Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Sec. 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law,
nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.
Note:
1. The school has a contractual obligation to afford its students a fair opportunity to
complete the course a student has enrolled for.
2. Exceptions:
3. Serious breach of discipline; or
4. Failure to maintain the required academic standard.
5. Proceedings in student disciplinary cases may be summary; cross-examination is not
essential
Note:
1. The right to counsel is a very basic requirement of substantive due process and has to
be observed even in administrative and quasi-judicial bodies.
2. The right to appeal is a statutory privilege that may be exercised only in the manner in
accordance with law.
Sec. 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects
against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be
inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to
be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be
searched and the person or things to be seized.
General Rule: Search and seizures are unreasonable unless authorized by a validly issued
search warrant or warrant of arrest
Note: Probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant does NOT require that the probable
guilt of a specific offender be established, unlike in the case of a warrant of arrest.
Existence of probable cause DETERMINED PERSONALLY BY THE JUDGE
The judge is NOT required to personally examine the complainant and his witnesses. What the
Constitution underscores is the exclusive and personal responsibility of the issuing judge to
satisfy himself of the existence of probable cause (Soliven v. Makasiar, 167 SCRA 394).
To be sure, the Judge must go beyond the prosecutors certification and investigation report
whenever necessary (Lim v. Felix).
Procedure:
1. The judge personally evaluates the report and supporting documents submitted by the
fiscal regarding the existence of probable cause and, on the basis thereof, issue a warrant
of arrest or
2. If on the basis thereof, the judge finds no probable cause, he may disregard the fiscals
report and require the submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses to aid him in
arriving at the conclusion as to the existence of probable cause.
GENERAL WARRANT
A general warrant is one that does not allege any specific acts or omissions constituting the
offense charged in the application for the issuance of the warrant. It contravenes the explicit
demand of the Bill of Rights that the things to be seized be particularly described.
The search must be made simultaneously with the arrest and it may only be made in the
area within the reach of the person arrested
Seizure of goods concealed to avoid customs duties/authorized under the Tariffs and
Customs Code
1. The Tariffs and Customs Code authorizes persons having police authority under the
Code to effect search and seizures without a search warrant to enforce customs laws.
2. Exception: A search warrant is required for the search of a dwelling house.
3. Searches under this exception include searches at borders and ports of entry. Searches
in these areas do not require the existence of probable cause.
Waiver of right
Requisites of a valid waiver:
1. The right exists.
2. The person had actual or constructive knowledge of the existence of such right.
3. There is an actual intention to relinquish such right.
1. The right against unreasonable searches and seizures is a personal right. Thus, only the
person being searched can waive the same.
2. Waiver requires a positive act from the person. Mere absence of opposition is not a
waiver.
3. The search made pursuant to the waiver must be made within the scope of the waiver.
Note:
1. Checkpoints: as long as the vehicle is neither searched nor its occupants subjected to a
body search and the inspection of the vehicle is limited to a visual search = valid search
(Valmonte V. De Villa)
2. Carroll rule: warrantless search of a vehicle that can be quickly moved out of the locality
or jurisdiction
3. The 1987 Constitution has returned to the 1935 rule that warrants may be issued only by
judges, but the Commissioner of Immigration may order the arrest of an alien in order to
carry out a FINAL deportation order.
Sec. 3. (1) The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except
upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as
prescribed by law.
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be
inadmissible for any purpose in any proceedings.
Exclusionary rule:
Any evidence obtained shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding. However, in
the absence of governmental interference, the protection against unreasonable search and
seizure cannot be extended to acts committed by private individuals. (People v. Martin)
Sec. 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the
press, or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government
for redress of grievances.
Freedom of Speech
The doctrine on freedom of speech was formulated primarily for the protection of core
speech, i.e. speech which communicates political, social or religious ideas. These enjoy
the same degree of protection. Commercial speech, however, does not.
