You are on page 1of 24


Introduction The Fundamental Powers of the State

The true role of Constitutional Law is to effect an The fundamental powers of the state are inherent and do
equilibrium between authority and liberty so that rights are not need to expressly conferred by constitutional provision
exercised within the framework of the law and the laws are on the State.
enacted with due deference to rights.
Similarities of the three inherent powers of the State:
The fundamental powers of the State:
1. They are inherent in the State and may be exercised
1. Police power the power of the State to regulate by it without need of express constitutional grant.
liberty and property for the promotion of the general 2. They are not only necessary but indispensable. The
welfare State cannot continue or be effective unless it is able
2. Power of Eminent Domain enables the State to to exercise them.
forcibly acquire property, upon payment of just 3. They are methods by which the State interferes with
compensation, for some intended public use private rights.
3. Taxation enables the State to demand from the 4. They all presuppose an equivalent compensation for
members of the society their proportionate share or the private rights interfered with.
contribution in the maintenance of the government 5. They are exercised primarily by the legislature.

Differences between the three inherent powers of the State:

1. The police power regulates both liberty and property.

Nature of the Constitution
The power of eminent domain and the power of
Constitution the written instrument enacted by direct action of taxation affect only property rights.
2. The police power and the power of taxation may be
the people by which the fundamental powers of the
exercised only by the government. The power of
government are established, limited and defined, and by which
eminent domain may be exercised by some private
those powers are distributed among the several departments
for their safe and useful exercise for the benefit of the body
3. The property taken in the exercise of the police power
is destroyed because it is noxious or intended for a
noxious purpose. The property taken under the power
Essential parts of the written constitution:
of eminent domain and the power of taxation is
1. Constitution of liberty consists of a series of intended for a public use or purpose and is therefore
prescriptions setting forth the fundamental civil and wholesome.
4. The compensation of the person subjected to the
political rights of the citizens and imposing limitations
police power is the intangible altruistic feeling that he
on the powers of government as a means of securing
has contributed to the general welfare. The
the enjoyment of those rights
2. Constitution of government consists of a series of compensation involved in the other powers is more
provisions outlining the organization of the concrete, to wit, a full and fair equivalent of the
government, enumerating its powers, laying down property expropriated or protection and public
certain rules relative to its administration, and defining improvements for the taxes paid.
the electorate
3. Constitution of sovereignty consists of the
provisions pointing out the mode or procedure in
accordance with which formal changes in the The Police Power
fundamental law may be brought about
The police power may not be bargained away through the
The Constitution should be interpreted in such a way as to medium of a contract or even a treaty. The impairment
give effect to the intendment of the framers. clause must yield to the police power whenever the
contract deals with a subject affecting the public welfare.
The Constitution must change with the changing times lest
it impede the progress of the people with antiquated rules The police power may sometimes use the taxing power as
grown ineffective in a modern age. an implement for the attainment of a legitimate police
In case of doubt, the constitution should be considered
self-executing rather than non-self-executing; mandatory Like taxation, the power of eminent domain could be used
rather than directory; and prospective rather retrospective. as an implement of the police power. (Association of Small
Landowners v. Sec. of Agrarian Reform, 175 SCRA 343)
Self-executing provision a rule that by itself is directly or
indirectly applicable without need of statutory implementation The police power is lodged primarily in the national
legislature. Its exercise lies in the discretion of the
Non-self-executing one that remains dormant unless it is legislative department. The ascertainment of facts upon
activated by legislative implementations which the police power is to be based is likewise a
legislative prerogative.
Tests of the police power: select the exact location of the improvement. In such a
case, it is well settled that the utility of the proposed
1. The interests of the public generally, as improvement, the extent of the public necessity for its
distinguished from those of a particular class, construction, the expediency of constructing it, the
require the exercise of the police power; and suitableness of the location selected and the consequent
necessity of taking the land selected for its site, are all
The first requisite simply means that the subject of the questions exclusively for the legislature to determine, and
measure is within the scope of the police power, that is, the courts have no power to interfere, or to substitute their
that the activity or property sought to be regulated affects own views for those of the representative of the people.
the public welfare. (City of Manila v. Chinese Community, 40 Phil. 349)
Since a franchise is a mere privilege, the exercise of the The necessity for conferring the authority upon a municipal
privilege may be reasonably be burdened with the corporation (by the legislature) to exercise the right of
performance by the grantee of some form of public eminent domain is admittedly within the power of the
service. legislature. But whether or not the municipal corporation or
entity (the delegate) is exercising the right in a particular
2. The means employed are reasonably necessary
case under the conditions imposed by the general
for the accomplishment of the purpose and not
authority is a question which the courts have the power to
unduly oppressive upon individuals.
inquire into. (City of Manila v. Chinese Community, supra)
The means employed for the accomplishment of the police
Property already devoted to public use is still subject to
objective must pass the test of reasonableness and,
expropriation, provided this is done directly by the national
specifically, conform to the safeguards embodied in the Bill
legislature or under a specific grant of authority to the
of Rights for the protection of private rights.
delegate. A mere general authority may not suffice.

Compensation is required if the property is a patrimonial

property, that is, property acquired by the municipality with
Eminent Domain its private funds in its corporate or private capacity.
However, if it is any other property such a public buildings
Private property shall not be taken for public use without
or legua comunal held by the municipality for the State in
just compensation. (Section 9, Article III, 1987
trust for the inhabitants, the State is free to dispose of it at
will. (From lawphilreviewer)
The exercise of the right of eminent domain, whether The Sangguniang Panlalawigan may only declare a
directly by the State, or by its authorized agents, is municipal resolution invalid if it is ultra vires. (Moday v.
necessarily in derogation of private rights, and the rule in CA, 268 SCRA 586) This rule is especially important in
that case is that the authority must be strictly construed. expropriations made by LGUs because they expropriate
through a municipal ordinance. A municipal ordinance for
The power of eminent domain is lodged primarily in the
expropriation is ultra vires if it not for public use and no
national legislature, but its exercise may be validly
just compensation.
delegated to other governmental entities and, in fact, even
to private corporations, like the so-called quasi-public Services are considered embraced in the concepts of
corporations serving essential public needs or operating property subject to taking under the power of eminent
public utilities. domain. (Republic of the Philippines v. PLDT, 26 SCRA
Under existing laws, the following may exercise the power of
expropriation: Essential requisites of eminent domain:
1. The Congress; 1. Taking by competent authority;
2. The President of the Philippines; 2. Observance of due process of law;
3. The various local legislative bodies; 3. Taking for public use;
4. Certain public corporations, like the Land Authority 4. Payment of just compensation.
and the NHA;
5. Quasi-public corporations like the Philippine National Taking imports a physical dispossession of the owner, as
Railways, the PLDT Co. and the Meralco. when he is ousted from his land or relieved of his watch or his
car and is thus deprived of all beneficial use and enjoyment of
Destruction from necessity cannot require the conversion
his property; in law, the term has a broader connotation as to
of the property taken to public use, nor is there any need
include trespass without actual eviction of the owner, material
for the payment of just compensation.
impairment of the value of the property or prevention of the
Questions of necessity or wisdom are essentially political ordinary uses for which the property was intended
when decided by the national legislature and are usually
not subject to judicial review.
1. Where farmland is permanently inundated because of
The legislature, in providing for the exercise of the power
the construction of a dam nearby, the owner who is
of eminent domain, may directly determine the necessity
prevented from planting on the land is entitled to
for appropriating private property for a particular
compensation although he remains in possession of
improvement of public use, and it may select the exact
the property.
location of the improvement for public use, and it may
2. If government planes fly over private property at such Where the entire property is not expropriated, there should
low altitude as to practically touch the tops of the be added to the basic value of the owners consequential
trees thereon, there would be such an intrusion into damages after deducting therefrom the consequential
the superjacent rights of the owner as to entitle him to benefits arising from the expropriation.
payment of just compensation although again there is
no divestiture of title. (U.S. v. Causby, 328 U.S. 256) Consequential damages consist of injuries directly caused on
3. The imposition of an easement over a 3-meter strip of the residue of the private property taken by reason of the
the plaintiffs property could not be legally done expropriation
without payment to it of just compensation. (Ayala de
Roxas v. City of Manila, 9 Phil. 215) Consequential benefits, like consequential damages, must
4. A municipal ordinance prohibiting construction of any be direct and particular and not merely shared with the
building that would destroy the view of the plaza from rest of the properties in the area, as when there is a
the highway was considered a taking under the power general appreciation of land values because of the public
of eminent domain that could not be allowed without use to which the condemned properties are devoted.
payment of just compensation to the owner affected.
(People v. Fajardo, 104 Phil. 443) The property taken should be assessed at the time of the
taking, which usually coincides with the commencement of
Not every taking is compensable, as it may be justified the expropriation proceedings. (Republic v. Castellvi, 58
under the exercise of police power aimed at improving the SRCA 336) BUT if the value increased independently of
general welfare. (This rule is valid as long as the prejudice what the expropriator did, then the value is that of the
suffered by the individual property owner is shared in latter filing of the case.
common with the rest of the community. If he suffers more
than his aliquot part of the damages, that is, a special Where the entry precedes the filing of the complaint for
injury over and above that sustained by the rest of the expropriation, the assessment should be made as of the
community, he will be entitled to payment of the time of entry.
corresponding compensation.)
The owner is entitled to payment of interest from the time
Requisites of taking in eminent domain: of the taking until just compensation is actually paid to
him. (Urtula v. Republic, 22 SCRA 477) Interest must be
1. The expropriator must enter a private property;
claimed, however, or are deemed waived.
2. The entry must be for more than a momentary period;
3. The entry must be under warrant or color of legal
Taxes paid by the owner from the time of the taking until
4. The property must be devoted to public use or the transfer of title, during which he did not enjoy any
otherwise informally appropriated or injuriously beneficial use of the property, are reimbursable by the
affected; expropriator. (City of Manila v. Roxas, 60 Phil. 215)
5. The utilization of the property for public use must be
While the non-payment of compensation does not entitle
in such a way as to oust the owner and deprive him of
the private landowner to recover possession of the
beneficial enjoyment of the property.
expropriated lots, however, in cases where the
The expropriator may enter into a private property even if government failed to pay the compensation within five
the case for expropriation is still pending, provided that the years from the finality of the judgement in the
expropriator has given prior notice and has deposited an expropriation proceedings, the owner concerned shall
amount equivalent to the assessed value of the property have the right to recover possession of their property.
for tax purposes. (Republic v. Lim, 462 SCRA 265)

Mere notice of the intention to expropriate a particular Title to the property shall not be transferred until after
property does not bind its owner and inhibit him from actual payment of just compensation is made to the
disposing of it or otherwise dealing with it. Such notice will owner. (Visayan Refining Co. v. Camus, 40 Phil. 550)
not justify immediate taking. (People v. Fajardo, supra)
Airtime is not a property of radio and television
The owner does not need to file the usual claim for broadcasting companies. (Telecom v. COMELEC, 289
recovery of just compensation with the COA if the SCRA 337) Thus, compulsory allocation of airtime in favor
government takes over his property and devotes it to of the government for free is not taking of private property
public use without benefit of expropriation. without just compensation.

