time of death or disappearance as well as any pattern or practice that may have brought about the death or disappearance. the respondent shall file a verified written return together with supporting affidavits which shall. they shall be deemed waived. Contents. 11. Counterclaim or cross-claim. affidavit. In case the writ cannot be served personally on the respondent. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions. If the respondent is a public official or employee. Motion for extension of time to file return. . Motion to dismiss. Petition for certiorari. 7. and 4. liberty and security of the aggrieved party. iv. Intervention. to verify the identity of the aggrieved party. contain the following: 1. act or omission against the aggrieved party. 8. Defenses not Pleaded Deemed Waived. to identify and apprehend the person or persons involved in the death or disappearance. Return. Motion for reconsideration of interlocutory orders or interim relief orders. and 12. and vi. position paper and other pleadings. to bring the suspected offenders before a competent court. 5. Memorandum. Within seventy-two (72) hours after service of the writ. 10. 3. Motion to declare respondent in default. to determine the cause. 3. Reply. SEC. Third-party complaint. All defenses shall be raised in the return. A general denial of the allegations in the petition shall not be allowed. 2. manner. v. opposition. The lawful defenses to show that the respondent did not violate or threaten with violation the right to life. otherwise. The following pleadings and motions are prohibited: 1. SEC. to recover and preserve evidence related to the death or disappearance of the person identified in the petition which may aid in the prosecution of the person or persons responsible. Dilatory motion for postponement. mandamus or prohibition against any interlocutory order.

The court. association or institution referred to in Section 3(c) of this Rule. The court. and MELFA SALIDAGA SEC. time. justice or judge. to permit entry for the purpose of inspecting. If the motion is opposed on the ground of national security or of the privileged nature of the information. upon motion or motu proprio. place and manner of making the inspection and may prescribe other conditions to protect the constitutional rights of all parties. which constitute or contain evidence relevant to the petition or the return. The hearing shall be from day to day until completed and given the same priority as petitions for habeas corpus. surveying. SEC. The hearing on the petition shall be summary. the court. justice or judge shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte. the court. letters. unless extended for justifiable reasons. Upon filing of the petition or at anytime before final judgment. justice or judge may call for a preliminary conference to simplify the issues and determine the possibility of obtaining stipulations and admissions from the parties. Summary Hearing. books. may order any person in possession. (c) Production Order. objects or tangible things. However. the court. The order shall expire five (5) days after the date of its issuance. custody or control of any designated documents. The court. may order any person in possession or control of a designated land or other property. Interim Reliefs. may order that the petitioner or the aggrieved party and any member of the immediate family be protected in a government agency or by an accredited person or private institution capable of keeping and securing their safety. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. accounts. in accordance with guidelines which it shall issue. The movant must show that the inspection order is necessary to establish the right of the aggrieved party alleged to be threatened or violated. The inspection order shall specify the person or persons authorized to make the inspection and the date. The accredited persons and private institutions shall comply with the rules and conditions that may be imposed by the court. Effect of Failure to File Return. the court. upon verified motion and after due hearing. If the petitioner is an organization. In case the respondent fails to file a return. 14. The motion shall state in detail the place or places to be inspected. 12. It shall be supported by affidavits or testimonies of witnesses having personal knowledge of the enforced disappearance or whereabouts of the aggrieved party. to produce and permit their inspection. The Supreme Court shall accredit the persons and private institutions that shall extend temporary protection to the petitioner or the aggrieved party and any member of the immediate family. justice or judge. upon verified motion and after due hearing. justice or judge. or photographing the property or any relevant object or operation thereon. SEC. the protection may be extended to the officers involved. copying or photographing by or on behalf of the movant. justice or judge may grant any of the following reliefs: (a) Temporary Protection Order. measuring. 13. or objects in digitized or electronic form. justice or judge may conduct a hearing in chambers to determine the merit of the opposition. papers. (b) Inspection Order. . justice or judge. photographs.

or to accredited persons or private institutions capable of keeping and securing their safety. Security and Benefit Program. and MELFA SALIDAGA The motion may be opposed on the ground of national security or of the privileged nature of the information. 16. justice or judge. justice or judge shall prescribe other conditions to protect the constitutional rights of all the parties. SEC. The appeal shall be given the same priority as in habeas corpus cases. the court. rules and regulations was observed in the performance of duty. if upon its determination it cannot proceed for a valid cause such as the failure of petitioner or witnesses to appear due to threats on their lives. pursuant to Republic Act No. but shall archive it. If the allegations in the petition are proven by substantial evidence. Archiving and Revival of Cases. upon motion or motu proprio. 15. justice or judge may conduct a hearing in chambers to determine the merit of the opposition. The contemnor may be imprisoned or imposed a fine. or any person who otherwise disobeys or resists a lawful process or order of the court to be punished for contempt. The court. The respondent public official or employee cannot invoke the presumption that official duty has been regularly performed to evade responsibility or liability. The court shall render judgment within ten (10) days from the time the petition is submitted for decision. The court. 17. otherwise. may refer the witnesses to the Department of Justice for admission to the Witness Protection. A motion for inspection order under this section shall be supported by affidavits or testimonies of witnesses having personal knowledge of the defenses of the respondent. The court. Contempt. SEC. the privilege shall be denied. (d) Witness Protection Order. 18. SEC. 19. Appeal. justice or judge may order the respondent who refuses to make a return. Upon verified motion of the respondent and after due hearing. . SEC. in which case the court. The period of appeal shall be five (5) working days from the date of notice of the adverse judgment. rules and regulations was observed in the performance of duty. The appeal may raise questions of fact or law or both. Burden of Proof and Standard of Diligence Required. justice or judge may issue an inspection order or production order under paragraphs (b) and (c) of the preceding section. 20. SEC. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. justice or judge may also refer the witnesses to other government agencies. or who makes a false return. The parties shall establish their claims by substantial evidence. Any party may appeal from the final judgment or order to the Supreme Court under Rule 45. Judgment. Availability of Interim Reliefs to Respondent. SEC. the court shall grant the privilege of the writ and such reliefs as may be proper and appropriate. The respondent who is a public official or employee must prove that extraordinary diligence as required by applicable laws. 6981. The court shall not dismiss the petition. The court. The respondent who is a private individual or entity must prove that ordinary diligence as required by applicable laws.

SEC. quasi-judicial. 26. This Rule shall not diminish. Applicability to Pending Cases. The procedure under this Rule shall govern the disposition of the reliefs available under the writ of amparo. and MELFA SALIDAGA A periodic review of the archived cases shall be made by the amparo court that shall. SPEEDY DISPOSATION OF CASES Section 16. SEC. SEC. increase or modify substantive rights recognized and protected by the Constitution. After consolidation. The reliefs under the writ shall be available by motion in the criminal case. Consolidation. When a criminal action has been commenced. Substantive Rights. When a criminal action is filed subsequent to the filing of a petition for the writ. 27. This Rule shall not preclude the filing of separate criminal. the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal action. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. SEC. quasi-judicial or admin. SEC. SEC. The Rules of Court shall apply suppletorily insofar as it is not inconsistent with this Rule. no separate petition for the writ shall be filed. Art. 23. 24. This Rule shall govern cases involving extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats thereof pending in the trial and appellate courts. III. civil or administrative actions. 21. 2007. Speedy Disposition of Cases Speedy trial Speedy disposition of cases Refers to trial phase only Refers to disposition of cases (All phases) Criminal cases only Judicial. I. This Rule shall take effect on October 24. or administrative bodies. Suppletory Application of the Rules of Court. Institution of Separate Actions. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial. following its publication in three (3) newspapers of general circulation. The clerks of court shall submit to the Office of the Court Administrator a consolidated list of archived cases under this Rule not later than the first week of January of every year. 25. Speedy Trial vs. Effectivity. The petition shall be dismissed with prejudice upon failure to prosecute the case after the lapse of two (2) years from notice to the petitioner of the order archiving the case. SEC. Proceedings . 22. Effect of Filing of a Criminal Action. When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to a petition for a writ of amparo. motu proprio or upon motion by any party. the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal action. order their revival when ready for further proceedings. the procedure under this Rule shall continue to apply to the disposition of the reliefs in the petition.

