You are on page 1of 96

SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017

MENDIOLA, MANILA

ARTICLE III. – THE BILL OF RIGHTS virtue of his citizenship in a state or


community. Such term may also refer, in
Art. 1. No person shall be deprived of its general sense, to rights capable of
life, liberty, or property without due being enforced or redressed in a civil
process of law, nor shall any person be action. '
denied the equal protection of the laws.
b) Political Rights. They refer to
From Nachura: the right to participate, directly or
indirectly, in the establishment or
A. Bill of Rights In general. administration of government, e.g., the
right of suffrage, the right to hold public
1. Definition.The set of prescriptions office, the right to petition and, in general
setting forth the fundamental civil and the rights appurtenant to citizenship vis-
political rights of the individual, and a-visthe management of government
imposing limitations on the powers of [Simon v. Commission on Human Rights,
government as a means of securing the
enjoyment of those rights. The Bill of G.R. No. 100150, January 5, 1994]. 2
Rights is designed to preserve the ideals
2. In Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
of liberty, equality and security “against 104768, July 21, 2003, the Supreme Court
the assaults of opportunism, the held that the Bill of Rights under the 1973
expediency of the passing hour, the Constitution was not operative from the
erosion of small encroachments, and the
actual and effective take-over of power by
scorn and derision of those who have no
the revolutionary government following
patience with general principles” [quoted
the EDSA revolution until the adoption, on
in PBM Employees Organization v.
March 24, 1986, of the Provisional
Philippine Blooming Mills, 51 SCRA 189].
(Freedom) Constitution. During this
Generally, any governmental action in period, the directives and orders of the
violation of the Bill of Rights is void.
revolutionary government were the
These provisions are also generally self- supreme law, because no constitution
executing. limited the extent and scope of such
a) Civil Rights. Those rights that directives and orders. Thus, during the
belong to every citizen of the state or interregnum, a person could not invoke
country, or, in a wider sense, to all its any exclusionary right under the Bill of
inhabitants, and are not connected with Rights, because there was neither a
the organization or administration of constitution nor a Bill of Rights at the
time. However, the protection accorded to
government. They include the rights to
individuals under the International
property, marriage, equal protection of
Covenant on Civil and Political
the laws, freedom of contract, etc.. They
Rights(ICCPR) and the Universal
are rights appertaining to a person by
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 1
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) property is concerned [Smith Bell &Co. v.


remained in effect during the Natividad, 40 Phil. 163]. The guarantee
interregnum. extends to aliens and includes the means
of livelihood [Villegas v. HiuChiong, 86
SCRA 275].

B. Due Process of Law. Sec. 1. Art. Ill: 4. Meaning of life, liberty and property.
“No person shall be deprived of life,
liberty or property without due a) Life includes the right of an
process of law x xx “.] individual to his body in its completeness,
free from dismemberment, and extends to
1. Origin. By the 39th chapter of the the use of God-given faculties which make
Magna Carta wrung by the barons from life enjoyable [Justice Malcolm, Philippine
King John, the despot promised that “no Constitutional Law, pp. 320321]. See:
man shall be taken or imprisoned or Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200.
disseized or outlawed, or in any manner
destroyed; nor shall we go upon him, nor b) Liberty includes “the right to
send upon him, but by the lawful exist and the right to be free from
judgment of his peers or by the law of the arbitrary personal restraint or servitude,
land [per legemterraef]. x xx (It) includes the right of the citizen to
be free to use his faculties in all lawful
2. Definition.“A law which hears before it ways x xx” [Rubi v. Provincial Board of
condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry Mindoro, 39 Phil 660],
and renders judgment only after trial”
[Darmouth College v. Woodward, 4 c) Property is anything that can
Wheaton 518], “Responsiveness to the come under the right of ownership and be
supremacy of reason, obedience to the the subject of contract. It represents more
dictates of justice” [Ermita-Malate Hotel than the things a person owns; it includes
& Motel Operators Association v. City of the right to secure, use and dispose of
Manila, 20 SCRA 849].“The embodiment them [Torraco v. Thompson, 263 U.S.
of the sporting idea of fair play” 197]. i)
[Frankfurter, Mr. Justice Holmes and the
Supreme Court, pp 32-33]. i) Public office is not property; but
one unlawfully ousted from it may
3. Who are protected. Universal in institute an action to recover the
application to all persons, without regard same, flowing from the de jure
to any difference in race, color or officer’s right to office [Nunez v.
nationality. Artificial persons are covered Averia, 57 SCRA 726], Indeed, the
by the protection but only insofar as their Court