Public use any use directly available to the general public as If the land is expropriated for a particular purpose with the
a matter of right and not merely of forbearance or condition that when the purpose is ended, it shall return to
accommodation; or while not directly available to the public, the former owner, then the former owner reacquires the
redound to their indirect advantage or benefit property. If the decree of expropriation gives to the entity a
fee simple title, then the land becomes the absolute
Just compensation a full and fair equivalent of the property property of the State. The public use may be abandoned
taken from the private owner by the expropriator without impairment of the right of title or reversion to the
former owner. (Heirs v. Moreno, 413 SCRA 502)
Owner as applied in eminent domain cases, refers to all
those who have lawful interest in the property to be Judicial review of the exercise of the power of eminent
condemned, including a mortgagee, a lessee and a vendee in domain
possession under an executory contract 1. To determine the adequacy of the compensation
2. To determine the necessity of the taking insofar as their property are concerned. (Smith, Bell & Co.
3. To determine the public use character of the taking. v. Natividad, 40 Phil. 136)
However, if the expropriation is pursuant to a specific
law passed by Congress, the courts cannot question Deprive to take away forcibly, to prevent from possessing,
the public use character of the taking. enjoying or using something

Deprivation per se is not necessarily unconstitutional.

Notice and hearing is always afforded to owner of the What is prohibited is deprivation of life, liberty or property
property to be taken so that the owner can without due process of law.

One cannot have a vested right to a public office, as this is

not regarded as property. If created by statute, it may be
Taxation abolished by the legislature at any time, even if the term of
the incumbent therein has not yet expired.
Taxes the enforced proportional contributions from persons
and property, levied by the State by virtue of its sovereignty, for Where the salary has already been earned, it cannot be
the support of government and for all public needs reduce or withdrawn by a retroactive law as the salary has
already accrued as a property right. (Mississippi v.
Taxation the method by which tax contributions are exacted Miller,276 U.S. 174)

The power to tax does not include the power to destroy as Mere privileges, such as a license to operate a cockpit or
long as the Court sits. (Justice Holmes) a liquor store are not property rights and are therefore
revocable at will.
The power to tax may include the power to destroy if it is
used validly as an implement of the police power in One does not have a vested property right in the
discouraging and in effect ultimately prohibiting certain continued operation of a law, which may be repealed or
things or enterprises inimical to the public welfare amended at will by the legislature, or in the maintenance
of a judicial doctrine, which may be modified or reversed in
Each local government unit shall have the power to create the discretion of the Supreme Court.
its own sources of revenue and to levy taxes, fees and
charges, subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Substantive due process requires the intrinsic validity of the
Congress may provide consistent with the basic policy of law in interfering with the rights of the person to his life, liberty
local autonomy. (Article X, Section 5) or property (see test of police power)

Uniformity in taxation persons or things belonging to the The twin requirements of notice and hearing constitute the
same class shall be taxed at the same rate essential elements of due process (procedural) and
neither of these elements can be eliminated without
Equality in taxation the tax shall be strictly proportional to the running afoul of the constitutional guaranty. (Vinta
relative value of the property Maritime Co. v. NLRC, 284 SCRA 656)

Equitable taxation taxes should be apportioned among Requirements of procedural due process in judicial
people according to their capacity to pay proceedings:

There is double taxation when additional taxes are laid on 1. There must be an impartial court or tribunal
the same subject by the same taxing jurisdiction during the clothed with judicial power to hear and determine
same taxing period and for the same purpose. the matter before it;

The judge must not only be impartial but must also appear
to be impartial as an added assurance to the parties that
his decision will be just. (Javier v. COMELEC, 144 SCRA
The Bill of Rights
Competent court one vested with jurisdiction over a case as
The provisions in the Bill of Rights are generally self- conferred upon it by law
2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the
The provisions of the Bill of Rights can only be invoked person of the defendant and over the property
which is the subject matter of the proceeding;
against the State and not against private individuals.
In action in personam, such as a complaint for recovery of
a loan, jurisdiction over the defendant is acquired by the
court by his voluntary appearance or through service of
Due Process of Law summons upon him.
Section 1, Article III. No person shall be deprived of life, In actions in rem or quasi in rem, such as land registration
liberty or property without due process of law... proceedings or the foreclosure of a real estate mortage,
the jurisdiction of the court is derived from the power it
Artificial persons like corporations and partnerships are
may exercise over the property.
also covered by the protection of due process but only
Due process is required in deportation and extradition
3. The defendant must be given an opportunity to be cases.
Due process is required in summary dismissal. There
A decision rendered without a hearing is null and void ab must be notice and hearing.
initio and may be attacked directly or collaterally. (David v.
Aquilizan, 94 SCRA 707) Due process need not be observed in the following cases:

The law does not require another notice and hearing for a 1. Abatement of nuisance per se
review of the decision of the board of special inquiry on 2. Preventive suspension
the basis of evidence previously presented. (Caoile v. 3. Provisional increase
Vivo, 125 SCRA 87) 4. Contempt

Due process is not violated where a person is not heard

because he has chose, for whatever reason, not to be
heard. If he opts to be silent where he has a right to Equal Protection
speak, he cannot later be heard to complain that he was
unduly silenced. (Stronghold Insurance Co. v. CA, 205 Section 1, Article III. x x x, nor shall any person be denied
SCRA 605) the equal protection of the laws.

Due process as a constitutional precept does not, always Equal protection all persons or things similarly situated
and in all situations, requires trial-type proceedings. should be treated alike, both as to rights conferred and
(Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan, 166 SCRA 316) responsibilities imposed

Some exceptions to the requirements of notice and hearing: Substantive equality is not enough. It is also required that
the law be enforce and applied equally. (Example: Even if
1. Cancellation of the passport of a person sought for the law be fair on its face, it will still violate equal
the commission of a crime; protection if it is administered with an evil eye and an
2. The preventive suspension of a civil servant facing uneven hand so as to unjustly benefit some and prejudice
administrative charges; others.)
3. The distraint of properties for tax delinquency;
4. The padlocking of restaurants found to be insanitary A law may appear to be fair on its face and impartial in
or of theatres showing obscene movies; appearance, yet, if it permits of unjust and illegal
5. The abatement of nuisances per se.
discrimination, it is within the constitutional prohibition.
4. Judgement must be rendered upon lawful (People v. Vera, 65 Phil. 56)
The equal protection clause is available to all persons,
Requisites of procedural due process in administrative natural as well as juridical. Artificial persons, however, are
proceedings: entitled to the protection only insofar as their property is
concerned. (Smith, Bell v. Natividad, 40 Phil. 136)
1. The right to a hearing, which includes the right to
present ones case and submit evidence in support Classification the grouping of persons or things similar to
thereof; each other in certain particulars and different from all others in
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented; these same particulars
3. The decision must have something to support itself;
4. The evidence must be substantial; While it is true that the Philippines as a state is not obliged
5. The decision must be rendered on the evidence to admit aliens within its territory, once an alien is
presented at the hearing, or at least contained in the admitted, he cannot be deprived of life without due
record and disclosed to the parties affected; process of law. This guarantee includes the means of
6. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on livelihood. The shelter of protection under the due process
its or his own independent consideration of the law and equal protection clause is given to all persons, both
and facts of the controversy and not simply accept the aliens and citizens. (Villegas v. Hiu Chiong, 86 SCRA 270)
views of a subordinate in arriving at a decision;
7. The board or body should, in all controversial
questions, render its decision in such a manner that Requisites of classification:
the parties to the proceedings can know the various
issues involved, and the reason for the decision 1. It must be based upon substantial distinctions;
The classification of cities into highly urbanized cities and
Disciplinary cases involving students need not necessarily component cities on the basis of their regular annual
include the right to cross-examine. An administrative income is based upon substantial distinction. (Ceniza v.
proceeding conducted to investigate students participation COMELEC, 96 SCRA 763)
in a hazing act need not be clothed with the attributes of a
judicial proceeding. (AdMU v. Capulong, 222 SCRA 644) Persons who work with substantially equal qualifications,
skills, effort and responsibility, under similar conditions,
When an administrative body issues an order which should be paid similar salaries. (International School
applies to all (quasi-legislative, as distinguished from Alliance of Educators v. Quisimbing, 333 SCRA 13)
quasi-judicial), there is no need for notice and hearing.
2. It must be germane to the purposes of the law;
The warrant must refer to only one specific offense. (Rule
The classification, even if based on substantial 126, Section 3, Rules of Court)
distinctions, will still be invalid if it is not germane to the
purpose of the law. 2. The probable cause must be determined
o Example: The law cannot provide for a lower personally by the judge;
passing average for women in the bar
examinations on the basis of classification of This power is derived by the judge directly from the self-
physical strength. Physical strength, although a executing provisions of Article III, Section 2, of the
substantial distinction between men and women, Constitution and therefore may not be limited, much less
is not the test for admission to the legal withdrawn, by the legislature.
The issuance of a warrant is not a ministerial function of
3. It must not be limited to existing conditions only; the judge who had the right to determine for himself the
existence of probable cause. While he could rely on the
The classification must be enforced not only for the findings of the prosecutor, he is nevertheless not bound
present but as long as the problem sought to be corrected thereby. (Placer v. Villanueve, 126 SCRA 463)
continues exist.
The judge may either do the following to personally determine
4. It must apply equally to all members of the class. probable cause:

It is not necessary that the classification be made with 1. Personally evaluate the report and the supporting
absolute symmetry, in the sense that the members of the documents* submitted by the fiscal regarding the
class should possess the same characteristics in equal existence of probable cause and on the basis thereof,
degree. Substantial similarity will suffice; and as long as issue a warrant; or
this is achieved, all those covered by the classification are 2. If on the basis thereof he finds no probable cause, he
to be treated equally. may disregard the fiscals report and require the
submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses to aid
The mere fact that an individual belonging to a class him in arriving at a conclusion as to the existence of
differs from the other members, as long as that class is probable cause.
substantially distinguishable from all others, does not
justify the non-application of the law to him. *The judge should not rely on the recommendations alone of
the prosecutor but must independently arrive at his own
conclusions based not only on the bare report of the
prosecutor but also on other relevant documents.
Searches and Seizures
What the Constitution underscores is the exclusive and
Section 2, Article III. The right of the people to be secure in personal responsibility of the issuing judge to satisfy
their persons, houses, papers, and effects against himself of the existence of probable cause.
unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature
and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search Difference between the determination of the existence of
warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause by the prosecutor and by the judge:
probable cause to be determined personally by the judge
after examination under oath or affirmation of the The prosecutor determines whether there is probable
complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and cause to believe that the accused is guilty and should be
particularly describing the place to be searched, and the held for trial. On the other hand, the judge determines
persons or things to be seized. whether there is probable cause to issue a warrant.