Accused – at all times. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. from extracting from the suspect testimony that may convict him. Based on: 1. Practical reasons – a person subjected to such compulsion is likely to perjure himself for his own protection Applicable to:  Criminal prosecutions. VIII)  SC: 24 months from submission  All lower collegiate courts: 12 months unless reduced by SC  All other lower courts: 3 months Periods for decision for Constitutional Commissions (Sec 7. 2. 15. May be Claimed by: 1. RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION Section 17. Prejudice caused by delay Remedy in case there has been unreasonable delay in resolution of a case: Dismissal through mandamus J. Art. there is a reasonable assumption that the purpose of his interrogation will be to incriminate him 2. Witness – only when an incriminating question is asked. and MELFA SALIDAGA  Periods for decision for courts (Sec. since the witness has no way . Length of delay 2. Use and Fruit Immunity Statute – prohibits the use of the witness' compelled testimony and its fruit in any manner in connection with the criminal prosecution for an offense to which such compelled testimony relates. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. III. Art. Art. Humanitarian reasons – it is intended to prevent the State. government proceedings. IX-A) 60 days from date of submission for decision or resolution Factors considered in determining whether the right is violated 1. including civil actions and administrative or legislative investigations Transactional Immunity Statute – testimony of any person or whose possession of documents or other evidence necessary or convenient to determine the truth in any investigation conducted is immune from criminal prosecution for an offense to which such compelled testimony relates. Reason of delay 3. with all its coercive powers. Assertion of the right or failure to assert it 4.

He cannot invoke right to self-incrimination when: a) The question is relevant and otherwise allowed even if the answer may tend to incriminate him or subject him to civil liability b) the question relates to past criminality for which the witness can no longer be prosecuted c) he has been previously granted immunity under a validly enacted statute  Only natural persons can invoke this right. it is not a violation of her constitutional right against self-incrimination. or b) By failure to invoke it PROVIDED the waiver is certain and unequivocal and intelligently and willingly made. obtaining a sample of the handwriting of the accused would violate this right if he is charged for falsification. Art. RIGHT AGAINST INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE .  The right does not prohibit the examination of the body of the accused or the use of findings with respect to his body as physical evidence. Judicial persons are subject to the visitorial powers of the state in order to determine compliance with the conditions of the charter granted to them. a third person in custody of the document may be compelled to produce it. Being purely a mechanical act. Scope: (1) Testimonial Compulsion  In Villaflor v. Hence. since the “kernel of the privilege” was the prohibition of “testimonial compulsion”. However. J.  The accused cannot be compelled to produce a private document in his possession which might tend to incriminate him. Summers. Right May be Waived: . Either: a) Directly. Papers and Chattels. No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations. III. Section 18 (1). However. the Court was willing to compel a pregnant woman accused of adultery to submit to the indignity of being tested for pregnancy. Exception: when books of accounts are to be examined in the exercise of police power and power of taxation.  What is prohibited is the use of physical or moral compulsion to extort communication from the witness or to otherwise elicit evidence which would not exist were it not for the actions compelled from the witness. and MELFA SALIDAGA of knowing in advance the nature or effect of the question to be put to him . the fingerprinting of an accused would not violate the right against self-incrimination. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. (2) Production of Documents.

(2) Peonage – a condition of enforced servitude by which the servitor is restrained of his liberty and compelled to labor in liquidation of some debt or obligation. 4. against his will General Rule No involuntary service in any form shall exist. Involuntary Servitude – the condition of one who is compelled by force. or imprisonment. the authorities might command all male inhabitants of a certain age to assist them (US vs Pompeya) 5. and against his will. whether he is paid or not. Civil Code) US vs An Act providing for the method by which the people of the town Pompeya may be called upon to render assistance for the protection of the public and the preservation of peace and good order is constitutional. Personal military or civil service in the interest of national defense (Sec. Involuntary Servitude Includes (1) Slavery –civil relation in which one man has absolute power over the life. and MELFA SALIDAGA Section 18 (2). It was enacted in the exercise of the police power of the state and does not violate the constitutional prohibition on involuntary servitude. Naval enlistment – remain in service until the end of voyage so that the crew would not desert the ship. real or pretended. No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted. III. to labor for another. 18. fortune and liberty of another. Punishment for a crime for which the party shall have been duly convicted (Sec. coercion. Art. making it difficult for the owners to recruit new hands to continue the voyage (Robertson vs Baldwin) 4. Art. Exceptions 1. III) 2. Art. or make criminal sanctions available for holding unwilling persons to labor. Return to work order in industries affected with public interest (Kapisanan ng Manggagawa sa Kahoy vs Gotamco) 6. 311. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. Pollock No indebtedness warrants a suspension of the right to be free from vs compulsory service. and no state can make the quitting of work any Williams component of a crime. Patria Potestas – unemancipated minors are obliged to obey their parents so long as they are under parental power and to observe respect and reverence to them always (Art. Posse comitatus – in pursuit of persons who might have violated the law. . II) 3.

Art. i. Being drawn and quartered. Art. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax. psychological. (2) A penalty is degrading if it exposes a person to public humiliation. III. degrading or inhuman. (3) It must not be unacceptable to contemporary society (4) It must not be excessive. for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes. Excessive Fine  A fine is excessive. Excessive fines shall not be imposed.  For humanitarian reasons… an added guaranty of the liberty of persons against their incarceration for the enforcement of purely private debts because of their misfortune of being poor . When is a penalty “cruel. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. (2) It must not be applied arbitrarily. unless. Bernas says that the accused cannot be convicted of the crime to which the punishment is attached if the court finds that the punishment is cruel. degrading and inhuman”? (1) A penalty is cruel and inhuman if it involves torture or lingering suffering. Ex. Reason: Without a valid penalty. Neither shall death penalty be imposed. NON IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT Section 20. and MELFA SALIDAGA K. CRUEL AND INHUMAN PUNISHMENT Section 19. nor cruel. Being tarred and feathered. 1. Standards Used (1) The punishment must not be so severe as to be degrading to the dignity of human beings.e. or degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law. The employment of physical. degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. the law is not a penal law. it is disproportionate to the offense. it must serve a penal purpose more effectively than a less severe punishment would. III. then paraded throughout town. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua. L. the Congress hereafter provides for it. Note: Fr. when under any circumstance. 2. Ex.

DOUBLE JEOPARDY Section 21. and MELFA SALIDAGA Debt – any civil obligation arising from a contract. Double jeopardy – when a person was charged with an offense and the case was terminated by acquittal or conviction or in any other manner without his consent. to which defendant has pleaded. this may result in his subsidiary imprisonment because his liability is ex delicto and not ex contractu. Exception: Failure to pay a poll tax Poll tax – a specific sum levied upon every person belonging to a certain class without regard to his property or occupation. The fraudulent debt constitutes a crime such as estafa. If an act is punished by a law and an ordinance. expressed or implied. Art. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. A FRAUDULENT debt may result in the imprisonment of the debtor if: 1.  A tax is not a debt since it is an obligation arising from law. conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act. The accused has been duly convicted. valid complaint or information 2. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. and 4. Two (2) Kinds of Double Jeopardy (1) When a person is put twice in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense (1st sentence of Section 21) . resulting in any liability to pay in money. III. filed before a competent court 3. Hence. he cannot again be charged with the same or identical offense. Scope of guaranty against imprisonment for non-payment of debt  If an accused fails to pay the fine imposed upon him. and 2. POLL TAX General Rule: Non-payment of taxes is punishable with imprisonment. Requisites of Double Jeopardy 1. defendant was previously acquitted or convicted or the case dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent. M. its non-payment maybe validly punished with imprisonment.