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 2
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

while public office is not property such as the license to operate a


to which one may acquire a vested cockpit, are not property rights
right, it is nevertheless a protected and are revocable at will [Pedro v.
right [Bince v. Commission on Provincial Board of Rizal, 53 Phil
Elections, 218 SCRA 782]. One’s 123].
employment, profession or trade
or calling is a property right, and iii) The license to carry a firearm is
the wrongful interference neither a property nor a property
therewith is an actionable wrong. right. Neither does it create a
Thus, an order of suspension, vested right. A permit to carry a
without opportunity for hearing, firearm outside one’s residence
violates property rights [Crespo v. may be revoked at any time. Even
Provincial Board, 160 SCRA 66]. if it were a property right, it cannot
But its proper regulation has been be considered as absolute as to be
upheld as a legitimate subject of placed beyond the reach of police
the police power of the State, power [Chavez v. Romulo, 431
particularly when its conduct SCRA 534],
affects either the execution of
legitimate governmental functions, iv)The mandatory suspension
the preservation of the State, the from office of a public official
public health and welfare, and pending criminal prosecution for
public morals [JMM Promotion violation of RA 3019 cannot
and Management v. Court of amount to deprivation of property
Appeals, supra.]. without due process of law
[Libanan v. Sandiganbayan, 233
ii) A mining license that SCRA 163].
contravenes a mandatory
provision of law under which it is From Bernas:
granted is void. Being a mere What is the significance of Bill of
privilege, a license does not vest Rights?
absolute rights in the holder. Thus,
without offending the due process Government is powerful. When unlimited,
and the non- impairment clauses it becomes tyrannical. The Bill of Rights is
of the Constitution, it can be a guarantee that there are certain areas of
revoked by the State in the public a person’s life, liberty, and property which
interest [Republic v. Rosemoor governmental power may not touch.
Mining & Development
Corporation, G.R. No. 149927,
March 30, 2004]. Mere privileges,

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 3
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

What powers of government are been deemed to include vested rights


limited by the Bill of Rights? such as a perfected mining claim, or a
perfected homestead, or a final judgment.
All the powers of the government are It also includes the right to work and the
limited by the Bill of Rights. right to earn a living. A license to operate
a cockpit is not considered protected
property. It is deemed merely a privilege
What rights are protected by the Bill of withdrawable when public interest
Rights? require its withdrawal. In like manner it
has been ruled that a certificate of public
In very general terms, the right to life, convenience granted to a transportation
liberty and property. The manner of company confers no property right on the
protecting these is elucidated in route covered thereby.
subsequent sections.
A mere privilege, however, may evolve
into some form of property right
protected by due process, as for instance
What is the right to “life”? when a privilege, in this case an export
The constitutional protection of the right quota, has been enjoyed for so long, has
to life is not just a protection of the right been the subject of substantial investment
to be alive or to the security of one’s limb and has become the source of
against physical harm. The right to life is employment for thousands. American
the right to a good life. The emphasis on Inter-Fashion Corporation v. Office of
the quality of living is found in Article II the President.
where Section 6 commands the State to
promote a life of “dignity” and where
Section 7 guarantees “ a decent standard Is one’s employment, profession, or
of living” trade “property” protected by the
Constitution?
Yes. Thus, an order of preventive
Do the unborn have a constitutional
suspension without opportunity for
right to life?
hearing at all violates property right.
YES Crespo v. Provincial Board

What does “property” include? A law limiting development of


overseas workers to skilled workers
Protected property includes all kinds of only was challenged as violative of the
property found in the Civil Code. It has right to work. Decide.