Constitutional requirements of a valid search warrant or

Warrants of arrest may be issued by administrative
warrant of arrest:
authorities only for the purpose of carrying out a final
1. It must be based upon probable cause; finding of a violation of law, like an order of deportation or
an order of contempt, and not for the sole purpose of
Probable cause referring to such facts and circumstances investigation or prosecution. (Board of Commissioners v.
antecedent to the issuance of the warrant that in themselves De la Rosa, 197 SCRA 853) Karon, ang issuance of
are sufficient to induce a cautious man to rely on them and act warrant is strictly judicial.
in pursuance thereof; consists of a reasonable ground of
suspicion supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in The requirement of probable cause is, strictly speaking,
themselves to warrant a cautious man in believing accused to not applicable in deportation proceedings, which are not
be committing the offense or to be guilty of the offense; the criminal in nature.
knowledge of facts, actual or apparent, strong enough to justify
3. The determination must be made after
a reasonable man in the belief that he has lawful grounds for
examination under oath or affirmation of the
prosecuting defendant in the manner complained of, the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce;
concurrence of facts and circumstances reasonable warranting
(Applies to search warrants; also to warrants of arrest
the belief; such facts and circumstances which would lead a
if the judge is not satisfied with the report of the
reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense
prosecutor and the supporting documents.)
has been committed and that the objects sought in connection
with the offense are in the place sought to be searched
In issuing warrants of arrest, there is no need to personally arrest without a warrant when an officer sees the offense
examine the complainant and his witnesses if the judge, although at a distance, or hears the disturbance or
after evaluating the report and the supporting documents disturbances created thereby and proceeds at once to the
submitted by the prosecutor, is satisfied of the existence of scene of the crime. (People v. Evaristo, 261 SCRA 431)
probable cause.
(b) When an offense has just been committed, and
Section 4. Requisites for issuing search warrant. A he has probable cause to believe based on
search warrant shall not issue except upon probable personal knowledge of facts or circumstances
cause in connection with one specific offense to be that the person to be arrested has committed it;
determined personally by the judge after examination and (Hot pursuit) [What is important here is to
under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the determine whether the arresting officer has personal
witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the knowledge.]
place to be searched and the things to be seized which
may be anywhere in the Philippines. (Rule 126, Rules of See People v. Briones, 202 SCRA 708. In this case, the
Court) eyewitness went to the police to report a crime committed by
the accused. The peace officers arrested the accused without
The judge, before issuing the search warrant, must
a warrant based on the eyewitness information. The SC held
personally examine in the form of searching questions and
that the warrantless arrest was not valid because the arresting
answers, in writing and under oath the complainant and
officers had no personal knowledge of facts or circumstances
any witness he may produce on facts personally known to
that the accused has committed the crime. It was the
them, and attach to the record their sworn statements
eyewitness who had such personal knowledge.
together with any affidavits submitted. (Section 5, Rule
126, Rules of Court)
In the case of People v. Tonog, Jr., 205 SCRA 772, it was held
The evidence offered by the complainant and his by the SC that the there was a valid warrantless arrest. Upon
witnesses should be based on their own personal the investigation of the police officer, it was found out that the
knowledge and not on mere information or belief. Hearsay accused was the perpetrator of the crime based on the
is not allowed. information given by a witness. The police officer arrested the
accused without a warrant of arrest. This case differs from the
4. It must particularly describe the place to be Briones case in that in this case, there was an investigation
searched and the persons or things to be seized. conducted by the arresting officer. The information gathered by
the arresting officer at his investigation becomes within his
While a John Doe warrant is generally held invalid, it will personal knowledge.
satisfy the constitutional requirement if there is some
descriptio personae that will enable the officer to identify
The information derived from statements made by alleged
the accused. (People v. Veloso, 48 Phil. 169)
eyewitnesses to the crime upon which the police acted
A description of a place to be searched is sufficient if the does not constitute personal knowledge of the arresting
officer with the warrant can, with reasonable effort, police. (Go v. CA, 206 SCRA 138)
ascertain and identify the place intended.
The filing of charges and the issuance of the warrant of
Where by the nature of the articles to be seized their arrest against a person invalidly detained will cure the
description must be rather general, it is not required that a defect of that detention or at least deny him the right to be
technical description be given. released because of such defect. (Sanchez v. Demetriou,
227 SCRA 627)
Properties subject to search and seizure:
The accused, invalidly arrested without a warrant, is
1. Property subject of the offense; deemed to have submitted to the jurisdiction of the court if
2. Property stolen or embezzled and other proceeds or he raises objections on grounds other than the ground that
fruits of the offense; and the court had not acquired jurisdiction because of the
3. Property used or intended to be used as the means of invalid warrantless arrest. (Sanchez v. Demetriou, supra)
committing an offense.
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner
The return of stolen goods, even if illegally seized, may
who has escaped from a penal establishment or
not be ordered by the court. (People v. Marcos, 117 SCRA
place where he is serving final judgment or is
temporarily confined while his case is pending, or
has escaped while being transferred from one
A peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant, confinement to another.
arrest a person:
Additional instances of valid warrantless arrest:
(a) When, in his presence, the person to be
arrested has committed, is actually committing, or
1. If a person lawfully arrested escapes or is rescued,
is attempting to commit an offense; (in flagrante
any person may immediately pursue or retake him
without a warrant at any time and in any place within
the Philippines. (Section 13, Rule 113)
An offense is committed in the presence or in the view of 2. For the purpose of surrendering the accused, the
an officer within the meaning of the rule authorizing an bondsmen may arrest him or upon written authority
endorsed on a certified copy of the undertaking, that the warrantless search made by the policemen was
cause him to be arrested by a police officer or any valid because when Posadas attempted to flee when the
other person of suitable age and discretion. (Section police officers were merely introducing themselves, it gave
23, Rule 114) probable cause for the policemen to believe that Posadas
3. An accused released on bail may be re-arrested was hiding something illegal.
without the necessity of a warrant if he attempts to
depart from the Philippines without permission of the In People v. Mengote, 210 SCRA 174, the facts were
court where the case is pending. (Section 23, Rule similar with the case of Posadas except that it happened
114) at noon and the accused Mengote did not attempt to flee
when policemen introduced themselves and searched
An application for or admission to bail shall not bar the him. The SC held that the warrantless search was invalid
accused from challenging the validity of his arrest or the because the policemen has no probable cause to search
legality of the warrant issued therefor, or from assailing the Mengote.
regularity or questioning the absence of a preliminary
investigation of the charge against him, provided that he 3. Search of moving vehicle
raises them before entering his plea. (Sec. 26, Rule 114,
Rules of Court) GENERAL RULE: Inspection in checkpoints of moving
vehicles is limited to a visual or ocular inspection.
An accused is stopped from question the legality of his (Valmonte v. De Villa)
arrest where he never raised it before entering his plea.
(People v. Salvatierra, 276 SCRA 55) EXCEPTION: Extensive search may be valid if the officers
conducting the search have reasonable or probable cause
to believe before the search that they will find the
Instances of valid warrantless search and seizure:
instrumentality or evidence pertaining to a crime in the
vehicle to be searched. Example: When the police officers
1. Search incident to a lawful arrest have information that a passenger riding as certain vehicle
was carrying something illegal. (People v. Malmstedt, 198
When an arrest is effected by virtue of a valid warrant, or
SCRA 401 and People v. Bagista, 214 SCRA 53) The
under any of the circumstances of a valid warrantless
ruling in Malmstedt and Bagista was not however applied
arrest, a search may be made as an incident to such valid
in the case of People v. Aminudi, 163 SCRA 402, where
arrest. The individual may be frisked for concealed
the police received information that Aminudin carrying
weapons that may be used against the arresting officer
marijuana was on a certain vessel from Mindanao. The SC
and all unlawful articles found in his person or within his
said that the warrantless search was not valid because the
immediate control may be seized. (Adams v. Williams, 47
police officer still have time to secure the necessary
U.S. 143)
search warrant.
A warrantless search incidental to a lawful arrest may be
EXCEPTION: When there is consent to search the
made only within the permissible area of search, or the
place within the immediate control of the person being
arrested. 4. Evidence in plain view

It is beyond cavil that a lawful arrest must precede the

search of a person and his belongings. Where a search
first undertaken, then an arrest effected based on
evidence produced by the search, both such search and
arrest would be unlawful, for being contrary to law.
2. Stop and frisk Where a police officer observes
unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to 1. The law enforcement officer in search of the evidence
conclude in the light of his experience that criminal has a prior justification for an intrusion or is in a
activity may be afoot and that the persons with whom position from which he can view a particular area;
he is dealing may be armed and presently dangerous, 2. The discovery of the evidence in plain view is
where in the course of investigating this behaviour, he inadvertent; and
identifies himself as a policeman and makes 3. It is immediately apparent to the officer that the item
reasonable inquiries, and where nothing in the initial he observes may be evidence of a crime, contraband
stages of encounter serves to dispel his reasonable or otherwise subject to seizure.
fear for his own and others safety, he is entitled for
the protection of himself and others in the area to The plain view doctrine will not justify the seizure of the
conduct a carefully limited search of the outer clothing object where the incriminating nature of the object is not
of such persons in an attempt to discover weapons apparent from the plain view.
which might be used to assault him. (Terry Search)
5. Customs searches
In the case of Posadas v. CA, 180 SCRA 283, the accused
Posadas, carrying a buri bag and acting suspiciously, was Searches, seizures and arrests may be made even
approached by two policemen who identified themselves without warrants for purposes of enforcing customs and
as such. Posadas suddenly attempted to leave. Thus, the tariff laws.
o REASON: The vessel can be quickly moved out
policemen caught him. And when searched, Posadas was
found out carrying firearms and ammunitions. The SC held of the locality or jurisdiction in which the search
must be sought before the warrant could be Restrictions on freedom of expression:
1. Previous restraint or censorship;
6. Consented search
Previous restraint or censorship on freedom of expression
Requisites: bears a heavy presumption of constitutional invalidity.
(Osmea v. COMELEC, 288 SCRA 447) It is incumbent
1. The right exist; for the Government to show that the restraint or
2. That the person involved had knowledge, either actual censorship has passed the clear-and-present danger test
or constructive, of the existence of such right; and (or the dangerous tendency test or the balancing of
3. The said person had actual intention to relinquish the interest test). [Applies only to content-based restrictions]
4. The consent must be voluntary.
Two ways of restrictions (concerns laws/regulations):
Silence is not equivalent to consent. (People v. Burgos,
144 SCRA 1) a) Content-neutral regulations

Where the permission to enter a residence was given to Content-neutral regulations on freedom of expression are
search for rebels, it is illegal to search the rooms therein concerned with the time, place and manner of the exercise
for firearms without a search warrant. (Veroy v. Layague, of such freedom, and not with the content of the speech.
210 SCRA 97)
Clear and present danger is not needed to justify content-
7. Exigent searches or searches during emergency neutral regulations. Substantial governmental interest is
circumstances sufficient to support them. (Osmea v. COMELEC, supra)
8. Searches pursuant to airport security procedures
9. Searches pursuant to jail safety procedures The restriction on freedom of expression in content-neutral
10. Search by private persons regulations is only incidental. (Osmea, supra)

Section 3, Article III. (1) The privacy of communication and b) Content-based restrictions
correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful
Content-based restrictions on freedom of expression
order of the court, or when public safety or order requires
restrict such freedom based on the content of the speech.
otherwise as prescribed by law.
Censorship conditions the exercise of freedom of
The court order herein must be issued upon compliance expression upon the prior approval of the government.
with the constitutional requirements for the issuance of a Only those ideas acceptable to it are allowed to be
warrant, and shall only be effective for only sixty (60) days. disseminated; all others are restricted or suppressed.