(d) If a complaint filed for preliminary investigation is dismissed. upon pleading guilty. This amounts to an acquittal. (3) The second jeopardy must be for the same offense as that in the first. When can the PROSECUTION appeal from an order of dismissal: . When does jeopardy NOT attach: (a) If information does not charge any offense (b) If. This amounts to an acquittal. 21) Same Offense Requisites for a valid defense of double jeopardy: (1) First jeopardy must have attached prior to the second. (c) Dismissal on motion of the prosecution. (2) The first jeopardy must have terminated. and MELFA SALIDAGA (2) When a law and an ordinance punish the same act (2nd sentence of Sec. the accused presents evidence of complete self-defense. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. (d) Discharge of an accused to be a state witness. When does jeopardy ATTACH: (1st requisite) (a) A person is charged (b) Under a complaint or information sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction (c) Before a court of competent jurisdiction (d) After the person is arraigned (e) Such person enters a valid plea. (c) If the information for an offense cognizable by the RTC is filed with the MTC. When does first jeopardy TERMINATE: (2ND REQUISITE) 1) Acquittal 2) Conviction 3) Dismissal W/O the EXPRESS consent of the accused 4) Dismissal on the merits. and the court thereafter acquits him without entering a new plea of not guilty for accused. Examples of termination of jeopardy: (a) Dismissal based on violation of the right to a speedy trial. subsequent to a motion for reinvestigation filed by the accused. This is a dismissal on the merits. (b) Dismissal based on a demurrer to evidence.

Exception: If motion is based on violation of the right to a speedy trial or on a demurrer to evidence. 2) Under (1)(b). What are considered to be the “SAME OFFENSE”: (a) Exact identity between the offenses charged in the first and second cases. (c) The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the consent of the fiscal and the offended party. a conviction for an offense will not bar a prosecution for an offense which necessarily includes the offense charged in the former information where: (a) The graver offense developed due to a supervening fact arising from the same act or omission constituting the former charge. For there to be double jeopardy. it would not be considered a supervening event. the prosecution for one will not bar the other so long as none of the exceptions apply. The whole case will be open to review by the appellate court. . (e) If the dismissal was made with grave abuse of discretion. it is not necessary that the offense be the same.  Note: where a single act results in the violation of different laws or different provisions of the same law. he WAIVES his right to plead double jeopardy. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. (b) The facts constituting the graver offense became known or were discovered only after the filing of the former information. (d) If the dismissal violates the right of due process of the prosecution. Supervening Facts 1) Under the Rules of Court. Such court may even increase the penalties imposed on the accused by the trial court. and MELFA SALIDAGA (a) If dismissal is on motion of the accused. Effect of appeal by the accused  If the accused appeals his conviction. (b) One offense is an attempt to commit or a frustration of the other offense. (c) One offense is necessarily included or necessary includes the other. Same Act  Double jeopardy will result if the act punishable under the law and the ordinance are the same. if the facts could have been discovered by the prosecution but were not discovered because of the prosecution’s incompetence. (b) If dismissal does NOT amount to an acquittal or dismissal on the merits (c) If the question to be passed upon is purely legal.

Accused appealed. CA. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted. BP Blg. there was no denial of the right to speedy trial. N. Sandiganbayan. 8249 is not a penal law. reinstatement did not violate the right against double jeopardy. (In Re Kay Villegas Kami) Characteristics of Ex Post Facto Law (a) Must refer to criminal matters (b) Prejudicial to the accused (c) Retroactive in application  In Lacson v. 24 of the Revised Penal Code that suspension of an officer during trial shall not be considered a penalty.”  In Calder v.  In Bayot v. hence. 1980. (4) One which alters the legal rules of evidence and receives less testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense in order to convict the accused. (3) One which changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than that which the law annexed to the crime when it was committed. the dismissal was with the consent of the accused. the Court said that when the law alters the legal rules of evidence or mode of trial. (5) One which assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only BUT. III. the Court held that the delays were not unreasonable. the accused was convicted by the Sandiganbayan for estafa on May 30. the court suspended the accused. EX POST FACTO LAWS AND BILL OF ATTAINDER Section 22. Ohio) unless the changes operate only in limited and unsubstantial manner to the disadvantage of the accused. it is an ex post facto law. and being merely an amendatory statute it does not partake the nature of ex post facto law. criminal. Art. the Court held that in general. The contention that the new law diluted their right to a two-tiered appeal is incorrect because “the right to appeal is not a natural right but statutory in nature that can be regulated by law. Exception: (Beazell v. On March 16.. Kinds of Ex Post Facto Laws (1) One which makes an action done before the passing of the law. (2) One which aggravates the crime or makes it greater than when it was committed. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. RA No. when done. RA 8249 pertains only to matters of procedure. and MELFA SALIDAGA  In Almario v. Sec. Bull. ex post facto law prohibits retrospectivity of penal laws... The Supreme Court ruled that Art. Second. Hence. 195 was passed authorizing suspension of public officers against whom an information may be pending at any stage. Exec. 1982. in effect. (6) One which deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful protection to which he has become entitled such as the protection of a former conviction or acquittal. or a proclamation of amnesty. and which was innocent when done. On July 22. was lawful. . and punishes such action. 1982.. imposes a penalty or deprivation of a right. which.

Forms of Correspondences and Communication Covered 1. 3. liberty. kidnapping. III. Public Order and Safety – the security of human lives. it would have to be based upon a government official's assessment that public safety and order demand such intrusion. If the punishment be less than death. inciting to sedition. or when public safety or order requires otherwise. messages 3. O. the act is termed a bill of pains and penalties. the likes Intrusion into the Privacy of Communication May Be Allowed 1. and 5. inciting rebellion. There must be a law. telephone calls 4. . The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court. BILL OF ATTAINDER Bill of attainder – is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without judicial trial. Upon lawful order of the court. conspiracy to commit sedition. under specific conditions for the crimes of treason.  RA No. Under Sec. Missouri) (All Bills of Attainder are Ex Post Facto Laws) Elements of Bill of Attainder 1. telegrams. When public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law.  When intrusion is made without a judicial order. 4200 known as the Anti-Wiretapping Law provides penalties for specific violations of private communication. The law imposes a penal burden on a named individual or easily ascertainable members of a group. conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion. There is a direct imposition of penal burden without judicial trial. provoking war and disloyalty in case of war. piracy. espionage. and rebels. insurrectionists. rebellion. mutiny in the high seas. PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION Section 3(1). and property against the activities of invaders. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. 2. letters 2. Art. or 2. 3 of the Act allows court-authorized taps. sedition. as prescribed by law.” (Cummings v. and MELFA SALIDAGA The suspension in the case is merely a preventive and not a penal measure which therefore does not come under the ex post facto prohibition.