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 4
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

No, right is absolute, and the proper free expression and of assembly occupy a
regulation of a profession, calling, preferred position as they are essential to
business or trade has always been upheld the preservation and vitality of our civil
as a legitimate subject of a valid exercise and political institutions.
of the police power by the state
particularly when their conduct affects “The superiority of these freedoms over
either the execution of legitimate property rights is underscored by the fact
governmental functions, the preservation that a mere reasonable or rational
of the State, the public health and welfare relation between the means employed by
and public morals. Executive Secretary v. the law and its object or purpose – that
CA the law is neither arbitrary nor
discriminatory nor oppressive- would
suffice to validate a law which restricts or
impairs property rights. On the other
May the license of harbor pilots be hand, a constitutional or valid
cancelled without a hearing? infringement of human rights requires a
No. Corona v. United Harbor Pilots more stringent criterion, namely
existence of a grave and immediate
Association of the Phils
danger of a substantive evil which the
State has the right to prevent.” Philippine
Blooming Mills Employees Organization
When property is classified into v. Philippine Blooming Mills Co. Inc.,
historical treasures or landmarks,
should such classification be done with
both procedural and substantive due
GlaxoWellcome has a policy against
process?
employees marrying employee of
Yes, when classification “will involve competitor companies. This is well
imposition of limits on ownership.” Army known to and is accepted by
and Navy Club of Manila v. CA employees. An employee who, after
repeated warnings, violated this rule
by marrying an employee of Astra, a
competitor company, was dismissed.
He challenges the policy as a violation
Do life and property enjoy identical of the right to marry. Decide.
protection from the Constitution? Glaxo has a right to guard its trade secrets,
No. The primacy of human rights over manufacturing formulas, marketing
property rights is recognized. In the strategies and other confidential
hierarchy of civil liberties, the rights of programs and information from

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 5
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

competitors. Glaxo and Astra are rival restriction on contact visits as this
companies in the highly competitive practice was reasonably related to
pharmaceutical industry. Duncan maintaining security. Contact visits make
Association of Employees v. it possible for the detainees to hold
GlaxoWellcome.Where, however, there is visitors and jail staff hostage to effect
no reasonable necessity for the escapes. Contract visits also leave the jail
prohibition, it is illegal.Star Paper v. vulnerable to visitors smuggling in
Simbol weapons, drugs, and other contraband.
The security consideration in the
imposition of blanket restriction on
What is the nature of the right to contact visits was ruled to outweigh the
sentiments of the detainees. In the Matter
collect from a pension plan?
of the Petition for Habeas Corpus
In a pension plan where employee
participation is mandatory, the prevailing Moreover, where the only limitation
imposed upon police officers is that their
view is that employees have contractual
or vested rights in the pension where the movements within the premises of the
camp shall be monitored, that they have
pension is part of the terms of
to be escorted whenever the
employment. Thus, where the employee
circumstances warrant that they leave the
retires and meets the eligibility
camp, and that their estimated time of
requirements, he acquires a vested
departure and arrival shall be entered in a
property right to benefits that is
protected by the due process clause. GSIS logbook, there is no deprivation of liberty.
v. Montescarlos Manalo v. PNP Chief

A law that orders discontinuance of a


pension of a retired military officer if he Do people have the right to bear arms?
becomes a citizen of another country was
held not to violate equal protection. No. Only those authorized by law may
Pension of military retirees is purely bear arms. Even the provision in the
gratuitous. Parreño v. COA American Constitution has reference only
to a collective right of militia to bear arms.
Right to liberty No similar provision is found in our
The military detainees question the Constitution. US v. Villareal
correctness of the restriction on
contact visits. Decide
DUE PROCESS OF LAW
Black v. Rutherford, which reiterated
Bell v. Wolfish,upheld the blanket

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 6
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