(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the

preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in
any proceeding. (Exclusionary rule; Fruit of the poisonous Distinctions between content-neutral and content-based:

Where the accused did not raise the issue of admissibility

of the evidence against him on the ground that it had been
illegally seized, such omission constituted a waiver of the
Content-neutral regulations Content-based restrictions
protection granted by this section, and the illegally seized
only restricts freedom of are abridgements on freedom
evidence could then be admitted against him. (People v.
expression incidentally, thus, expression, thus, there is a
they are presumed a valid presumption of constitutional
The accused should raise the objection before the exercise of police power. invalidity against them.
prosecution rests during trial.
Since they are presumed Since they are presumed
valid, the burden of showing constitutionally invalid, the
that they are not is upon burden of showing that they
those who challenge the are valid is upon the
Freedom of Expression regulation/law. Government.

Section 4, Article III. No law shall be passed abridging the They are concerned with the They are concerned with the
freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the time, place, and manner of content and substance of the
right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the exercising the freedom. speech.
government for redress of grievances.
Substantial governmental Clear and present danger
Freedom of expression is available only insofar as it is interest is sufficient to justify must be shown to justify
exercised for the discussion of matters affecting the public content-neutral regulations. content-based restrictions.
2. Subsequent punishment.
Freedom of expression is a preferred right.
Freedom of speech includes freedom after the speech. about the substantive evil which the legislative body seeks
to prevent. (Cabansag v. Fernandez, 102 Phil. 152)
It has been held that freedom of expression does not
cover ideas offensive to public order or decency or the 3. The balancing of interest test
reputation of person which are all entitled to protection by
When particular conduct is regulated in the interest of
the State.
public order, and the regulation results in an indirect,
conditional, partial abridgement of speech, the duty of the
Three major criteria for determining the liability of the
courts is to determine which of the two conflicting interests
individual for ideas expressed by him:
demands the greater protection under the particular
circumstances presented. (American Communications
1. The clear and present danger rule Assoc. v. Douds, 339 U.S. 282) -_O_-

The question in every case is whether the words used are The official acts, and now even the private life of, a public
used in circumstances and are of such a nature as to servant (includes public figures and persons involved in a
create a clear and present danger that they will bring public issue) are legitimate subjects of public comment.
about the substantive evils that the State has the right to The people have a right to scrutinize and commend or
prevent. (Schenck v. United State, 249 U.S. 97) condemn the conduct of their chosen representatives in
the government. And as long as their comments are made
The rule is that the danger created must not only be clear
in good faith and with justifiable ends, they are insulated
and present but also traceable to the ideas expressed.
from prosecution or damage suits for defamation even if
such views are found to be inaccurate or erroneous.
Clear a causal connection with the danger of the substantive
evil arising from the utterance questioned In prosecution for libellous comments against a public
official, it is upon the public official concerned to prove that
Present refers to the time element the false defamatory statement was made with actual
malice, that is, with knowledge that it was false or with
The substantive evil must be extremely serious and the disregard of whether it was false or not. (Vasquez v. CA,
314 SCRA 460)
degree of imminence extremely high before utterances
can be punished.
The right to invade a persons privacy to disseminate
public information does not extend to a fictional or
In Primicias v. Fugoso, 80 Phil. 71, the Supreme Court held novelized representation of a person, no matter how public
that the respondent Mayors refusal to allow the Nacionalista a figure he or she may be. (Lagunzad v. Sotto Vda. De
Party to hold a meeting at Plaza Miranda is violative of the Gonzales, 92 SCRA 476)
freedom of expression. The Mayors refusal was grounded on
the fear of disorder that could be caused by the speeches that Newspaper publications tending to impede, obstruct,
will be delivered during the meeting. The Supreme Court, in embarrass or influence the courts in administering justice
rejecting the argument, said that the fear of disorder is not that in a pending suit or proceeding constitutes criminal
serious and imminent as to justify the curtailment of contempt which is summarily punishable by the courts.
expression. This rule is otherwise after the case is ended. (People v.
Alarcon, 69 Phil. 265) This rule simply prohibits criticisms
In Navarro v. Villegas, 31 SCRA 731, the facts are similar to on pending litigations so as not to interfere with the
the Primicias case, but occurred in 1970, at the height of administration of justice.
student unrest and activism. The Supreme Court sustained the
Mayors refusal to allow the meeting to be held at Plaza Criticisms must always be couched in respectful language.
Miranda because the fear of disorder at that time is serious (People v. Godoy, 243 SCRA 64) Critics may be cited for
and imminent. The Sunken Garden was suggested, a less contempt in violation with this rule.
sensitive area in the city.
Tests of obscenity:
In Reyes v. Bagatsing, 125 SCRA 553, the Supreme Court
held that the denial by the respondent Mayor to issue a permit 1. Whether the average, applying contemporary
to rally was invalid because there was no showing of the community standards, would find that the work, taken
probability of a clear and present danger that might arise as a as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
result of the rally. 2. Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently
offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by
2. The dangerous tendency doctrine the applicable law;
3. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious
If the words uttered create a dangerous tendency which literary, artistic, political or scientific value.
the State has a right to prevent, then such words are
punishable. It is not necessary that some definite or Rules regarding the right peaceably to assemble and
immediate acts of force, violence, or unlawfulness be petition the Government
advocated. It is sufficient that such acts be advocated in
general terms. Nor is it necessary that the language used The permit for an assembly to be held in a public place is
be reasonably calculated to incite persons to acts of force, required for the use of such place, and not for the
violence or unlawfulness. It is sufficient if the natural assembly itself.
tendency and probable effect of the utterance be to bring
The power of the local officials with regards to lawful The doctrine of the separation of Church and State cuts
assemblies is only one of regulation and not prohibition. both ways. It is not only the State that is prohibited from
(Primicias v. Fugoso, supra) Meaning mag designate lang interfering in purely ecclesiastical affairs; the Church is
sila ug other place or time. likewise barred from meddling in purely secular matters.

Another place may be designated by the licensing

The establishment clause is not violated if:
authorities upon clear and convincing evidence that the
public assembly will create a clear and present danger
1. The statute has a secular legislative purpose;
that will bring about the substantive evils that such 2. Its principal or primary effect is one that neither
authorities has a right to prevent. advances nor inhibits religion; and
3. It does not foster an excessive government
If the mayor or any official acting in his behalf denies the
entanglement with religion.
application or modifies the terms thereof in his permit, the
applicant may contest the decision in an appropriate court Freedom of religion includes freedom from religion; the
of law. (Sec. 6[e], B.P. Blg. 880) right to worship includes the right not to worship.

A permit for the holding of a public assembly shall not be In Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421, the U.S. Supreme Court
necessary where the meeting is to be held: declared as unconstitutional the recitation by the student in
public schools in New York of a prayer. It held that the State
1. In a private place; aligned itself with the worshiper as against the atheist and
2. In the campus of a government-owned and operated violated its obligation to maintain an attitude of strict neutrality
educational institution; in religious matters.
3. In a freedom park. (Public Assemnly Act, B.P. Blg.
Section 29 (2), Article VI. No public money or property shall
Where a permit is required, the written application therefor be appropriated, applied, paid or employed directly or
shall be filed with the mayors office at least five days indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church,
before the scheduled meeting and shall be acted upon denomination, sectarian institution, or system of religion, or of
within two days. Otherwise, the permit shall be deemed any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher, or
granted. dignitary as such, except when such priest, preacher, minister,
or dignitary is assigned to the armed forces, or to any penal
The question, if rights of free speech and peaceful institution or government orphanage or leprosarium.
assembly are to be preserved, is not as to the auspices
under which the meeting is held but as to its purpose; not Any benefit indirectly enjoyed by a religious institution, as
as to the relations of the speakers, but whether their long as such benefit was only incidental to a legitimate
utterances transcend the bounds of the freedom of speech secular objective, would not violate the prohibition.
which the Constitution protects. (De Jonge v. Oregon, 229 (Aglipay v. Ruiz, 64 Phil. 201)
U.S. 353) The Test of a Lawful Assembly
In Garces v. Estenzo (105 SCRA 510), the Supreme Court
Rights to peaceably assemble and petition the ruled that the purchase of a religious image by a barangay
government for redress of grievances, like any other council with private funds raised from voluntary
liberty, must be exercised within reasonable limits so as contributions did not violate the Constitution.
not to prejudice the public welfare. (De la Cruz v. CA, 305
SCRA 303) If they exercise their right beyond the Section 29 (2) does not inhibit the use of public property
reasonable limits, they may be penalized, not because for religious purposes when the religious character of such
they exercised such right but because of the manner they use is merely incidental to a temporary use which is
exercised such right. (Bangalisan v. CA, 276 SCRA 619) available indiscriminately to the public in general.

Property rights are inferior to the rights of free expression Payment of public funds is prohibited to ecclesiastics only
and of assembly. (PBM Employees v. Phil. Blooming Mills as such, which means that they may be paid from public
Co., 51 SCRA 189) funds if they serve the government in a non-ecclesiastical

Section 3 (3), Article XIV. At the option expressed in writing by

the parents or guardians, religion shall be allowed to be taught
Freedom of Religion to their children or wards in public elementary and high schools
within the regular class hours by instructors designated or
Religion any specific system of belief, worship, conduct, etc., approved by the religious authorities of the religion to which the
often involving a code of ethics and philosophy children or wards belong, without additional cost to the
Religion embraces matters of faith and dogma, as well as
doubt, agnosticism and atheism. Section 28 (3), Article VI. Charitable institutions, churches
and personage and convents appurtenant thereto, mosques,
Section 5, Article III. No law shall be made respecting an non-profit cemeteries, and all lands, buildings, and
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise improvements, actually, directly and exclusively used for
thereof... religious, charitable or educational purposes shall be exempt
from taxation.
(The taxes covered by the constitutional exemption are real Any restraint in the freedom to act in ones belief can be
estate taxes or ad valorem taxes imposed on the property justified like other restraints of freedom of expression on
itself.) [As distinguished from excise taxes] (Lladoc v. CIR, 14 the ground that there is a clear and present danger of
SCRA 292) _-o-_ any substantive evil which the State has the right to
prevent. (American Bible Society v. City of Manila, 101
Intramural disputes regarding religious dogma and other Phil. 386)
matters of faith are outside the jurisdiction of the secular
The freedom to act in ones belief is not subject to the
requirement of licensing or registration or fee. A person
Where the dispute involves the property rights of the has the right to exercise such privilege without permission
religious group, or the relations of the members where or fee.
property rights are involved, the civil courts may assume
jurisdiction. Example is in the case of Fonacier v. CA, 96 In American Bible Society, supra, the Supreme Court held that
Phil. 417, where the SC applied the pertinent laws and the the ordinance requiring petitioner to obtain a license and pay
internal rules of the Philippine Independent Church to the corresponding fee for being engaged in the sale of
determine who between the two persons is the head of the merchandise unconstitutional. The SC said that petitioner was
church and thus has the right to control its properties. not engaged in the sale of merchandise but was in the exercise
of his freedom to religion. Such privilege is not subject to
Where a civil right depends upon some matter pertaining license and fees.
to ecclesiastical affairs, the civil tribunal tries the civil right
and nothing more, taking the ecclesiastical decision out of In Tolentino v. Sec. of Finance, 235 SCRA 630, the registration
which the civil right has arisen as it finds them, and fee of P1,000 was upheld by the Supreme Court because such
accepting those decisions as matters adjudicated by fee was not imposed on the exercise of a privilege but only for
another jurisdiction. (Gonzales v. Archbishop of Manila, 51 the purpose of defraying part of the cost of registration.
Phil. 420)

x x x The free exercise and enjoyment of religious

profession and worship, without discrimination or
preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall Liberty of Abode and Travel
be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.
Section 6, Article III. The liberty of abode and of changing
Aspects of the right to religious profession and worship: the same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be
impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither
1. Freedom to believe shall the right to travel be impaired except in the interest
of national security, public safety or public health, as may
This freedom is absolute as long as the belief is confined be provided by law.
within the realm of thought.
2. Freedom to act on ones belief An employment agency, regardless of the amount it may
advance to a prospective employee, has absolutely no
Where the individual externalizes his beliefs in acts or
power to curtail the freedom of said employee. The fact
omissions that affect the public, his freedom to do so
that power to control said freedom may be an effective
becomes subject to the authority of the State.
means of avoiding monetary loss to the agency is no
The constitutional provision on religious freedom reason for jeopardizing a fundamental human right.
(Caunca v. Salazar, 82 Phil. 851)
terminated disabilities, it did not create new privileges. It
gave religious liberty, not civil immunity. Its essence is
It is desirable that respondent Travel Processing Center
freedom from conformity to religion, not freedom from
should exercise the utmost care to avoid the impression
conformity to law because of religious dogma. (W. Va.
that certain citizens desirous of exercising their
Board of education v. Barnette, 219 U.S. 624)
constitutional right to travel could be subjected to
inconvenience or annoyance. (Salonga v. Hermoso, 97
Examples: SCRA 121)