Commercial Speech
1. A communication which no more than proposes a commercial transaction.
1. To enjoy protection:
1. It must not be false or misleading; and
2. It should not propose an illegal transaction.
1. Even truthful and lawful commercial speech may be regulated if:
1. Government has a substantial interest to protect;
2. The regulation directly advances that interest; and
3. It is not more extensive than is necessary to protect that interest. (Central
Hudson Gas and Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission of NY, 447 US 557)
Unprotected Speech
1. LIBEL
FAIR COMMENT (U.S. Rule). These are statements of OPINION, not of fact, and are not
considered actionable, even if the words used are neither mild nor temperate. What is
important is that the opinion is the true and honest opinion of the person. The statements
are not used to attack personalities but to give ones opinion on decisions and actions.
OPINIONS. With respect to public personalities (politicians, actors, anyone with a
connection to a newsworthy event), opinions can be aired regarding their public actuations.
Comment on their private lives, if not germane to their public personae, are not protected.
2. OBSCENITY
A. Test for obscenity (Miller v. California)
1. Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find
that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest.
2. Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct,
specifically defined by law.
3. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific
value.
Sec. 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without
discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the
exercise of civil or political rights.
Sec. 6. The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law shall
not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be
impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety or public health, as may be
provided by law.
Curtailment of rights:
RIGHT MANNER OF
CURTAILMENT
1. Liberty of abode Lawful order of the
court and within the
limits prescribed by
law.
2. Right to travel May be curtailed even
by administrative
officers (ex. passport
officers) in the interest
of national security,
public safety, or public
health, as may be
provided by law.
Note: The right to travel and the liberty of abode are distinct from the right to return to ones
country, as shown by the fact that the Declaration of Human Rights and the Covenant on
Human Rights have separate guarantees for these. Hence, the right to return to ones country
is not covered by the specific right to travel and liberty of abode. (Marcos v. Manglapus)
Sec. 7. The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized.
Rights guaranteed under Section 7
1. Right to information on matters of public concern
2. Right of access to official records and documents
Discretion of government
The government has discretion with respect to the authority to determine what matters are of
public concern and the authority to determine the manner of access to them.
Sec. 8. The right of the people, including those employed in the public and private
sectors, to form unions, associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to law, shall
not be abridged.
The right to form associations shall not be impaired without due process of law and is thus an
aspect of the right of liberty. It is also an aspect of the freedom of contract. In addition, insofar
as the associations may have for their object the advancement of beliefs and ideas, the freedom
of association is an aspect of the freedom of speech and expression, subject to the same
limitation.
Sec. 9. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.
A. Elements: CODE: E P A P O
1. The expropriator enters the property
2. The entrance must not be for a momentary period, i.e., it must be permanent
3. Entry is made under warrant or color of legal authority
4. Property is devoted to public use
5. Utilization of the property must be in such a way as to oust the owner and deprive him of
the beneficial enjoyment of his property.
B. Compensable taking does not need to involve all the property interests which form part of
the right of ownership. When one or more of the property rights are appropriated and applied to
a public purpose, there is already a compensable taking, even if bare title still remains with the
owner.
PUBLIC USE
1. Public use, for purposes of expropriation, is synonymous with public welfare as the latter
term is used in the concept of police power.
Examples of public use include land reform and socialized housing.
JUST COMPENSATION
1. Compensation is just if the owner receives a sum equivalent to the market value of his
property. Market value is generally defined as the fair value of the property as between
one who desires to purchase and one who desires to sell.
2. The point of reference use in determining fair value is the value at the time the property
was taken. Thus, future potential use of the land is not considered in computing just
compensation.
1) If it changes the terms and conditions of a legal contract either as to the time or mode of
performance
2) If it imposes new conditions or dispenses with those expressed
3) If it authorizes for its satisfaction something different from that provided in its terms.