WRIT OF HABEAS DATA Writ of habeas data – is a remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life. Torres. the right to privacy being a fundamental right. No. or modify substantive . pleading. up until the "point at which the fetus becomes ‘viable. liberty or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases. Constitutional Basis Section 5(5). 08-1-16-SC – full text). But a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy at whatever time. and shall not diminish.  In Roe v. the integrated bar. the admission to the practice of law. and legal assistance to the under-privileged. RIGHT TO PRIVACY  In Ople v. and procedure in all courts. shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade. thereby subjecting all laws attempting to restrict it to the standard of strict scrutiny. potentially able to live outside the mother's womb. Wade. the Court held that abortions are permissible for any reason a woman chooses. we also underscores that the right to privacy does not bar all incursions into individual privacy. in whatever way and for whatever reason she alone chooses is NOT absolute. which was approved by the Supreme Court on 22 January 2008. (a) The Constitution does not explicitly mention any right to privacy but the Court has recognized that such right does exist in the Constitution. and MELFA SALIDAGA P. collecting or storing of data or information regarding the person. in maintaining medical standards. That Rule shall not diminish. and in protecting potential life.M.” Intrusions into the right must be accompanied by proper safeguards and well-defined standards to prevent unconstitutional invasions. the government has the burden of proof to show that a statute (AO no. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. A state may properly assert important interests in safeguarding health. the Court also acknowledges that some state regulation in areas protected by a right is appropriate. The right is not intended to stifle scientific and technological advancements that enhance public service and the common good. the Court has held that regulation limiting these rights may be justified only by a “compelling state interest. While recognizing the right to privacy. VIII. or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering.  It is governed by The Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data (A. It merely requires that the law be narrowly focused. increase or modify substantive rights. Art. The Court deemed abortion a fundamental right under the United States Constitution.” (b) The right to privacy is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. home and correspondence of the aggrieved party. Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights. “In no uncertain terms. practice.’ that is. Where certain “fundamental rights” are involved. increase. 308 in this case) is justified by some compelling state interest and that it is narrowly drawn. family. Q.

rectification. the petition may be filed by: (1) Any member of the immediate family of the aggrieved party. the relief may . Who may file a petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas data?  General rule: The aggrieved party. which may include the updating. (e) The reliefs prayed for. and the person in charge. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court. or (4) Sandiganbayan. suppression or destruction of the database or information or files kept by the respondent. when the action concerns public data files of government offices. without prejudice to subsequent submission of proof of indigency not later than 15 days from the filing of the petition. at the option of the petitioner. in possession or in control of the data or information. (3) Court of Appeals.  No docket and other lawful fees shall be required from an indigent petitioner. or that which has jurisdiction over the place where the data or information is gathered. and MELFA SALIDAGA rights. registers or databases. (c) The actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to secure the data or information. children and parents. (d) The location of the files. (b) The manner the right to privacy is violated or threatened and how it affects the right to life. collected or stored. the government office. The petition of the indigent shall be docketed and acted upon immediately. The verified written petition shall allege the following: (a) The personal circumstances of the petitioner and the respondent. namely: the spouse. in default of those mentioned in the preceding paragraph. Where can the petition be filed? (1) Regional Trial Court where the petitioner or respondent resides. descendant or collateral relative of the aggrieved party within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity. liberty or security of the aggrieved party. or (2) Any ascendant. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. (2) Supreme Court.  Exceptions: In cases of extralegal killings and enforced disappearances. following its publication in three (3) newspapers of general circulation. In case of threats. if known.  The Rule takes effect on 2 February 2008.

 Instead of having the hearing in open court. and (iii) the currency and accuracy of the data or information held. state secrets. which period may be reasonably extended by the Court for justifiable reasons.  A clerk of court who refuses to issue the writ after its allowance. or a deputized person who refuses to serve the same.  When the respondent fails to file a return. The writ shall also set the date and time for summary hearing of the petition which shall not be later than ten (10) work days from the date of its issuance. justice or judge shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte. The clerk of court shall issue the writ under the seal of the court and cause it to be served within three (3) days from its issuance. or when the data or information cannot be divulged to the public . justice or judge for contempt without prejudice to other disciplinary actions. the court. the rules on substituted service shall apply. In case the writ cannot be served personally on the respondent.  The writ shall be served upon the respondent by the officer or person deputized by the court. in possession or in control of the data or information subject of the petition: (i) a disclosure of the data or information about the petitioner. shall be punished by the court. justice or judge shall immediately order the issuance of the writ if on its face it ought to issue. it can be done in chambers when the respondent invokes the defense that the release of the data or information in question shall compromise national security or state secrets. confidentiality of the source of information of media and others. or. and (f) Such other relevant reliefs as are just and equitable. and MELFA SALIDAGA include a prayer for an order enjoining the act complained of. privileged communication. and may deputize any officer or person to serve it. justice or judge who shall retain a copy on which to make a return of service. (ii) the steps or actions taken by the respondent to ensure the security and confidentiality of the data or information. the court. the justice or judge may issue the writ under his or her own hand.  The respondent shall file a verified written return together with supporting affidavits within five (5) work days from service of the writ. and (c) Other allegations relevant to the resolution of the proceeding. granting the petitioner such relief as the petition may warrant unless the court in its discretion requires the petitioner to submit evidence. Contents of Return (a) The lawful defenses such as national security. and the purpose for its collection. (b) In case of respondent in charge. the nature of such data or information. When is the writ of habeas data issued? Upon the filing of the petition. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. in case of urgent necessity.

 The Writ of Certiorari – a writ ordering a person to correct an erroneous act committed with grave abuse of discretion. shall be afforded the citizen.  When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to a petition for a writ of habeas data.  Upon its finality.  the citizenry has a right to know what is going on in the country and in his government so he can express his views thereon knowledgeably and intelligently.  When a criminal action has been commenced. R.  The hearing on the petition shall be summary. or decisions. but the reliefs under the writ shall be available by motion in the criminal case. These writs which protect the rights of the individual against the state are as follows:  The Writ of Habeas Corpus – a writ ordering a person who detained another to produce the body and bring it before a judge or court. subject to such limitations as may be provided by law. III. as well as to government research data used as basis for policy development. and  The Writ of Amparo – a writ designed to protect the most basic right of a human being. and MELFA SALIDAGA due to its nature or privileged character. and to documents and papers pertaining to official acts. liberty and security guaranteed by the Constitution. The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized. ACCESS TO PUBLIC INFORMATION Section 7. justice or judge within five (5) work days. transactions. the petition shall be consolidated with the criminal action. no separate petition for the writ shall be filed. Access to official records. the court.  The introduction of the Writ of Habeas Data into Philippine Justice System complemented several writs used in the Philippines. the procedure under this Rule shall continue to govern the disposition of the reliefs in the petition. Its purpose is to determine whether the detention is lawful or not. the judgment shall be enforced by the sheriff or any lawful officer as may be designated by the court. However.  The Writ of Prohibition – a writ ordering a person to prohibit the commission of an illegal act. and the procedure under this Rule shall govern the disposition of the reliefs available under the writ of habeas data. Rights Guaranteed . justice or judge may call for a preliminary conference to simplify the issues and determine the possibility of obtaining stipulations and admissions from the parties. After consolidation. These are the right to life.  The Writ of Mandamus – a writ ordering a governmental agency to perform a ministerial function. Art. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR.

 covers ideas that are acceptable to the majority and the unorthodox view. Philippine Constitution. Corollary right of access to official records and documents. and MELFA SALIDAGA 1. (3) criminal matters pending in court. Then right to privacy belongs to the individual and must be invoked by the individual. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION Freedom of Speech – “at once the instrument and the guaranty and the bright consummate flower of all liberty. A public agency like the GSIS cannot invoke the right to privacy. p. Echegaray SC held that making the Lethal Injection Manual inaccessible to case the convict was unconstitutional. abstracts. a Dimaano judge may regulate the manner in which persons desiring to 1976 inspect. may exercise their rights. but I will defend to the death your right to say it. (2) trade secrets. 85). CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. However. Legaspi v Personal interest is not required in asserting the right to Civil Service information on matters of public concern. a matter of public concern. Commission What matters constitute “public concern” should be determined 1987 by the court on a case to case basis.) – writings coming into the hands of public PCGG officers in connection with their official functions 1998 Ill-gotten wealth is. Chavez v Public concern (def. examine or copy records in his office. by its nature. “I may not agree with what you say. .Voltaire)  The freedom to speak includes the right to silent.Socrates) . Right to information on matters of public concern . Limitations: “As may be provided by law” Valmonte v The people have a right to access official records but they can’t Belmonte compel custodians of official records to prepare lists. Baldoza v Judges cannot prohibit access to judicial records. 1989 summaries and the like. (This freedom was meant not only to protect the minority who want to talk but also to benefit the majority who refuse to listen.” (Wendell Philips) Scope  Freedom of Expression is available only insofar as it is exercised for the discussion of matters affecting the public interest. Purely private interest matters do not come within the guaranty (invasion of privacy is not sanctioned by the Constitution). Privileged communication: (1) national security. (One of the functions of this freedom is “to invite dispute” – US Supreme Court. and 2. such not being based on a demandable legal right.  These are political rights that are available to citizens only (Bernas. S.” .