1. One has full freedom to believe in Satan, but he may An order of a court to a person released on bail to remain
not offer the object of his piety a human sacrifice, as to be a resident in a certain area constitutes a lawful order
this would be murder. as contemplated by the provision in the Constitution. (Yap
2. One has freedom to believe in the Biblical command v. CA, 358 SCRA 564)
to go forth and multiply, but he is not allowed to
contract plural marriages in violation of the laws Provisions of law limiting enjoyment of liberty should be
against bigamy. strictly construed against the government and in favor of
the individual.
As long as it can be shown that the exercise of the right
does not impair the public welfare, the attempt of the State The power of the court to restrict the right to travel of an
to regulate or prohibit such right would be an accused released on bail is inherent on their power to
unconstitutional encroachment. administer justice.
The right to travel refers to the right to move from one Orders and decisions of the courts are matters of public
place to another. (Mirasol v. DPWH, 490 SCRA 318) concern and the public has a right to be informed.
However, when it comes to pleadings and other
documents filed by the parties to a case, the purpose for
which they are sought is to be considered. (Hilado v.
Reyes, 296 SCRA 282)
Access to Information
Section 7, Article III. The right of the people to information
on matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access
1. Mandamus
to official records, and to documents and papers 2. Administrative case
pertaining to official acts, transactions, or decisions, as
well as to government research data used as basis for
policy development, shall be afforded the citizen subject
to such limitations as may be provided by law.
Right of Association
Except perhaps when it is clear that the purpose of the
examination is unlawful or sheer, idle curiosity, we do not Section 8, Article III. The right of the people, including
believe it is the duty under the law of registration officers those employed in the public and private sectors, to form
to concern themselves with the motives, reasons, and unions, associations or societies for purposes not
objects of the persons seeking access to the records. contrary to law shall not be abridged.
(Baldoza v. Dimaano, 71 SCRA 14)
Section 2 (5), Article IX-B. The right to self-organization shall
The authority to regulate the manner of examining public not be denied to government employees.
records does not carry with it the power to prohibit.
Members of the civil service may not declare a strike to
Distinctions between the discretion to refuse outright the enforce their economic demands. (Alliance of Government
disclosure of or access to a particular information and the Workers v. Ministry of Labor and Employment, 124 SCRA
authority to regulate the manner in which the access is to 1)
be afforded:
Laborers who are inhibited from joining labor unions
1. The refusal may only be made by the Legislature by because of their religious beliefs have the right not to
law; while regulation pertains to the government associate in spite of any closed-shop agreement with the
agency charged with the custody of public records. management. The right to associate includes the right not
2. While the manner of examining public records may be to associate. (Victoriano v. Elizalde Rope Workers Union,
subject to reasonable regulation by the government 59 SCRA 54)
agency in custody thereof, the duty to disclose the
information of public concern, and to afford access to GENERAL RULE: The right to associate includes the right
public records cannot be discretionary on the part of not to associate. EXCEPTION: Closed-shop agreement
said agencies.
A closed-shop agreement is a valid form of union security
Executive privilege, whether asserted against Congress, and a provision therefor in a collective bargaining
the courts, or the public, is recognized only in relation to agreement is not considered a restriction of the right of
certain types of information of a sensitive character. The association. (Villar v. Inciong, 121 SCRA 444)
extraordinary character of the exemption indicates that the
presumption inclines heavily against executive secrecy REASON for the validity of a closed-shop agreement: The
and in favor of disclosure. (Senate v. Exec. Sec., 488 purpose of the self-organization of the workers could be
SCRA 1) thwarted if every worker were to choose to go his own
separate way instead of joining his co-employees in
Matters covered by the executive privilege: planning collective action and presenting a united front
when they sit down to bargain with their employees.
1. Military secrets and diplomatic secrets To compel a lawyer to be a member of the Integrated Bar
2. Internal deliberations
3. Identities of crime informers is not violative of his constitutional freedom to associate
(and not to associate). (In re Edillon, 84 SCRA 554)

Some of the recognized restrictions on freedom of information: Section 8 only guarantees the right to associate. It does
not guarantee registration as a group.
1. National security matters and intelligence information;
2. Trade secrets and banking transactions;
3. Criminal matters; and
4. Other confidential information.
The Impairment Clause
Cases on R.A. No. 9262 and child abuse are prohibited
from public knowledge.
Section 10, Article III. No law impairing the obligation of
contracts shall be passed.
Contract refers to any lawful agreement on property or Section 11, Article III. Free access to the courts and quasi-
property rights, whether real or personal, tangible or intangible judicial bodies and adequate legal assistance shall not be
denied to any person by reason of poverty.
What contracts include:

1. Executed or executor contracts;

2. Contract between private persons only, natural or
The Writ of Habeas Corpus
3. Contracts between private persons and the
government or its agencies; Writ of habeas corpus a writ directed to the person detaining
4. Franchises or charters granted to private persons or another, commanding him to produce the body of the prisoner
entities. at a designated time and place, with the day and cause of his
caption and detention, to do, to submit to, and receive
The contracts herein do not include licenses, as these whatever the court or judge awarding the writ shall consider in
involve grants of privileges only that are essentially his behalf
The function of the special proceeding of habeas corpus is
License merely a permit or privilege to do what otherwise to inquire into the legality of ones detention. (Ilagan v.
would be unlawful and not a contract with the government Enrile, 139 SCRA 349) can also apply when there is
undue restraint
A public office is not a property right and therefore cannot
be the subject of a contract between the incumbent and Where a person continues to be unlawfully denied one or
the government. The office itself, if created by statute, may more of his constitutional freedoms, where there is present
be modified or even abolished or any of its incidents may a denial of due process, where the restraints are not
be changed, as by reduction of the term or the salary. The merely involuntary but appear to be unnecessary, and
exception already noted is where the salary has already where a deprivation of freedoms originally valid has, in the
been earned, in which case it will be deemed a vested light of subsequent developments, become arbitrary, the
property right that cannot be withdrawn or reduced by person concerned or those applying in his behalf may still
retroactive legislation. (Mississippi v. Miller, 276 U.S. 174) avail themselves of the privilege of the writ. (Moncupa v.
Enrile, 141 SCRA 223)
Law includes statutes enacted by the national legislature,
executive orders and administrative regulations promulgated
under a valid delegation of power, and municipal ordinances
When the writ of habeas corpus is available:
passed by the local legislative bodies

1. Arbitrary detention;
Obligation the law or duty which binds the parties to perform
2. Moral restraint, as where a housemaid is prevented
their undertaking or agreement according to the terms of the
from leaving her employ because of the influence of
contract and the intent of the parties
the person detaining her;
3. When conviction was made by a court without
Impairment anything that diminishes the efficacy of the jurisdiction;
contract; the obligation is reduced or increased, the period of 4. Where the sentence has become invalid;
payment is shortened or lengthened, conditions are added or 5. When a person is sentenced to a longer penalty than
removed, remedies to enforce right are completely withdrawn that subsequently meted out to another person
convicted of the same offense;
6. In case of unlawful denial of bail;
In the case of remedies for the enforcement of rights of the 7. When there is denial of the right to a speedy trial.
parties, there will be impairment only if all of them are
withdrawn, with the result that either of the parties will be
Section 15, Article III. The privilege of the writ of habeas
unable to enforce his rights under the original agreement.
corpus shall not be suspended except in cases of invasion
There will be no impairment, in other words, as long as a
or rebellion when public safety requires it.
substantial and efficacious remedy remains. And this rule
holds true even if the remedy retained is the most difficult
to employ and it is the easier ones that are withdrawn. Suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
(Manila Trading Co. v. Reyes, 62 Phil. 461) does not suspend the writ itself, but only its privilege. This
means that when the court receives an application for the
An obligation may be impaired by law if the law is in the writ, and it finds the petition in proper form, it will issue the
proper exercise of police power. The obligation, however, writ as a matter of course, i.e., the court will issue an order
is not considered impaired within the meaning of the commanding the production before the court of the person
impairment clause. allegedly detained, at a time and place stated in the order,
and requiring the true cause of his detention to be shown
The legislature cannot bargain away the police power to the court. If the return to the writ shows that the person
through the medium of a contract. in custody was apprehended and detained in areas where
the privilege of the writ has been suspended or for crimes
mentioned in the executive proclamation, the court will
suspend further proceedings in the action. (Ex Parte
Milligan, 4 Wall. 131)
Free Access to Courts
Section 18, Article VII. x x x In case of invasion or rebellion, 1. All citizens may be required, under conditions
when the public safety requires it, he may for a period not provided by law, to render personal military or civil
exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writ of service. (Sec. 4, Article II)
habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof 2. A person who enlists in the service of a merchant
under martial law... vessel may be compelled to remain in such service
until the end of the voyage for which he contracted.
3. In pursuit of persons who have violated the law, such
as brigands, the authorities might command all the
male inhabitants of a certain age to assist them. (U.S.
The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding
v. Pompeya, 31 Phil. 245)
filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the 4. Striking workers in industries affected with public
proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of interest may be required to return to work pending
the writ or the extension thereof, and must promulgate its settlement of the labor dispute. (Kaisahan ng
decision thereon within thirty days from its filing. Manggagawa sa Kahoy v. Gotamco Sawmills, 45
O.G. 147)
A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the 5. Unemancipated minors come under the patria
Constitution, nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts or potestas and so are obliged to obey their parents so
legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of long as they are under parental power, and to observe
jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where respect and reverence toward them always.
civil courts are able to function, nor automatically suspend the
privilege of the writ.
In Caunca v. Salazar, supra, the Supreme Court released on
habeas corpus a housemaid who was being detained and
The suspension of the writ shall apply only to persons judicially required to render domestic services in payment for the money
charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly advanced for her transportation from the province.
connected with invasion.