ruled out and unfairness avoided. To


satisfy the due process requirement,
What is Due Process? Gabby Question official action, to paraphrase Cardozo,
must not outrun the bounds of reason
*memorize these by heart sure and result in sheer oppression. Due
natanongnyato process is thus hostile to any official
impresssmosyasabihinmonalahat IN action marred by lack of
SHORT WAG MO NA SYA PAG- reasonableness. Correctly, it has been
SALITAIN!!!! (ewanko n lang kung di identified as freedom from
kamaka-line of 9 saknya unless bad arbitrariness. It is the embodiment of
trip syasa class nyoi-pag PRAY mo n the sporting Idea of fair play ... It exacts
lngsyai-pag PRAY din kita! hahahaha) fealty 'to those strivings for justice' and
judges the act of officialdom of
Justice Felix Frankfurterof the U.S. whatever branch 'in the light of reason
Supreme Court, for example, would go no
drawn from considerations of fairness
farther than to define due process - and in
that reflect (democratic) traditions of
so doing sums it all up — as nothing more
legal and political thought.' ... It is not a
and nothing less than"the embodiment of
narrow or 'technical conception with
the sporting idea of fair play."
fixed content unrelated to time, place
Daniel Webster described almost two and circumstances,' ... decisions based
on such a clause requiring a 'close and
hundred years ago in the famous
perceptive inquiry into fundamental
Dartmouth College Case, as "the law
principles of our society.'... Questions of
which hears before it condemns, which
proceeds upon inquiry and renders due process are not to be treated
judgment only after trial." Reason: It narrowly or pedantically in slavery to
has to be so if the rights of every person form or phrases. .... "
are to be secured beyond the reach of
officials who, out of mistaken zeal or plain
arrogance, would degrade the due
process clause into a worn and empty
catchword. (This definition is on Justice Isagani Cruz- Due process is a
procedural aspect) guaranty against any arbitrariness on
the part of the government, whether
Justice Enrique M. Fernando, committed by the legislative, the
emphasized in the recent case of Galman executive, or the judiciary.
vs. Pamaran, supra, "due process ... is
responsiveness to the supremacy of The essence of due process is distilled in
reason, obedience to the dictates of the immortal cry of Themistocles to
justice. Negatively put, arbitrariness is Alcibiades "Strike — but hear me first!"
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 7
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

2. Procedural Due Process- it


serves as a restriction on
What are the two kinds of due process? actions of judicial and quasi-
judicial agencies of the
1. Substantive Due Process- this government (BERNAS); a
serves as a restriction on the guarantee of procedural
government’s law and rule- fairness; it refers to the regular
making powers. It requires the methods of procedure to be
intrinsic validity of the law in observed before one’s life,
interfering with the rights of liberty or property can be
the person to his life, liberty or taken away from him. Simply
property. (CRUZ); It must be a stated, it means the procedure
guarantee against the exercise to be observed must be fair.
of arbitrary power even when (SUAREZ)
the power is exercised
according to proper forms and
procedure (BERNAS)
What are the effects of violation of due
Requisites: process?

a. There must be a valid Law 1. Substantive- unconstitutional


upon which it is based;
2. Procedural- invalid
b. The law must have been proceedings
passed or approved to
accomplish a valid
government objective;
What are the aspects of procedural due
c. The objective must be process?
pursued in a lawful manner;
and 1. Procedural Due Process in
Judicial Proceedings
d. The law as well as the Means
to accomplish the objective 2. Procedural Due Process in
must be valid and not Administrative Proceedings
oppressive.
3. Procedural Due Process in
Note: Publication of laws is School Proceedings
part of substantive due
process (Ta

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 8
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

ICHONG vs. Hernandez Case Doctrine: constitutionality of the Act, contending


that it denies to alien residents the equal
BALANCING OF INTERESTS IN DUE protection of the laws and deprives of
PROCESS. The conflict between police their liberty and property without due
power and the guarantees of due process process of law. In answer, the
and equal protection of the laws is more respondents contend that the Act was
apparent than real. Properly related, the passed in the valid exercise of the police
power and the guarantees are supposed power of the State, which exercise is
to coexist. The balancing is the essence, or authorized in the Constitution in the
the indispensable means for the interest of national economic survival.
attainment of legitimate aspirations of
any democratic society. There can be no ISSUE: Whether or not the enactment of
absolute power, whoever exercises it, for R.A No. 1180 is constitutional.
that would be tyranny. Yet there can
neither be absolute liberty, for that would HELD: Yes. The disputed law was enacted
mean license and anarchy. So the State to remedy a real actual threat and danger
can deprive persons of life, liberty or to national economy posed by alien
property, provided there is due process of dominance and control of the retail
law; and persons may be classified into business and free citizens and country
classes and groups, provided everyone is from dominance and control; that the
given the equal protection of the law. The enactment clearly falls within the scope of
test or standard, as always, is reason. The the police power of the State, thru which
police power legislation must be firmly and by which it protects its own
grounded on public interest and welfare, personality and insures its security and
and a reasonable relation must exist future; that the law does not violate the
between purposes and means. And if equal protection clause of the
distinction or classification has been Constitution because sufficient grounds
made, there must be a reasonable basis exist for the distinction between alien and
for said distinction. citizen in the exercise of the occupation
regulated, nor the due process of law
clause, because the law is prospective in
operation and recognizes the privilege of
ICHONG VS. HERNANDEZ aliens already engaged in the occupation
GR L-7995; 31 MAY 1957 and reasonably protects their privilege.
The petition is denied.