The ultimate good desired is better reached by a free trade in ideas – that the best test of truth is the
power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market; and that truth is the only
ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out.

Modes of Expression

(a) Oral and written language
(b) Symbolisms (e.g. bended knee, salute to the flag, cartoons)

Elements of Freedom of Expression

(1) Freedom from prior restraint or censorship

(2) Freedom from subsequent punishment

Freedom From Previous Restraint or Censorship

Section 4, Art. III. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of
the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for
redress of grievances.

Censorship – conditions the exercise of freedom of expression upon the prior approval of the
government. Only those ideas acceptable to it are allowed to be disseminated.

 Censor, therefore, assumes the role of arbiter for the people, usually applying his own
subjective standards in determining the good and the not. Such is anathema in a free society.

 In New York Times v. United States, the Court held that prohibition of “prior restraint” is not
absolute, although any system of prior restraint comes to court bearing a heavy presumption
against its constitutionality.

 In Near v. Minnesota, the exceptions to the prohibition of “prior restraint is enumerated by the
Court, thus: “When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in time of peace are such
a hindrance to its effort .... No one would question but that government might prevent actual
obstruction to its recruiting service or the publication of sailing dates of transports or the
number or location of troops.... The security of the community life may be protected against
incitements to acts of violence and the overthrow by force of orderly government.”

 In SWS v. Comelec, Sec. 1 of RA No. 9006, the Fair Election Act says that surveys affecting
national candidates shall not be published fifteen (15) days before an election and surveys
affecting local candidates shall not be published seven days before an election. The provision
is challenged as violative of freedom of expression. The Court held that as prior restraint, the
rule is presumed to be invalid. The power of the Comelec over media franchises is limited to
ensuring “equal opportunity, time, space and the right to reply” as well as to reasonable rates
of charges for the use of media facilities for “public information and forums among candidates.”
Here the prohibition of speech is direct, absolute and substantial. Nor does the rule pass the

O'Brien test for content related regulation because (1) it suppresses one type of expression
while allowing other types such as editorials, etc. and (2) the restriction is greater than what is
needed to protect government interest because the interest can be protected by narrower
restriction such as subsequent punishment.

 In Re: Request for Radio-TV Coverage of the Estrada Trial, the Court held that the propriety
of the Estrada trial involves the weighing out of the constitutional guarantees of freedom of the
press and the right to public information, on the one hand, and the fundamental rights of the
accused, on the other hand, along with the constitutional power of a court to control its
proceedings in ensuring a fair and impartial trial... With the possibility of losing not only the
precious liberty but also the very life of an accused, it behooves all to make absolutely certain
that an accused receives a verdict solely on the basis of a just and dispassionate judgment...”

 The doctrine of freedom of speech was formulated primarily for the protection of “core speech,”
i.e., speech which communicates political, social or religious ideas. Commercial speech,
however, does not.

Grosjean vs There need not be total suppression; even restriction of
American circulation constitutes censorship
Press Co.
Burgos vs the search, padlocking and sealing of the offices of
Chief of Staff Metropolitan Mail and We Forum by military authorities,
resulting in the discontinuance of publication of the
newspapers, was held to be prior restraint
Mutuc vs the COMELEC prohibition against the use of taped jingles in
COMELEC the mobile units used in the campaign was held to be
unconstitutional, as it was in the nature of censorship
Sanidad vs the Court annulled the COMELEC prohibition against radio
COMELEC commentators or newspaper columnists from commenting on
the issues involved in the scheduled plebiscite on the organic
law creating the Cordillera Autonomous Region as an
unconstitutional restraint on freedom of expression
Gonzales vs the Court upheld the validity of the law which prohibited, except
COMELEC during the prescribed election period, the making of speeches,
announcements or commentaries for or against the election of
any party or candidate for public office.
JUSTIFICATION: the inordinate preoccupation of the people
with politics tended toward the neglect of the other serious
needs of the nation and the pollution of its suffrages.
Iglesia ni Cristo The Board of Review for Motion Pictures and Television
vs CA (BRMPT) has the authority to review the petitioner's television
However, the Board acted with grave abuse of discretion when
it gave an “X-rating” to the TV program on the ground of
“attacks against another religion.” Such a classification can be
justified only if there is a showing that the tv program would
create a clear and present danger of an evil which the State
ought to prevent.

Primicias vs The respondent mayor could only reasonably regulate, not
Fugosos absolutely prohibit, the use of public places for the purpose
National Press the Supreme Court upheld the validity of Sec. 11(b), RA 6646,
Club vs which prohibited any person making use of the media to sell or
COMELEC to give free of charge print space or air time for campaign or
other political purposes except to the COMELEC. This was
held to be within the power of the COMELEC to supervise the
enjoyment or utilization of franchises for the operation of media
of communication and information, for the purpose of ensuring
equal opportunity, time and space, and the “right to reply,” as
well as uniform and reasonable rates of charges for the use of
such media facilities.
Osmeňa vs SC reaffirmed validity of RA 6646 as a legitimate exercise of
COMELEC police power. The regulation is unrelated to the suppression of
speech, as any restriction on freedom of expression
occasioned thereby is only incidental and no more than is
necessary to achieve the purpose of promoting equality.
NOTE: This is not inconsistent with the ruling in PPI vs
COMELEC, because in the latter, SC simply said that
COMELEC cannot procure print space without paying just
Adiong vs COMELEC's resolution prohibiting the posting of decals, and
COMELEC stickers in mobile units like cars and other moving vehicles was
declared unconstitutional for infringmenet of freedom of
Besides, the constitutional objective of giving the rich and poor
candidates' equal opportunity to inform the electorate is not
violated by the posting of decals and stickers on cars and other
“Overbreadth doctrine” = prohibits the government from
achieving its purpose by means that weep unnecessarily
broadly, reaching constitutionally protected as well as
unprotected activity; the government has gone too far; its
legitimate interest can be satisfied without reaching so broadly
into the area of protected freedom.
Gonzales vs petitioner questioned the classification of the movie as “for
katigbak adults only.” the petition was dismissed because the Board did
not commit grave abuse of discretion.

Freedom From Subsequent Punishment

Section 18(1), Art. III. No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and

 Without this assurance, the individual would hesitate to speak for fear that he might be held to
account for his speech, or that he might be provoking the vengeance of the officials he may
have criticized.

It contends that “an exit poll has the tendency to sow confusion considering the randomness of selecting interviewees. United States) Clear – causal connection with the danger of the substantive evil arising from the utterance Present – time element. Dangerous tendency doctrine 3. and MELFA SALIDAGA  Not absolute. subject to police power and may be regulated (freedom of expression does not cover ideas offensive to public order) Right of students to free speech in school premises not absolute General Rule: a student shall not be expelled or suspended solely on the basis of articles he has written Exception: when the article materially disrupts class work or involves substantial disorder or invasion of rights of others. Clear and Present Danger Rule – when words are used in such circumstance and of such nature as to create a clear and present danger that will bring about the substantive evil that the State has a right to prevent. the Court said that exit polls constitute an essential part of the freedoms of speech and of the press...  decided in 1947 Navarro vs Villegas (compare with Primicias case) . the use of public places for the purpose indicated. it may expel or suspend the student) Tests of valid governmental interference (criteria in determining the liability of the individual for ideas expressed by him) : 1. Terminiello vs City of  (speech inside an auditorium with 800 Chicago persons)  speech is often provocative and challenging. Clear and present danger rule 2. imminent and immediate danger (the danger must not only be probable but also inevitable). not absolutely prohibit. the school has the right to discipline its students (in such a case. the Comelec banned “exit polls” in the exercise of its authority to regulate the holders of media franchises during the lection period. orderly and credible elections. “fighting words” are not sufficient to convict a person absent a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil Primicias vs Fugosos The respondent mayor could only reasonably regulate. the Comelec cannot ban totally in the guise of of promoting clean. (As formulated by Justice Holmes in Schenck v. The ban does not satisfy the clear and present danger rule because the evils envisioned are merely speculative.  the condition of Manila at that time did not justify the mayor's fears. hence. Comelec. there was no clear and present danger. Comelec)  In ABS-CBN v.. honest. Hence. However. Balance of interest test 1. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. (Gonzales v.