During the suspension of the privilege of the writ, any person

thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within
three days, otherwise he shall be released.

Speedy Disposition of Cases

Non-Imprisonment for Debt
Section 16, Article III. All persons shall have the right to a
speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-
Section 20, Article III. No person shall be imprisoned for
judicial, or administrative bodies.
debt or non-payment of a poll tax.

Debt refers to any civil obligation arising from contract,

expressed or implied
Involuntary Servitude
But although the debtor cannot be imprisoned for his
Section 18, Article III. (1) No person shall be detained failure to pay his debt, he can be validly punished in a
solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations. criminal action if he contracted his debt through fraud. In
such a case, the act for which he is penalized is the
(2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except deception he employed in securing the debt, not his
as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have default in paying it.
been duly convicted.
The gravamen of the offense punished by B.P. Blg. 22 is
the act of making and issuing a worthless check or a
Involuntary servitude the condition of one who is compelled
check that is dishonored upon its presentation for
by force, coercion, or imprisonment and against his will, to
payment. It is not the non-payment of an obligation which
labor for another, whether he is paid or not
the law punishes.

Slavery that civil relation in which one man has absolute Since tax is not a debt but arises from the obligation of the
power over the life, fortune and liberty of another person to contribute his share in the maintenance of the
government, failure to pay the same can be validly
Peonage a condition of enforced servitude by which the punished with imprisonment. Exception: Poll tax
servitor is restrained of his liberty and compelled to labor in
liquidation of some debt or obligation, real or pretended, Poll tax a specific fixed sum levied upon every person
against his will belonging to a certain class without regard to his property or
Exceptions to the prohibition on involuntary servitude:
Ex Post Facto Laws Mere inquiry on the commission of a crime by law
enforcement authorities does not automatically trigger the
Section 22, Article III. No ex post facto law or bill of application of the right to counsel. It is only after the
attainder shall be enacted. investigation ceased to be a general inquiry and begins to
focus on a particular suspect, the suspect is taken into
custody, and the police carries out a process of
Ex post facto law is one which:
interrogations that lend itself to eliciting incriminating
1. Makes criminal an act done before the passage of the statements.
law and which was innocent when done, and
punishes such an act; In People v. Compil, 244 SCRA 135, the accused upon his
2. Aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, arrest in Quezon City was interrogated by the police while
when committed; being transported back to Manila, where his formal
3. Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater investigation was conducted at the police station. The
punishment than the law annexed to the crime when Supreme Court held that his custodial investigation started in
committed; Quezon City. His right to counsel has began from the time
4. Alters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes when he was interrogated in Quezon City.
conviction upon less or different testimony than the
law required at the time of the commission of the
A barangay chairman is not deemed a law enforcement
5. Assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only, in officer for purposes of applying the right to counsel. Thus,
effect imposes penalty or deprivation of a right for a suspects uncounselled statement before the barangay
something which when done was lawful; and chairman is admissible. (People v. Ulit, 423 SCRA 374) dili
6. Deprives a person accused of a crime some lawful ni extrajudicial confession
protection to which he has become entitled, such as
Any person arrested, detained or under custodial
the protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or a
proclamation of amnesty. investigation shall at all times be assisted by counsel.
(Sec. 2, R.A. No. 7438)
Characteristics of an ex post facto law:
The right to counsel may be waived but to insure that the
1. Refers to criminal matters; waiver is voluntary and intelligent, the waiver must be in
2. Retroactive in its application; writing and in the presence of the counsel of the accused.
3. Prejudices the accused. (People v. Del Castillo, 439 SCRA 601) In custodial
A law providing for the suspension pende lite of any public investigation only, not in trial.
officer or employee accused of offenses involving
fraudulent use of public funds or property, including those Requisites for the validity of an extrajudicial confession in
charged earlier, is not ex post facto even if applied custodial investigation:
retroactively because the suspension was not punitive but
merely preventive. (Bayot v. Sandiganbayan, 128 SCRA
1. It must be voluntary;
383) 2. It shall be in writing and signed by the person
arrested, detained or under custodial investigation;
Bill of attainder a legislative act which inflicts punishment
3. It must be signed in the presence of his counsel or in
without trial, its essence being the substitution of legislative fiat
the latters absence, upon a valid waiver;
for a judicial determination of guilt 4. In the event of a valid waiver, it must be signed in the
presence of any of the parents, elder brothers and
sisters, his spouse, the municipal mayor, the
municipal judge, district school supervisor, or priest or
minister of the gospel chosen by him.
Rights of the Accused
When things were seized from an accused during arrest,
Section 12, Article III. (1) Any person under investigation the signing of the receipt for the things seized by the
for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be accused must be with the presence of a counsel.
informed of his right to remain silent and to have
competent and independent counsel preferably of his own Tactical interrogation is included in Section 12.
choice. If the person cannot afford the services of
counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights Section 12 does not apply in cases where the accused
cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of signed the marked money used during a buy-bust
counsel. operation without counsel. The signed marked money is
admissible in court even if it was signed without counsel.
Custodial investigation the stage where the police
Confession made to a TV reporter is admissible in court.
investigation is no longer a general inquiry into an unsolved
(People v. Taboga, 376 SCRA 505)
crime but has begun to focus on a particular suspect taken into
custody by the police who carry out the process of Counsel is not necessary in administrative investigations.
interrogation that lends itself to elicit incriminating statement;
this includes the practice of issuing an invitation to a person Statements in a counter-affidavit are admissible even if
who is investigated in connection with an offense he is executed without counsel.
suspected to have committed, without prejudice to the liability
of the inviting officer for any violation of law
Res gestae statements are admissible even without but not yet proven guilty and to relieve the accused of
counsel. imprisonment and the State of the burden of keeping him,
pending trial.
The rights under Section 12 apply only to custodial
investigation or questioning initiated by law enforcement The right to bail is a constitutional right. It is personal in
officers after a person has been taken into custody or nature and is therefore, waivable. (Paderanga c. CA, 247
otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any SCRA 741)
significant way. (Sebastian v. Gachitorena, 343 SCRA 463)
The right to bail is not suspended by the suspension of the
There is a presumption that the rights in Section 12 are privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. (Section 13, Article
not afforded to the accused. The prosecution has the III, 198 Constitution)
burden of proof.
The right to bail has traditionally not been recognized and
There is a presumption that the waiver is invalid. it is not available in the military. (Commendador v. De
Prosecution has the burden to prove otherwise. Villa, 200 SCRA 80)

By its definition, bail requires that a person must first be in

(2) No torture, force, violence threat or intimidation, or any
the custody of the law or deprived of his liberty before it
other means which vitiate the free will shall be used
can be availed of. (Manigbas v. Luna, 98 Phil. 466)
against him. Secret detention places, solitary,
incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are Bail cannot be denied simply because the person detained
has not yet been formally charged in court but is still under
investigation for the commission of an offense. if one who
(There is a presumption that these acts are not done by law has already been indicted is entitled to bail, there is no
enforcers.) reason why another who has not yet been charged
against whom prima facie case has not yet been
(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of established should be denied a similar right. (Teehankee
this or Section 17 shall be inadmissible in evidence v. Rovira, 42 O.G. 717)
against him.
In custody of the law may mean (1) physical or actual
The right to counsel is not available during a police line-up custody, or (2) constructive custody. (Pederanga v. CA,
as this is not considered part of the custodial investigation. 247 SCRA 41)
(De la Torre v. CA, 294 SCRA 196)
If bail can be granted in deportation cases, there is no
A re-enactment of the crime in the absence of counsel is reason why it should not be granted in extradition cases if
inadmissible evidence against the accused. (People v. petitioner is not a flight risk. (Government of Hong Kong v.
Suarez, 267 SCRA 119) Olalia, April 19, 2007)

While the right to be represented by counsel is absolute, Before the complaint or information is filed, the person
the accuseds option to hire one of his choice is limited. arrested may ask for a preliminary investigation in
Such option cannot be used to sanction reprehensible accordance with this Rule, but he must sign a waiver of
dilatory tactics, to trifle with the Rules or to prejudice the the provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code,
equally important rights of the State and the offended as amended, in the presence of his counsel.
party to speedy and adequate justice. (People v. Serzo, Notwithstanding the waiver, he may apply for bail and the
274 SCRA 553) investigation must be terminated within fifteen (15) days
from its inception. (Sec. 6, Rule 112, Rules of Court)

(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for
violations of this section as well as compensation to and x x x The right to bail shall not be impaired even when the
rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices, and privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended.
their families. Excessive bail shall not be required.

Section 13, Article III. All persons, except those charged Section 2. Conditions of the bail; requirements. All
with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when the kinds of bail are subject to the following conditions:
evidence of guilt is strong shall, before conviction, be
bailable by sufficient sureties, or be released on (a) The undertaking shall be effective upon
recognizance as may be provided by law... approval, and unless cancelled, shall remain in
force at all stages of the case until promulgation
Section 1. Bail defined. Bail is the security given for the of the judgment of the Regional Trial Court,
release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by him or a irrespective of whether the case was originally
bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as filed in or appealed to it;
required under the conditions hereinafter specified. Bail may
be given in the form of corporate surety, property bond, cash (The accused have to apply for another bail after promulgation
deposit, or recognizance. (Rule 114, Rules of Court) of the judgement of the RTC. If granted, the accused may
continue his provisional liberty under the same bail provided
the bondsman consents. [par. 2, Sec. 5])
The purpose of bail is to combine the administration of
criminal justice with the convenience of a person accused
(b) The accused shall appear before the proper b. The decision of the RTC convicting the
court whenever required by the court of these accused has not changed the nature of the
Rules; offense from non-bailable to bailable.

(c) The failure of the accused to appear at the trial The application for bail may be filed and acted upon by the trial
without justification and despite due notice shall court despite the filing of a notice of appeal, provided it has not
be deemed a waiver of his right to be present transmitted the original record to the appellate court. However,
thereat. In such case, the trial may proceed if the decision of the trial court convicting the accused changed
in absentia; and the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the
application for bail can only be filed with and resolved by the
(d) The bondsman shall surrender the accused to appellate court.
the court for execution of the final judgment.
Should the court grant the application, the accused may
The original papers shall state the full name and address be allowed to continue on provisional liberty during the
of the accused, the amount of the undertaking and the pendency of the appeal under the same bail subject to the
conditions herein required. Photographs (passport size) consent of the bondsman.
taken within the last six (6) months showing the face, left
and right profiles of the accused must be attached to the If the penalty imposed by the trial court is imprisonment
bail. (2a) exceeding six (6) years, the accused shall be denied bail,
or his bail shall be cancelled upon a showing by the
Section 3. No release or transfer except on court order or prosecution, with notice to the accused, of the following
bail. No person under detention by legal process shall or other similar circumstances:
be released or transferred except upon order of the court
or when he is admitted to bail. (3a) (a) That he is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, or
habitual delinquent, or has committed the crime
Section 4. Bail, a matter of right; exception. All persons aggravated by the circumstance of reiteration;
in custody shall be admitted to bail as a matter of right,
with sufficient sureties, or released on recognize as (b) That he has previously escaped from legal
prescribed by law or this Rule confinement, evaded sentence, or violated the
conditions of his bail without valid justification;
(a) before or after conviction by the Metropolitan Trial
Court, Municipal Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court (c) That he committed the offense while under
in Cities, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court, and probation, parole, or conditional pardon;
(b) before conviction by the Regional Trial Court of
an offense not punishable by death, reclusion (d) That the circumstances of his case indicate
perpetua, or life imprisonment. (4a) the probability of flight if released on bail; or
(c) Before conviction by the Regional Trial Court of an
offense punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or
(e) That there is undue risk that he may commit
life imprisonment when the evidence of guilt is not
another crime during the pendency of the appeal.