FACTS: Republic Act No. 1180 is entitled Petitioner, for and in his own behalf and
"An Act to Regulate the Retail Business." on behalf of other alien
In effect it nationalizes the retail trade residents
 corporations and
business. Petitioner attacks the
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 9
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

partnerships adversely affected by the and equal protection of the laws. What is
provisions of
 Republic Act. No. 1180, the scope of police power, and how are
brought this action to obtain a judicial the due process and equal protection
declaration
 that said Act is clauses related to it? What is the province
unconstitutional, and to enjoin the and power of the legislature, and what is
Secretary of Finance
 and all other the function and duty of the courts? These
persons acting under him, particularly consideration must be clearly and
city and municipal
 treasurers, from correctly understood that their
enforcing its provisions. Petitioner application to the facts of the case may be
attacks the constitutionality of the Act, brought forth with clarity and the issue
contending that: (1) it denies to alien accordingly resolved.
residents the equal protection of the laws
and deprives of their liberty and property It has been said the police power is so far
without due process of law;In answer, the - reaching in scope, that it has become
Solicitor-General and the Fiscal of the City almost impossible to limit its sweep. As it
of Manila contend that: (1) the Act was derives its existence from the very
passed in the valid exercise of the police existence of the State itself, it does not
power of the State, which exercise is need to be expressed or defined in its
authorized in the Constitution in the scope; it is said to be co-extensive with
interest of national economic survival; self- protection and survival, and as such
it is the most positive and active of all
governmental processes, the most
essential, insistent and illimitable.
a. The police power. — Especially is it so under a modern
democratic framework where the
There is no question that the Act demands of society and of nations have
was approved in the exercise of the police multiplied to almost unimaginable
power, but petitioner claims that its proportions; the field and scope of police
exercise in this instance is attended by a power has become almost boundless, just
violation of the constitutional as the fields of public interest and public
requirements of due process and equal welfare have become almost all-
protection of the laws. But before embracing and have transcended human
proceeding to the consideration and foresight. Otherwise stated, as we cannot
resolution of the ultimate issue involved, foresee the needs and demands of public
it would be well to bear in mind certain interest and welfare in this constantly
basic and fundamental, albeit preliminary, changing and progressive world, so we
considerations in the determination of the cannot delimit beforehand the extent or
ever recurrent conflict between police scope of police power by which and
power and the guarantees of due process through which the State seeks to attain or

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 10
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

achieve interest or welfare. So it is that object to which it is directed or by


Constitutions do not define the scope or territory within which is to operate. It
extent of the police power of the State; does not demand absolute equality among
what they do is to set forth the limitations residents; it merely requires that all
thereof. The most important of these are persons shall be treated alike, under like
the due process clause and the equal circumstances and conditions both as to
protection clause. privileges conferred and liabilities enforced.
The equal protection clause is not infringed
by legislation which applies only to those
persons falling within a specified class, if it
b. Limitations on police power. — applies alike to all persons within such
class, and reasonable grounds exists for
The basic limitations of due process and making a distinction between those who
equal protection are found in the fall within such class and those who do not.
following provisions of our Constitution:
d. The due process clause. —
SECTION 1.(1) No person shall be
deprived of life, liberty or property The due process clause has to do with the
without due process of law, nor any reasonableness of legislation enacted in
person be denied the equal protection of pursuance of the police power. Is there
the laws. (Article III, Phil. Constitution) public interest, a public purpose; is public
welfare involved? Is the Act reasonably
These constitutional guarantees which necessary for the accomplishment of the
embody the essence of individual liberty legislature's purpose; is it not
and freedom in democracies, are not
unreasonable, arbitrary or oppressive? Is
limited to citizens alone but are
there sufficient foundation or reason in
admittedly universal in their application,
connection with the matter involved; or
without regard to any differences of race,
has there not been a capricious use of the
of color, or of nationality.
legislative power? Can the aims conceived
be achieved by the means used, or is it not
merely an unjustified interference with
c. The, equal protection clause. — private interest? These are the questions
that we ask when the due process test is
The equal protection of the law clause is applied.
against undue favor and individual or
class privilege, as well as hostile The conflict, therefore, between police
discrimination or the oppression of power and the guarantees of due process
inequality. It is not intended to prohibit and equal protection of the laws is more
legislation, which is limited either in the apparent than real. Properly related, the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 11
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