Fernandez)  Justice Holmes. Douds) CLEAR AND DANGEROUS BALANCE OF INTEREST PRESENT DANGER TENDENCY RULE RULE RULE liberty is preferred Authority is preferred the issue is resolved in the light of the peculiar circumstances obtaining in each particular case  In Mutuc v. the duty of the courts is to determine which of the two conflicting interests demands the greater protection under the circumstances presented. 2. and MELFA SALIDAGA SC sustained respondent mayor's act of refusing to issue a permit enabling students to hold a public rally.decided in 1970 Reyes vs Bagatsing the denial of a permit to hold a public rally was invalid as there was no showing of the probability of a clear and present danger of an evil that might arise as a result of the meeting. and the regulation results in an indirect. Balance of Interest Test – when particular conduct is regulated in the interest of public order. . People vs Perez Accused declared: “The Filipinos like myself must use bolos for cutting off (Governor- General) Wood's head for having recommended a bad thing for the Filipinos. 3. or some failure of energy stifles the movement at its birth. Mayor feared the rally would result to public disorder. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. conditional. (American Communications Association v. the preferred freedom of expression calls all the more the utmost respect . If believed. Bayan vs Executive (f) the Calibrated Pre-emptive Response Policy Secretary Ermita is null and void. partial abridgment of speech. Respondents are enjoined from using it and to strictly observe the requirements of maximum tolerance. The burden of proving such eventually rests on the Mayor. Cabansag vs Fernandez It is not necessary that some definite or immediate acts of force or violence be advocated.(Cabansag v. Comelec. Dangerous Tendency Doctrine – if the words uttered create a dangerous tendency of an evil which the State has the right to prevent. critique of this doctrine: Every idea is an incitement. A mere tendency toward the evil was enough. it is acted on unless some other belief outweighs it.” He was sentenced to jail. for he has killed our independence. It is sufficient that such acts be advocated in general terms.

.) maintaining free and clean elections. The New York Times is protected under the freedom of speech in publishing paid advertisement. to convince others to agree with him.  The general rule for a speech to be considered libelous or defamatory is: Libel = falsity + actual malice (uttered in full knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard) Exemption: When the subject of the supposed libelous or defamatory material is a public officer.” Erroneous statement is inevitable in free debate. the expression becomes a statement by the owner. Sullivan. and sought a financial support on behalf of a movement. local officials and COMELEC should lean in favor of freedom. Otherwise. expressed opinion. Feliciano shows that regulation of election campaign activity may not pass the test of validity if:  It is too general in its terms  Not limited in time and scope in its application  It if restricts one’s expression of belief in a candidate or one’s opinion of his or her qualifications. by displaying it on his car. the freedom to speak and the right to know are unduly curtailed. the freedom of the citizen and the State’s power to regulate are NOT ANTAGONISTIC. newspapers will be discouraged from carrying “editorial advertisements” and so might shut off an important outlet for the promulgation of information and ideas by persons who do not themselves have access to publishing facilities. For in the ultimate analysis.  If it cuts off the flow of media reporting  If the regulatory measure bears no clear and reasonable nexus with the constitutionally sanctioned objective. We examine the limits of regulation. no matter if it contained erroneous claims and facts. and in no instance is this truer than that of the press. recited grievances.the police. That the Times was paid for publishing the advertisement is as immaterial as the fact that newspapers and books are sold. A sticker may be furnished by a candidate but once the car owner agrees to have it placed in his private vehicle. Defamatory words may be uttered against them and not be considered libelous. protested claimed abuses. and 3) public figures have the opportunity and resources to rebut whatever is said against them. When faced with border line situations where freedom (of expression) to speak & freedom to know (to information) are invoked against (vs. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA when what may be curtailed is the dissemination of information to make more meaningful the equally vital right of suffrage. The regulation strikes at the freedom of an individual to express his preference and. primarily his own and not of anybody else. ( New York Times vs Sullivan)  In New York Times v. Newspapers do not forfeit the protection they enjoy under speech freedom just because they publish paid advertisements. (Policarpio vs Manila Times). 2) it’s a matter of public interest. J. On errors: “Some degree of abuse is inseparable from the proper use of every thing. There can be no free and honest elections if in the efforts to maintain them. Said publication was not “commercial” in the sense that it communicated information. The reason is that 1) they asked for it (“they voluntarily thrust themselves into the public eye and therefore should not be thin- skinned”).

Actual Malice needs to be proved if a public official wants to recover damages for a defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct. the right must be exercised in such a way that it will not prejudice the public welfare. retired J. JBL Reyes sought a permit from the City of Manila to hold a march and rally on Oct 26. but changed the meeting place to Ugarte Field. Kapit sa Patalim was classified as “For Adults Only” by the MTRCB and was suggested to have certain portions cut/ deleted. 1983 2-5pm from Luneta to gates of US Embassy. and freedom park. and MELFA SALIDAGA Moreover. is the clear and present danger test. Court of Appeals)  If assembly is to be held at a public place. the campus of a government-owned or operated educational institution. Fugoso)  Permit for public assembly is not necessary if meeting is to be held in: a private place. Assembly and Petition  The right to assemble is not subject to prior restraint and may not be conditioned upon the prior issuance of a permit or authorization from the government authorities. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. The power of the MTRCB is limited to the classification of films. (Primicias v. 880 . Blg.”  In Gonzales v. Power of local officials is merely for regulation and not for prohibition. therefore should be censored. However. and was denied by the Mayor due to Vienna Convention Ordinance and fear of subversives may infiltrate the ranks of the demonstrators.only clear and present danger of substantive evil. “Even a false statement may be deemed to make a valuable contribution to public debate since it brings about the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth. Notes: the Court is called upon to protect the exercise of the cognate rights to free speech and peaceful assembly… Tanada vs SC sustained the petitioner's motion compelling the mayor of Bagatsing Manila to issue a permit to hold a rally. may be validly required. (De la Cruz v. a private park Malabanan vs (several students were suspended for 1 year for conducting Ramento demonstration in the premises of a university outside the area permitted by the school authorities) . The test to determine whether a motion picture exceeds the bounds of permissible exercise of free speech and. Kalaw-Katigbak. Bagatsing. Held: no justifiable ground to deny permit because Bill of Rights will prevail over Vienna Ordinance should conflict exist (none proven because 500m not measured from gate to US Embassy proper) and fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and assembly. Held: MTRCB do not have the power to exercise prior restraint. criticism of official conduct does not lose its constitutional protection merely because it is effective criticism and hence diminishes their official reputations.P. permit for the use of such place. produced by its collision with error. (B.“The Public Assembly Act of 1985')  In JBL Reyes v. and not for the assembly itself. Presence of clear and present danger of substantive evil must be proved.