Where bail is a matter of right, the existence of a high The appellate court may, motu proprio or on motion of any
probability that the defendant will abscond confers upon party, review the resolution of the Regional Trial Court
the court no greater discretion than to increase the bond after notice to the adverse party in either case. (5a)
that would assure his presence when wanted. (San Miguel
v. Judge Maceda, April 4, 2007) A finding that none of the circumstances enumerated in
paragraph 3, Section 5 of Rule 114 is present does not
The remedy of the petitioner from the order of the trial
automatically result in the grant of bail. Such finding will
court denying a petition for bail is to file a petition for simply authorize the court to use the less stringent sound
certiorari if the trial court committed a grave abuse of its discretion approach. (Leviste v. CA, March 17, 2010)
discretion amounting to excess or lack of jurisdiction in
issuing the said order. (People v. Gomez, 325 SCRA 61)
Section 6. Capital offense defined. A capital offense is
an offense which, under the law existing at the time of its
Section 5. Bail, when discretionary. Upon conviction by commission and of the application for admission to bail,
the Regional Trial Court of an offense not punishable by may be punished with death. (6a)
death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, admission
to bail is discretionary.
Section 7. Capital offense or an offense punishable by
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, not bailable.
Where to file bail after conviction by the RTC: No person charged with a capital offense, or an offense
punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment,
1. Appellate Court; or shall be admitted to bail when evidence of guilt is strong,
2. RTC despite the filing of a notice of appeal, provided regardless of the stage of the criminal prosecution. (7a)
the following conditions concur:
a. The original record of the case has not been
transmitted to the appellate court; and
The general rule is that a hearing upon notice is (j) Pendency of other cases where the accused is
mandatory before the grant of bail, whether bail is a matter on bail.
of right or discretion.
Excessive bail shall not be required. (9a) __--o--__
Section 8. Burden of proof in bail application. At the
hearing of an application for bail filed by a person who is Section 14, Article III. (1) No person shall be held to
in custody for the commission of an offense punishable answer for a criminal offense without due process of law.
by death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, the (See comments in Section 1, Article III)
prosecution has the burden of showing that evidence of
guilt is strong. The evidence presented during the bail The holding of a preliminary investigation is not required
hearing shall be considered automatically reproduced at by the Constitution. It is not a fundamental right and is not
the trial, but upon motion of either party, the court may among those rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. The
recall any witness for additional examination unless the right thereto is of a statutory character and may be
latter is dead, outside the Philippines, or otherwise unable invoked only when specifically created by statute.
to testify. (8a) (Marinas v. Siochi, 104 SCRA 423) However, since it has
been established by statute, it becomes a component of
Duties of the trial judge in case an application for bail is filed: due process in criminal justice. Denial of this right, in the
absence of a valid waiver, will violate due process. (Bunye
1. Notify the prosecutor of the hearing of the application v. Sandiganbayan, 205)
for bail or require him to submit his recommendation;
2. Conduct a hearing of the application for bail The rule is that the right to preliminary investigation is
regardless of whether or not the prosecution refuses waived when the accused fails to invoke it before or at the
to present evidence to show that guilt of the accused time of entering a plea at arraignment. (Go v. CA, 206
is strong for the purpose of enabling the courts to SCRA 138) WAIVER OF THE RIGHT TO PRELIMNARY
exercise its sound discretion; INVESTIGATION
3. Decide whether the evidence of guilt is strong based
on the summary of evidence of the prosecution; How to invoke the right? By filing a Motion to Conduct a
4. If the evidence guilt of the accused is not strong, Preliminary Investigation.
discharge the accused upon the approval of the bail
bond. Article 2. Laws shall take effect after fifteen days following the
completion of their publication in the Official Gazette (or in a
In the hearing for a petition for bail by an accused charged newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines), unless it is
with an offense punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or otherwise provided. (Civil Code of the Philippines)
life imprisonment, the presentation of mitigating
circumstance will be considered unless the prosecution
Due process is denied where a person is impleaded for
objects. And if such presentation of mitigating
violation of a law, administrative regulation or municipal
circumstance makes the maximum penalty for the offense
ordinance not previously published as he would not know
less than reclusion perpetua, bail becomes a matter of
what acts he must do or avoid to prevent prosecution.
right. (Bravo v. Borja, 134 SCRA 466)
Where appeal is permitted by the Constitution or by
Section 9. Amount of bail; guidelines. The judge who statute, denial thereof will also militate against due
issued the warrant or granted the application shall fix a process. (Reyes v. CA, 80 SCRA 143)
reasonable amount of bail considering primarily, but not
limited to, the following factors:
Section 14, Article III. (2) In all criminal prosecutions, the
accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is
(a) Financial ability of the accused to give bail; proved, . . .

(b) Nature and circumstances of the offense; Section 1 (a). To be presumed innocent until the contrary is
proved beyond reasonable doubt. (Rule 115, Rules of Court)
(c) Penalty for the offense charged;
Accusation is not synonymous with guilt. (People v.
(d) Character and reputation of the accused; Dramayo, 42 SCRA 59)

(e) Age and health of the accused; While the law enforcers enjoy the presumption of
regularity in the performance of their duties, this
(f) Weight of the evidence against the accused; presumption cannot prevail over the constitutional right of
the accused to be presumed innocent and it cannot by
itself constitute proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
(g) Probability of the accused appearing at the
(People v. Cantalejo, G.R. No. 182790)
The onus probandi on the prosecution is not discharged
(h) Forfeiture of other bail; by casting doubts upon the innocence of an accused, but
by eliminating all reasonable doubts as to his guilt.
(i) The fact that accused was a fugitive from (People v. Mirantes, 209 SCRA 179)
justice when arrested; and
It is generally conceded that the legislature has the power The right of the accused to counsel in criminal
to provide that proof of certain facts can constitute prima proceedings has never been considered subject to waiver.
facie evidence of the guilt of the accused and then shift (Flores v. Ruiz, 90 SCRA 429)
the burden of proof to the accused provided there is a
rational connection between the facts proved and the The requisites of trial in absentia:
ultimate fact presumed. (Hizon v. CA, 265 SCRA 517)
1. The accused has already been arraigned;
Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not require that the
2. He has been duly notified of the trial;
guilt of the accused must be shown with absolute 3. His failure to appear is unjustified.
certainty. The rule merely requires moral certainty. (People
v. Malilay, 63 SCRA 420, citing U.S. v. Lasada) Trial in absentia does not abrogate the provisions of the
Rules of Court regarding forfeiture of the bail bond if the
In establishing the guilt of the accused, jurisprudence accused fails to appear at his trial. (People v. Prieto, 84
requires that the prosecution must rest on its own merits SCRA 198)
and must not rely on the weakness of the defenses.
Section 1 (d). To testify as a witness in his own behalf but
Equipoise rule where the evidence of the parties in a criminal subject to cross-examination on matters covered by direct
case is evenly balanced, the constitutional presumption of examination*. His silence shall not in any manner prejudice
innocence should tilt the scales in favour of the accused him. (Rule 115, Rules of Court)

x x x and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and *American rule is used; only matters covered by the direct
counsel . . . examination as distinguished from Section 6, Rule 132 on the
Rules on Evidence where the English rule is used wherein
Section 1 (c). To be present and defend in person and by cross-examination not only on matters covered by the direct
counsel at every stage of the proceedings, from arraignment to examination but also those connected therewith are allowed.
promulgation of the judgment. The accused may, however,
waive his presence at the trial pursuant to the stipulations set When an accused is silent when he should speak, in
forth in his bail, unless his presence is specifically ordered by circumstances where an innocent person so situated
the court for purposes of identification. The absence of the would have spoken, on being accused of a crime, his
accused without justifiable cause at the trial of which he silence and omission are admissible evidence against him.
had notice shall be considered a waiver of his right to be (People v. Delmendo, 296 SCRA 371)
present thereat. When an accused under custody escapes,
he shall be deemed to have waived his right to be present on
x x x to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation
all subsequent trial dates until custody over him is regained.
against him . . .
Upon motion, the accused may be allowed to defend himself in
person when it sufficiently appears to the court that he can
properly protect his right without the assistance of counsel. The defendant is denied the right to be informed of the
(Rule 115, Rules of Court) charge against him, and to due process as well, where the
statute itself is couched in such indefinite language that is
Two rights here: not possible for men of ordinary intelligence to determine
therefrom what acts or omissions are punished and,
hence, should be avoided. (The void-for-vagueness rule)
1. To be present at every stage of the proceedings, from
arraignment to promulgation of the judgement;
2. To defend in person and by counsel at every stage of Section 1 (b). To be informed of the nature and cause of the
the proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of accusation against him. (Rule 115, Rules of Court)
the judgement.
The right to be informed of the nature and cause of the
Instances when the accused may not be allowed to waive his accusation is not waivable because public interest is
presence in court: involved, the public having an interest in seeing to it that
no person is unlawfully deprived of his life or liberty. (U.S.
1. During arraignment because he is required to v. Palisoc, 4 Phil. 207)
personally enter his plea;
2. At the promulgation of judgement; The variance in the identities of the check described in the
3. During trial for purposes of identification; information and the check allegedly issued and admitted in
4. Any other instances when the court so requires with evidence violates the right of the accused to be informed
due notice. of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.
(Dico v. CA, 452 SCRA 441)
Upon the termination of a trial in absentia, the court has
the duty to rule upon the evidence presented in court. The Section 8. Designation of the offense. The complaint or
court need not wait for the time until the accused who information shall:
escape from custody finally decides to appear in court to
present his evidence and cross-examine the witnesses
1. state the designation of the offense given by the
against him. (Gimenez v. Nazareno, 160 SCRA 1)
statute, [Not an essential element of a complaint or
information because, at most, that is a mere
conclusion of the fiscal. Note: When the facts
appearing in the complaint or information are so It is not the use of the words qualifying or qualified by
stated that they are capable of two or more that raises a crime to a higher category, but the specific
interpretations, then the designation of the offense in allegation of an attendant circumstance which adds the
the caption controls. (U.S. v. Ticzon, 25 Phil. 67)] essential element raising the crime to a higher category.
2. aver the acts or omissions constituting the offense, (People v. Rosas, G.R. No. 177825)
3. specify its qualifying and aggravating circumstances.
x x x to have a speedy, impartial and public trial . . . (same
as Section 1 [h], Rule 115, Rules of Court)
If there is no designation of the offense, reference shall be
made to the section or subsection of the statute punishing it.
The right to speedy disposition of cases is considered
(Rule 110, Rules of Court)
violated only when the proceedings are attended by
vexatious, capricious, and oppressive delays. The concept
The real question is not did he commit a crime given in
of speedy disposition of cases is relative or flexible.
the law some technical and specific name?, but did he (Rodriguez v. Sandiganbayan, 424 SCRA 236) Due regard
perform the acts alleged in the body of the information in must be given to the facts and circumstances surrounding
the manner therein? (Matrido v. People, G.R. No. each case.