A mere change in PROCEDURAL REMEDIES which does not change the substance of the
contract, and which still leaves an efficacious remedy for enforcement does NOT impair the
obligation of contracts.
Sec. 12. Rights of person under investigation for the commission of an offense.
Rights of person under investigation for the Commission of an offense CODE: SCISI
1) Right to remain silent
2) Right to have competent and independent counsel, preferably of his own choice
3) Right to provided with the services of counsel if he cannot afford the services of one.
4) Right to be informed of these rights.
When rights are available:
1) AFTER a person has been taken into custody or
2) When a person is otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.
3) When the investigation is being conducted by the government (police, DOJ, NBI) with
respect to a criminal offense.
4) Signing of arrest reports and booking sheets.
Exclusionary rule
1) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this section shall be inadmissible in
evidence against him (the accused).
2) Therefore, any evidence obtained by virtue of an illegally obtained confession is also
inadmissible, being the fruit of a poisoned tree.
DUE PROCESS
This means that the accused can only be convicted by a tribunal which is required to comply
with the stringent requirements of the rules of criminal procedure.
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
The Constitution does not prohibit the legislature from providing that proof of certain facts leads
to a prima facie presumption of guilt, provided that the facts proved have a reasonable
connection to the ultimate fact presumed.
Presumption of guilt should not be conclusive.
2. Right to counsel
(a) Right to counsel means the right to EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION.
(b) If the accused appears at arraignment without counsel, the judge must:
(i) Inform the accused that he has a right to a counsel before arraignment
(ii) Ask the accused if he desires the aid of counsel
(iii) If the accused desires counsel, but cannot afford one, a counsel de oficio must be appointed
(iv) If the accused desires to obtain his own counsel, the court must give him a reasonable time
to get one.
Effect of dismissal based on the ground of violation of the accuseds right to speedy trial
If the dismissal is valid, it amounts to an acquittal and can be used as basis to claim double
jeopardy. This would be the effect even if the dismissal was made with the consent of the
accused
Remedy of the accused if his right to speedy trial has been violated
He can move for the dismissal of the case.
If he is detained, he can file a petition for the issuance of writ of habeas corpus.
Sec 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial,
quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.
Exceptions:
1. Punishment for a crime for which the party has been duly convicted
2. Personal military or civil service in the interest of national defense
3. Return to work order issued by the DOLE Secretary or the President
Standards used:
1. The punishment must not be so severe as to be degrading to the dignity of human
beings.
2. It must not be applied arbitrarily.
3. It must not be unacceptable to contemporary society
4. It must not be excessive, i.e. it must serve a penal purpose more effectively than a less
severe punishment would.
Excessive fine
A fine is excessive, when under any circumstance, it is disproportionate to the offense.
Note: Fr. Bernas says that the accused cannot be convicted of the crime to which the
punishment is attached if the court finds that the punishment is cruel, degrading or inhuman.
Reason: Without a valid penalty, the law is not a penal law.
Sec. 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax.
Sec. 21. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. If an act
punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to
another prosecution for the same act.
What are considered to be the SAME OFFENSE: (under the 1st sentence of Section 21)
1) Exact identity between the offenses charged in the first and second cases.
2) One offense is an attempt to commit or a frustration of the other offense.
3) One offense is necessarily included or necessary includes the other.
Note: where a single act results in the violation of different laws or different provisions of the
same law, the prosecution for one will not bar the other so long as none of the exceptions apply.
SUPERVENING FACTS
1) Under the Rules of Court, a conviction for an offense will not bar a prosecution for an
offense which necessarily includes the offense charged in the former information where:
1. The graver offense developed due to a supervening fact arising from the same act or
omission constituting the former charge.
2. The facts constituting the graver offense became known or were discovered only after
the filing of the former information.
3. The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the consent of the fiscal and
the offended party.
2) Under (1)(b), if the facts could have been discovered by the prosecution but were not
discovered because of the prosecutions incompetence, it would not be considered a
supervening event.