which includes the right to set academic standards to determine under what circumstances failing grades suffice for expulsion of students. Villar vs TIP (several students were barred from re-enrollment for participating in demonstrations) while the Court upheld the academic freedom of institutions of higher learning. because the students do not shed theur constitutionally protected rights at the school gate. it was held that this right cannot be utilized to discriminate against those who exercise their constitutional rights to peaceful assembly. believing they were right. And these people did so in proper channels without undue publicity. . or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged. Assoc vs PBM Tests of a lawful assembly (1) Purpose Test  ideally. revoking all permits previously granted by him on the ground that the party had been found (by the fiscal's office) to be an illegal association. Non vs Dames SC abandons its ruling in Alcuaz vs PSBA (that enrolment of a student is a semester-to-semester contract and the school may not be compelled to renew the contract) upholding the primacy of freedom of expression. Bustos and several people sent complaint letters via counsel against Justice of Peace Roman Punsalan. and MELFA SALIDAGA SC emphasized that the students did not shed their constitutional rights to free speech at the schoolhouse gate. Bustos. Ratio: the guarantees of free speech and a free press include the right to criticize judicial conduct. regardless of the auspices under which it is organized (2) Auspices Test  Evengelista vs Earnshaw: the mayor of Manila prohibited the members of the Communist Party from holding any kind of meeting. Held: Bustos and the others were acquitted. including those employed in the public and private sectors. PBM right to free assembly and petition prevails over economic Employees rights. Right of Association Section 8. to form unions. III. associations. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. Art. the test should be the purpose for which the assembly is held. and permitted the students to re-enroll and finish their studies. The right of the people. who charged them with libel.  In People v.

appeals to the prurient interest  whether the work depicts. applying contemporary community standards. In re Edillon Bar integration does not compel the lawyer to associate with anyone. sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable law  whether the work. taken as a whole. political or scientific value Justice Douglas. Miller vs California Test of Obscenity:  whether the average person. T. the judges. SC. dissent: I do not think we. taken as a whole. noting that he has charged admission fees to the exhibition. not merely artistic. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. were ever given the constitutional power to make definitions of obscenity. Obscenity is a hodgepodge. Pita vs CA SC declared that the determination of what is obscene is a judicial function. holding that he had only presented them in their native attire People vs Go Pin Accused was convicted for exhibiting nude paintings and pictures. in a patently offensive way. Integration does not make a lawyer a member of any group of which he is not already a member. artistic. held that his purpose was commercial. . . would find that the work. OBSCENITY CASES US vs Kottinger SC acquitted accused who was charged of having offered for sale pictures of half-clad members of non-Christian tribes. SSS right to organize does not carry with it right to strike Employees Assoc vs CA Victoriano vs Elizalde Rope Workers' Union Occena vs right of association was not violated where political parties COMELEC were prohibited from participating in the barangay elections to insure the non-partisanship of the candidates. notwithstanding his claim that he had done so in the interest of art. lacks serious literary.The Courts should not apply a national standard but the standard of the community in which the material is being tested. and MELFA SALIDAGA The Right of Association is deemed embraced in freedom of expression because the organization can be used as a vehicle for the expression of views that have a bearing on public welfare.

The Community Standard as applied to the internet means that any communication available to a nationwide audience will be judged by the standards of the community most likely to be offended by the message. cannot be properly analyzed as a form of time. it was upheld by the Supreme Court. Being a public figure does not destroy one's right to privacy. The CDA is punitive. unconstitutional. vague.” because it contained fictionalized embellishments. The classification of content was limited as “harmful to minors” using the Miller V California Test. newsgroups or chat rooms. Ayer Productions vs the tribunal upheld the primacy of freedom of Judge Capulong expression over Enrile's “right to privacy. Chat and email were not included. mail exploders. The CDA is a content. Notes: the Court’s Jurisprudence teaches that it is the publisher’s responsibility to abide by that community’s standards.  Held: overbroad. Imposition of requirements (adult identification number or credit card) would bar adults who do not have a credit card and lack the resources to obtain one from accessing any blocked material. The internet is not an “invasive” medium because it requires a series of affirmative steps more deliberate and directed than merely turning a dial (tv or radio). There is no effective way to determine the identity or the age of a user who is accessing material through email. The scope had been limited to material displayed only on the world wide web. . The effect of CDA is such that when a site is blocked for being “indecent” or “patently offensive” the remaining content even if not indecent cannot be viewed anymore.based blanket restriction on speech.” because Enrile was a public figure and a public figure's right to privacy is narrower than that of an ordinary citizen. place and manner regulation. So. the Court granted the petition to restrain the public de Gonzales exhibition of the movie “Moises Padilla Story.  Notes: Sexual expression which is indecent but not obscene is protected by the First Amendment. ACLU.Criticism of Official Conduct Lagunzad vs Sotto Vda. Communications Decency Act seek to protect minors from obscenity on the internet. The fact that distributors of allegedly obscene materials may be subjected to varying community standards in the various federal judicial districts into which they transmit the materials does not render a federal statute unconstitutional. Besides.  The CDA was replaced with Child Online Protection Act. 1. a criminal statute. the movie “Four Days of Revolution (sabi ni Cruz)” / “A Dangerous Life (sabi ni Nachura)” / “The Four Day Revolution (sabi sa . It burdens communication among adults. and as such. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA  In Reno v.

No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion. authority and integrity of the judiciary and the proper administration of justice. In re Jurado a publication that tends to impede. It is not necessary that publication actually obstructs the administration of justice. FREEDOM OF RELIGION Section 5. III. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship. obstruct. In re Laureta a lawyer was held in contempt and suspended from the practice of law for wrting individual letters to members of the SC division that decided a case against his client. corruption and other misdeeds to members of the Supreme Court was suspended from the practice of law as “neither the right of free speech nor the right to engage in political activities can be so construed or extended as to permit any such liberties to a member of the bar. it is enough that it tends to do so. In re Sotto a senator was punished for contempt for having attacked a decision of SC which he called incompetent and narrow-minded. worship. or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. and announcing that he would file a bill for its reorganization In re Tulfo Tulfo's “Sangkatutak na Bobo” column was held contumacious.. without discrimination or preference.” U. etc. embarrass or influence the courts in administering justice in a pending suit or proceeding constitutes criminal contempt which is summarily punishable by the courts. Freedom of the press is subordinate to the decision. and MELFA SALIDAGA case)” would not be historically faithful without including therein the participation of Enrile in the EDSA revolution. shall forever be allowed. Religion defined  “any specific system of belief. often involving a code of ethics and . Art. US vs Bustos SC compared criticism of official conduct to a “scalpel that relieves the abscesses of officialdom” People vs Alarcon newspaper publications tending to impede. embarrass or obstruct the court and constitutes a clear and present danger to the administration of justice is not protected by the guarantee of press freedom and is punishable by contempt. arrogantly questioning their decision Zaldivar vs a member of the Bar who imputed charges of Sandiganbayan improper influence. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. conduct. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.

Art VI [appropriation allowed where the minister is employed in the armed forces. 28 (3). Two Guarantees Contained Section 5. or ◦ result in a conspiracy because of its composite strength  separation of church and state is not a wall of hostility  The Government is neutral. and MELFA SALIDAGA philosophy” (defined by Cruz)  In Aglipay vs Ruiz religion is defined as “a profession of faith to an active power that binds and elevates man to his Creator. VI [prohibition against the use of public money or property for the benefit of any religion. Non-establishment Clause  reinforces Sec. Art. It protects all. IX-C [a religious sect or denomination cannot be registered as a political party]. Art. or of any priest. but prefers none and disparages none.  Freedom of religion includes freedom from religion. and  to avoid encroachment by one against the other. the right to worship includes right not to . penal institution or government-owned orphanage or leprosarium] Scope: The State (a) cannot set up a church. and Sec 29 (2). Sec 4(2). Art. 6. Art. VI [no sectoral representative from the religious sector]. minister or ecclsiastic]. VI [exemption from taxation of properties actually. (b) cannot pass laws which aid one religion. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. Sec 29(2). Art XIV [citizenship requirement of ownership of educational institutions except those owned by religious groups]. II on the separation of church and State  other provisions which support this: Sec 2(5). (c) cannot influence a person to go to or remain away from church against his will.  A union of Church and State would either: ◦ tend to destroy government and to degrade religion. directly and exclusively used for religious purposes. nor (d) force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. Rationale:  to delineate boundaries between the two institutions. Sec 5(2). III of the Constitution (1) Non-establishment clause (2) Free exercise of religious profession and worship 1. Sec. all religions or prefer one over another. Art. Art.