power and the guarantees are supposed to power, or of the measures adopted to
coexist. THE BALANCING IS THE ESSENCE implement the public policy or to achieve
or, shall it be said, the indispensable public interest. On the other hand, courts,
means for the attainment of legitimate although zealous guardians of individual
aspirations of any democratic society. liberty and right, have nevertheless
There can be no absolute power, evinced a reluctance to interfere with the
whoever exercise it, for that would be exercise of the legislative prerogative.
tyranny. Yet there can neither be They have done so early where there has
absolute liberty, for that would mean been a clear, patent or palpable arbitrary
license and anarchy. So the State can and unreasonable abuse of the legislative
deprive persons of life, liberty and property, prerogative. Moreover, courts are not
provided there is due process of law; and supposed to override legitimate policy,
persons may be classified into classes and and courts never inquire into the wisdom
groups provided everyone is given the of the law.
equal protection of the law. The test or
standard, as always, is reason. The police
power legislation must be firmly grounded
on public interest and welfare, and a f. Law enacted in interest of national
reasonable relation must exist between economic survival and security. — We
purposes and means. And if distinction and are fully satisfied upon a consideration of
classification has been made, there must be all the facts and circumstances that the
a reasonable basis for said distinction. disputed law is not the product of racial
hostility, prejudice or discrimination, but
the expression of the legitimate desire
and determination of the people, thru
e. Legislative discretion not subject to their authorized representatives, to free
judicial review. — the nation from the economic situation
that has unfortunately been saddled upon
Now, in this matter of EQUITABLE it rightly or wrongly, to its disadvantage.
BALANCING, what is the proper place and The law is clearly in the interest of the
role of the courts? It must not be public, nay of the national security itself,
overlooked, in the first place, that the and indisputably falls within the scope of
legislature, which is the constitutional police power, thru which and by which
repository of police power and exercises the State insures its existence and
the prerogative of determining the policy security and the supreme welfare of its
of the State, is by force of circumstances citizens.
primarily the judge of necessity, adequacy
or reasonableness and wisdom, of any law
promulgated in the exercise of the police

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 12
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

DOCTRINE: Philippine Phosphate opportunity to explain one's side or an


Fertilizer Corp. vs. Torres [G.R. No. opportunity to seek a reconsideration of
98050, March 17, 1994] the action or ruling complained of.
Where, as in the instant case, petitioner
THE RIGHT TO HEARING AS AN PHILPHOS agreed to file its position paper
ELEMENT OF DUE PROCESS DOES NOT with the Mediator-Arbiter and to consider
CALL FOR A TRIAL TYPE HEARING. We the case submitted for decision on the
do not see it the way PHILPHOS does here. basis of the position papers filed by the
The essence of due process is simply an parties, there was sufficient compliance
opportunity to be heard or, as applied to with the requirement of due process, as
administrative proceedings, an petitioner was afforded reasonable
opportunity to explain one's side or an opportunity to present its side.Moreover,
opportunity to seek a reconsideration of petitioner could have, if it so desired,
the action or ruling complained of. Where, insisted on a hearing to confront and
as in the instant case, petitioner examine the witnesses of the other party.
PHILPHOS agreed to file its position paper But it did not; instead, it opted to submit
with the Mediator-Arbiter and to consider its position paper with the Mediator-
the case submitted for decision on the Arbiter. Besides, petitioner had all the
basis of the position papers filed by the opportunity to ventilate its arguments in
parties, there was sufficient compliance its appeal to the Secretary of Labor.
with the requirement of due process, as
petitioner was afforded reasonable
opportunity to present its side. Moreover,
petitioner could have, if it so desired,
insisted on a hearing to confront and PHILIPPINE PHOSPHATE FERTILIZER
examine the witnesses of the other party. CORP. V. TORRES
But it did not; instead, it opted to submit G.R.NO. 98050, 17 MARCH 1994
its position paper with the Mediator-
Arbiter. Besides, petitioner had all the
opportunity to ventilate its arguments in FACTS: The PhilPhos Movement for
its appeal to the Secretary of Labor. Progress (PMPI), a labor organization
composed of supervisory employees of
the Philippine Phosphate Fertilizer
What is the essence of administrative Corporation, filed a certification election
due process? on July 7, 1989 with the Department of
Labor and Employment. The move was
The essence of due process is simply an not contested by the Philippine Phosphate
opportunity to be heard or, as applied Fertilizer Corporation management and
to administrative proceedings, an in fact was supported by a position paper