It is axiomatic that the nature and character of the crime Factors to be considered in the determination of whether or not
charged are determined not by the designation of the the right to a speedy trial has been violated:
specific crime, but by the facts alleged in the information.
Controlling in an information should not be the title of the 1. The length of delay;
complaint or the designation of the offense charged or the 2. The reasons for such delay;
3. The assertion or failure to assert such right by the
particular law or part thereof allegedly violated, these
accused; and
being, by and large, mere conclusions of law by the
4. The prejudice caused by the delay.
prosecutor, but the description of the crime charged and
the particular facts therein recited. (People v. Quemeggen,
G.R. No. 178205) Remedies of an accused whose right to a speedy trial is being
The failure to designate the offense by the statute or to
mention the specific provision penalizing the act or 1. Oppose the postponement and insist on trial;
erroneous specification of the law violated does not vitiate 2. Mandamus, if the court grants the postponement
the information if the facts alleged clearly recite the facts every time the prosecution asks for it over the
constituting the crime charged. (Malto v. People, G.R. No. objection of the accused;
164733) 3. If the accused is restrained of his liberty, his remedy is
habeas corpus.
Section 9. Cause of the accusation. The acts or If the court denies the postponement asked by the
omissions complained of as constituting the offense and the
prosecution and directs the prosecution to proceed and
qualifying and aggravating circumstances must be stated in
cannot do so because he does not have the evidence,
ordinary and concise language and not necessarily in the
accused should move for the dismissal of the case on the
language used in the statute but in terms sufficient to enable a
ground of failure to prosecute or insufficiency of evidence.
person of common understanding to know what offense is
If the motion for dismissal is granted, such dismissal is
being charged as well as its qualifying and aggravating
equivalent to an acquittal and there is no way for that case
circumstances and for the court to pronounce judgment. (9a)
to be brought back because it will amount to double
BAR 2001 (Rule 110, Rules of Court)

A generic aggravating circumstance, if not alleged in the The purpose of the right to a public trial is for the public to
information or complaint even proven at the trial, cannot see that the accused is fairly dealt with and not unjustly
be appreciated against the accused. (Sombilon v. People, condemned and for keeping his triers keenly alive to a
2009) sense of responsibility and to the importance of their
A qualifying aggravating circumstance to be such must be
alleged in the information. If it is not alleged but proven at x x x to meet the witness face to face . . .
the trial, it is a generic aggravating circumstance only.

While, under the new rules, an aggravating circumstance Section 1(f). To confront and cross-examine the witnesses
against him at the trial*.
that is not alleged in the information cannot be appreciated
in determining the criminal liability of the accused, the
rules do not prevent its appreciation for the purpose of Either party may utilize as part of its evidence the testimony of
determining civil liability. (People v. Suela, 373 SCRA 163) a witness who is deceased, out of or can not with due diligence
be found in the Philippines, unavailable or otherwise unable to
Qualifying circumstances need not be preceded by testify, given in another case or proceeding, judicial or
descriptive words such as qualifying or qualified by to administrative, involving the same parties and subject matter,
properly qualify an offense. (People v. Aquino, 2002) [mu- the adverse party having the opportunity to cross-examine him.
apply pud sa aggravating] Requisites:
1. The testimony is given by a witness who is
deceased, out of or cannot with due diligence be The preceding rule applies only to a witness who is not the
found in the Philippines, unavailable or otherwise accused. The accused may altogether refuse to take the
unable to testify; witness stand and refuse to answer any and all questions.
2. The testimony is given in another case or On this instance, it is assumed that the purpose of his
proceeding, judicial or administrative; interrogation is to incriminate him.
3. The other case involves the same parties and
subject matter; Whereas an ordinary witness may be compelled to take
4. The adverse party had the opportunity to cross- the witness stand and claim the privilege as each question
examine the witness. requiring an incriminating answer is shot at him, an
accused may altogether refuse to take the witness stand
*In trial only. Not in advance because it might endanger the and refuse to answer any and all questions. For, in reality,
witnesses if the accused were to know the prosecution the purpose of calling an accused as a witness for the
witnesses in advance. People would be to incriminate him. (Chavez v. CA, 24
SCRA 663)
Exceptions to this right:
This privilege applies only to natural person. (U.S. v.
White, 322 U.S. 694)
1. Second paragraph of [f];
2. When there is a separate civil action filed against the
The privilege against self-incrimination applies only to
accused by the offended party and he made a
evidence that is communicative in essence. (Herrera v.
3. The exceptions to the Hearsay Rule. Alba, 460 SCRA 197)

The kernel of the right against self-incrimination is against

x x x and to have compulsory process issued to secure not all compulsion but testimonial compulsion only. (4
the attendance of witnesses and production of other Wigmore, Sec. 2263)
evidence in his behalf. (Same as Section 1 (g), Rule 115,
Rules of Court) Force re-enactments come within the ban against self-
incrimination. (People v. Olvis, G.R. No. 71092)
The right to compulsory process must be invoked during
the trial. Failure to do so constitutes a waiver that cannot The constitutional inhibition is directed not merely to giving
be rectified or undone on appeal. (U.S. v. Garcia, 10 Phil. of oral testimony, but embraces as well the furnishing of
384) evidence by other means than by word of mouth, the
divulging, in short, of any fact which the accused has a
right to hold secret. (Beltran v. Samson and Jose, 53 Phil.
Section 17, Article III. No person shall be compelled to be a
570) Does not cover mechanical acts. Mechanical act
witness against himself.
does not require concentration and intelligence

The right is available not only in criminal prosecutions but The prohibition applies to the compulsion for the
also in all other government proceedings, including civil production of documents, papers and chattels that may be
actions and administrative or legislative investigations. used as evidence against the witness, except where the
State has a right to inspect the same, such as the books of
The right may not be invoked where the question asked accounts of corporations, under the police power.
relates to a past criminal liability for which the witness can (Wigmore)
no longer be prosecuted.
The right against self-incrimination is waivable by the
The witness may not refuse to answer where he has been accused taking the stand and testifying as a witness or by
previously granted immunity under a validly enacted freely answering the incriminating question put to him.
statute. (U.S. v. Grant, 18 Phil. 122)

Section 1 (e). To be exempt from being compelled to be a The privilege also protects the accused against any
witness against himself. (Rule 115, Rules of Court) attempt to compel him to furnish a specimen of his
handwriting in connection with his prosecution for
The right against self incrimination prescribes an option of falsification. (Beltran v. Samson, 53 Phil. 570)
refusal to answer incriminating questions, and not a
prohibition of inquiry. (People v. Ayson, G.R. No. 85215) SITUATION: Prosecution presented as evidence a letter
allegedly written by the accused. The accused denied that it
The right against self-incrimination does not give a witness was his handwriting. Because of such denial, the accused
the right to disregard a subpoena, to decline to appear cannot anymore refuse to give a specimen of his handwriting
before the court at the time appointed, or to refuse to on the ground of violation of the right against self-incrimination
testify altogether. The witness receiving a subpoena must because he is deemed to have waived such right when he
obey it, appear as required, take the stand, be sworn and testified that the handwriting in the letter presented was not his.
answer questions. It is only when a particular question is [Dapat wala juy maski denial kung incriminating.]
addressed to him, the answer to which may incriminate
him for some offense, that he may refuse to answer on the Section 19, Article III. (1) Excessive fines shall not be
strength of the constitutional guaranty. (People v. Ayson, imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment
supra) inflicted. Neither shall the death penalty be imposed
unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, c. Any offense which necessarily includes or is
the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty necessarily included in the offense charged
already imposed shall be reduce to reclusion perpetua. in the former complaint or information.

(2) The employment of physical, psychological, or However, the conviction of the accused shall not be a bar to
degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee or another prosecution for an offense which necessarily includes
the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities the offense charged in the former complaint or information
under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law. under any of the following instances:

Section 21, Article III. No person shall be twice put in (a) the graver offense developed due to supervening
jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. facts arising from the same act or omission
constituting the former charge;
Section 7. Former conviction or acquittal; double
jeopardy. When an accused has been: (b) the facts constituting the graver charge became
known or were discovered only after a plea was
1. convicted or entered in the former complaint or information; or
2. acquitted, or
3. the case against him dismissed or otherwise (c) the plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made
terminated without his express consent without the consent of the prosecutor and of the
offended party except as provided in section 1 (f) of
by a court of competent jurisdiction, upon a valid complaint Rule 116.
or information or other formal charge sufficient in form and
substance to sustain a conviction and after the accused In any of the foregoing cases, where the accused satisfies or
had pleaded to the charge, the conviction or acquittal of serves in whole or in part the judgment, he shall be credited
the accused or the dismissal of the case shall be a bar to with the same in the event of conviction for the graver offense.
another prosecution: (Rule 117, Rules of Court)

1. for the offense charged, or

When does jeopardy NOT attach:
2. for any attempt to commit the same or frustration
thereof, or
3. for any offense which necessarily includes or is 1) If information does not charge any offense
necessarily included in the offense charged in the
former complaint or information. 2) If, upon pleading guilty, the accused presents evidence
of complete self-defense, and the court thereafter acquits
Requisites that must be present in order to properly raise him without entering a new plea of not guilty for accused.
the defense of double jeopardy:
3) If the information for an offense cognizable by the RTC
1. The first jeopardy must have been attached prior is filed with the MTC.
to the second;
a. The former complaint or information is valid, 4) If a complaint filed for preliminary investigation is
sufficient in form and substance to sustain a dismissed.
i. It charges an offense; and
Section 8. Provisional dismissal. A case shall not be
ii. It is filed by a person or officer
provisionally dismissed except with the express consent of the
legally authorized to do so
b. It was filed in a court of competent accused and with notice to the offended party.
c. The accused had been arraigned under said The provisional dismissal of offenses punishable by
complaint or information and had pleaded to imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years or a fine of any
the same. amount, or both, shall become permanent one (1) year after
2. The first jeopardy must be validly terminated; and issuance of the order without the case having been revived.
a. When the accused had been previously With respect to offenses punishable by imprisonment of more
convicted; than six (6) years, their provisional dismissal shall become
b. When the accused had been previously
permanent two (2) years after issuance of the order without the
acquitted; or
case having been revived. (Rule 117, Rules of Court)
c. When the case against him had been
dismissed or otherwise terminated without
his express consent. The grant of the demurrer to evidence amounts to an
3. The second jeopardy must be for the same acquittal. Thus, double jeopardy can arise.
offense as that of the first. The accused cannot
anymore be charged of: Where the accused is acquitted without giving the
a. The same offense charged in the former prosecution its day in court, this denial of due process may
complaint or information; be validly appealed.
b. The attempted or frustrated stage of the
offense charged in the former complaint or x x x If an act is punished by a law and an ordinace,
information; or conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar
to another prosecution for the same act.
Distinctions between the first sentence and the second 2. There is no double jeopardy in the first sentence so
sentence in Section 21, Article III: long as the second offense charged is different even if
it arises from the same act; there is double jeopardy
1. What the first sentence prohibits is double jeopardy in the second sentence even if the offenses are
for the same offense; what the second sentence distinct provided they arise from the same act
prohibits is double jeopardy for the same act punished punished by a law and an ordinance.
by an ordinance and a law.