 Intramural Religious Dispute – outside the jurisdiction of the secular authorities Gonzales vs where a civil right depends upon some matter pertaining to Archbishop of ecclesiastical affairs. Islamic Da'wah by arrogating to itself the task of issuing halal certifications. (2) Insulation of the political process from interfaith dissension – voluntarism cannot be achieved unless the political process is insulated from religion and unless religion is insulated politics. or the relations of the members where the property rights are involved. not to the church-related school Adong vs Cheong in line with the constitutional principle of equal treatment of Seng Gee all religions. Office of Exec. Free Exercise Clause Two Aspects of Free Exercise Clause: . including those attending parochial schools Board of US Supreme Court sustained the law requiring the Education vs Allen petitioner to lend textbooks free of charge to all students from grades 7-12. in effect. It refers to degree of civilization. Fonacier v CA where the dispute involves the property rights of the religious group. and MELFA SALIDAGA worship Two values sought to be protected by the non-establishment clause: (1) Voluntarism – the growth of a religious sect as a social force must come from the voluntary support of its members because of the belief that both spiritual and secular society will benefit if religions are allowed to compete on their own intrinsic merit without benefit of official patronage. the civil courtws may assume jurisdiction. the civil tribunal tries the civil right and Manila nothing more. the State recognizes the validity of marriages performed in conformity with the rites of Mohammedan religion Rubi vs Provincial the expression “non-Christian” in “non-Christian tribes” Board was not meant to discriminate. forced Muslims to accept its own Philippines vs interpretation of the Qur'an and Sunna on halal food. Sec. not to the religious belief. Council of the the State has. Engel vs Vitale recitation by students in public schools in New York of a prayer composed by the Board of Regents was unconstitutional Everson vs Board US Supreme Court sustained the law providing free of Education transportation for all schoolchildren without discrimination. the government aid was given directly to the student and parents. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. including those attending private schools In Everson and Allen. 2.

. Freedom to Believe (a) absolute (b) includes not to believe (c) “everyone has a right to his beliefs and he may not be called to account because he cannot prove what he believes” 2. can be enjoyed only with proper regard to rights of others (c) Justice Frankfurter: the constitutional provision on religious freedom terminated disabilities. the registration fee is not imposed for the exerise of a privilege. of Finance the free exercise clause does not prohibit imposing a generally applicable sales and use tax on the sale of religious materials.. not freedom from conformity to law because of religious dogma German vs Barangan SC found that petitioners were not sincere in their profession of religious liberty and were using it merely to express their opposition to the government Ebralinag vs division SC reversed Gerona vs Sec. it did not create new privileges. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. but only for the purpose of defraying part of the cost of registration  Compelling State Interest test [Estrada vs Escritor] . Freedom to Act According to One's Beliefs (a) happens when the individual externalizes his beliefs in acts or omissions (b) subject to regulation. To compel students to take part in a flag ceremony when it is against their religious beliefs will violate their religious freedom. People vs Zosa invocation of religious scruples in order to avoid military service was brushed aside by the SC Victoriano vs Elizalde Rope SC upheld the validity of RA 3350. exempting Workers Union members of a religious sect from being compelled to join a labor union American Bible Society vs City the constitutional guarantee of free exercise of Manila carries with it the right to disseminate information. and MELFA SALIDAGA 1. City ordinance imposing license fees to on sale is inapplicable to the society Tolentino vs Sec. Hence. and Superintendent of Schools of upheld the right of petitioners to refute to Cebu salute the Philippine flag on account of their religious scruples. its essence is freedom from conformity to religious dogma. of Educ. . and any restraint of such right can be justified only on the ground that there is a clear and present danger of an evil which the State has the right to prevent.

 In Centeno vs Villalon-Pornillos.  In Pamil v. The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. III 1. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired except in the interest of national security. the disqualification remains enforceable. Said Code disqualifies an “ecclesiastic” from being elected or appointed to a municipal office. Liberty Guaranteed by Sec. Art. 6 Art.” Religious Tests  Purpose: to stop government's clandestine attempts to prevent a person from exercising his civil of political rights because of his religious beliefs. and 2. public safety. the Court held that solicitiations for religious purposes requires not a prior permit from DSWD as it is not included in solicitations for “charitable or public welfare purposes. 2175 of the Revised Adminsitrative Code is questioned whether or not it is consistent with the religious clause of the Constitution. and MELFA SALIDAGA  the constitution's religion clause's prescribe not a strict bu a benevolent neutrality (which recognizes that government must pursue its secular goals and interests.  two steps (as regards the test): ▪ inquire whether respondent's right to religious freedom has been burdened.) People vs Zosa invocation of religious scruples in order to avoid military service was brushed aside by the SC V. (Hence. Seven Justices voted to consider this a prohibited “religious test. as may be provided by law. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. III. RIGHT TO TRAVEL Section 6.” Five justices said it is not a religious test but a safeguard against the constant threat of union of Church and State that has marked the Philippine history. or public health. and ▪ ascertain respondent's sincerity in her religious belief. freedom to choose and change one's place of abode. but at the same time. strive to uphold religious liberty to the greatest extent possible within flexible constitutional limits  benevolent neutrality could allow for accomodation morality based on religion provided it does not offend the compelling state interest test. Sec. freedom to travel both within the country and outside Limitations  Liberty of Abode – “upon lawful order of the court” . Teleron. since the majority vote needed under the 1973 Constitution to nullify a statute was not reached.

public health or public order. as provided by the Labor Code. CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II by PORFERIO JR. Salonga vs the case became moot and academic when the permit to Hermoso travel abroad was issued before the case could be heard. By its nature. advancement and protection. as may be provided Service Exporters by law. and MELFA SALIDAGA  Right to Travel – “national security. 1927 Such segregation is premised on the duty to protect public health. Marcos vs The liberty of abode and the right to travel includes the right Manglapus to leave. of Laws for the segregation of lepers have been provided the Health world over and is supported by high scientific authority. are not chattels Lukban but Philippine citizens. etc. Rubi vs Provincial The respondents were justified in requiring the members of Board of Mindoro certain non-Christian tribes to reside in a reservation. power. Villavicencio vs Prostitutes. it may serve as a prohibition on an accused from leaving the jurisdiction of the Philippines where orders of Philippine courts would have no binding force. is a valid restriction on the 1986 right to travel. The fortunes of business cannot be controlled by controlling a fundamental human freedom. public safety or public health as may be provided by law” Caunca vs Salazar Whether a maid had the right to transfer to another 82 Phil 851 residence even if she had not paid yet the amount advances by an employment agency: Yes. vs Drilon An order temporarily suspending the deployment of 1988 overseas workers is constitutional for having been issued in the interest of the safety of OFWs. despite being in a sense lepers. reside and travel within one’s country but it does 1989 not include the right to return to one’s country. protected by the same constitutional 1919 guarantee of freedom of abode. Human dignity and freedom are essentially spiritual – inseparable from the idea of eternal. They may not be compelled to change their domicile in the absence of a law allowing such. NOTE: Court warned that this case should not create a precedent because Marcos was a class in himself. The measure was a legitimate exercise of police power. Money. belong to the ephemeral and perishable. Philippine Right to travel may be impaired in the interest of national Association of security. 97 SCRA 121 Lorenzo vs Dir. Manotok vs CA Bail posted in a criminal case. for 1919 their better education. .