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 13
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

submitted to the Mediator-Arbiter on HELD: No. The essence of due process is


August 11, 1989. The management hailed simply an opportunity to be heard or, as
the creation of a supervisor’s union applied to administrative proceedings,
provided that they meet all the necessary an opportunity to explain one's side or
legal requirements. an opportunity to seek a
reconsideration of the action or ruling
On October 13, 1989 the Mediator-Arbiter complained of. Where, as in the instant
Milado issued an order for the holding of case, petitioner PHILPHOS agreed to file
the elections excluding the technical, its position paper with the
 Mediator-
professional and confidential employees. Arbiter and to consider the case
Then on November15, 1989 respondent submitted for decision on
 the basis of
PMPI prayed for the inclusion of technical, the position papers filed by the parties,
professional and confidential employees. there was
 sufficient compliance with
On December 14, 1989 both parties the requirement of due process,
submitted their position papers on the as
 petitioner was afforded reasonable
said subject matter. Mr. Milado, allowing opportunity to present its side.
the membership of other employees as Moreover, petitioner could have, if it so
stated, granted the petition of PMPI. desired, insisted on a hearing to confront
Petitioner then moved to have the and examine the witnesses of the other
technical, professional and confidential party. But it did not; instead, it opted to
employees removed from the submit its position paper with the
membership of the PMPI on April 16, Mediator-Arbiter. Besides, petitioner had
1990 to the Secretary of Labor and all the opportunity to ventilate its
Employment and a decision was made on arguments in its appeal to the Secretary of
August 7, 1990 dismissing the appeal and Labor.
the subsequent motion for
reconsideration. Then on July 8, 1991 the
Court issued a temporary restraining
order against the holding of the Ynot vs. Intermediate Appellate Court
certification election scheduled on July Case Doctrine:
12, 1991 pending judicial review.
THE CONCEPT OF DUE PROCESS WAS
ISSUE: Whether or not PHILPHOS was NOT GIVEN EXACT DEFINITION FOR
denied due process when respondent RESILIENCY.
Mediator-Arbiter granted the amended
petition of respondent PMPI without It is part of the art of constitution-making
according PHILPHOS a new opportunity to that the provisions of the charter be cast
be heard. in precise and unmistakable language to
avoid controversies that might arise on

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 14
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

their correct interpretation. That is the Justice Felix Frankfurter of the U.S.
ideal. In the case of the due process clause, Supreme Court, for example, would go
however, this rule was deliberately not no farther than to define due process -
followed and the wording was purposely and in so doing sums it all up — as
kept ambiguous. In fact, a proposal to nothing more and nothing less than
delineate it more clearly was submitted in "the embodiment of the sporting idea
the Constitutional Convention of 1934, of fair play."
but it was rejected by Delegate Jose P.
Laurel, Chairman of the Committee on the
Bill of Rights, who forcefully argued
against it. He was sustained by the body. What are the minimum requirements
of due process?
The due process clause was kept
intentionally vague so it would remain The minimum requirements of due
also conveniently resilient. This was felt process are notice and hearing which,
necessary because due process is not, like generally speaking, may not be dispensed
some provisions of the fundamental law, with because they are intended as a
an "iron rule" laying down an implacable safeguard against official arbitrariness.
and immutable command for all seasons
Are Notice and Hearing imperative
and all persons. Flexibility must be the
meaning indispensable? Yes. Absolute?
best virtue of the guaranty. The very
No. What are the exceptions?
elasticity of the due process clause was
meant to make it adapt easily to every 1. The conclusive presumption, for
situation, enlarging or constricting its example, bars the admission of
protection as the changing times and contrary evidence as long as such
circumstances may require. presumption is based on human
experience or there is a rational
Aware of this, the courts have also
connection between the fact proved
hesitated to adopt their own specific
and the fact ultimately presumed
description of due process lest they
therefrom.
confine themselves in a legal straitjacket
2. In the summary abatement of a
that will deprive them of the elbow room
nuisance per se, like a mad dog on
they may need to vary the meaning of the
the loose, which may be killed on
clause whenever indicated. Instead, they
sight because of the immediate
have preferred to leave the import of the
danger it poses to the safety and lives
protection open-ended, as it were, to be
of the people. Pornographic materials,
"gradually ascertained by the process of
contaminated meat and narcotic
inclusion and exclusion in the course of
drugs are inherently pernicious and
the decision of cases as they arise." Thus,
may be summarily destroyed.

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 15
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

3. The passport of a person sought vice of bias or intolerance or ignorance, or


for a criminal offense may be worst of all, in repressive regimes, the
cancelled without hearing, to compel insolence of power.
his return to the country he has fled.
4. Filthy restaurants may be The minimum requirements of due
summarily padlocked in the interest process are notice and hearing which,
of the public health and bawdy generally speaking, may not be
houses to protect the public morals. dispensed with because they are
intended as a safeguard against official
arbitrariness. It is a gratifying
commentary on our judicial system that
Reason for non-requirement of notice the jurisprudence of this country is rich
and Hearing? with applications of this guaranty as proof
of our fealty to the rule of law and the
Because of the nature of the property ancient rudiments of fair play. We have
involved or the urgency of the need to consistently declared that every person,
protect the general welfare from a clear faced by the awesome power of the State,
and present danger. is entitled to "the law of the land," which
Daniel Webster described almost two
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF DUE
hundred years ago in the famous
PROCESS.
Dartmouth College Case, as "the law
which hears before it condemns, which
The closed mind has no place in the open
proceeds upon inquiry and renders
society. It is part of the sporting idea of
fair play to hear "the other side" before an judgment only after trial." It has to be
opinion is formed or a decision is made by so if the rights of every person are to be
those who sit in judgment. Obviously, one secured beyond the reach of officials who,
side is only one-half of the question; the out of mistaken zeal or plain arrogance,
other half must also be considered if an would degrade the due process clause
impartial verdict is to be reached based into a worn and empty catchword.
on an informed appreciation of the issues
This is not to say that notice and hearing
in contention. It is indispensable that the
are imperative in every case for, to be sure,
two sides complement each other, as unto there are a number of admitted exceptions.
the bow the arrow, in leading to the The conclusive presumption, for example,
correct ruling after examination of the bars the admission of contrary evidence as
problem not from one or the other
long as such presumption is based on
perspective only but in its totality. A
human experience or there is a rational
judgment based on less that this full
connection between the fact proved and
appraisal, on the pretext that a hearing is
the fact ultimately presumed therefrom.
unnecessary or useless, is tainted with the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 16
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

There are instances when the need for No. 626-A was issued in the exercise of
expeditious action will justify omission of police power to conserve the carabaos
these requisites, as in the summary that were still fit for farm work or
abatement of a nuisance per se, like a mad breeding.
dog on the loose, which may be killed on
sight because of the immediate danger it ISSUE: Whether or Not EO No. 626-A is a
poses to the safety and lives of the people. violation of Substantive Due Process.
Pornographic materials, contaminated
meat and narcotic drugs are inherently HELD: Yes. The thrust of his petition is
pernicious and may be summarily that the executive order is
destroyed. The passport of a person sought unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes
for a criminal offense may be cancelled outright confiscation of the carabao or
without hearing, to compel his return to carabeef being transported across
the country he has fled. Filthy restaurants provincial boundaries. His claim is that
may be summarily padlocked in the the penalty is invalid because it is
interest of the public health and bawdy imposed without according the owner a
houses to protect the public morals. In right to be heard before a competent and
such instances, previous judicial hearing impartial court as guaranteed by due
may be omitted without violation of due process.
process in view of the nature of the
The closed mind has no place in the open
property involved or the urgency of the
society. It is part of the sporting Idea of
need to protect the general welfare from a
fair play to hear "the other side" before an
clear and present danger.
opinion is formed or a decision is made by
those who sit in judgment. Obviously, one
side is only one-half of the question; the
YNOT VS IAC other half must also be considered if an
GR No. 74457, 20 March 1987 impartial verdict is to be reached based
on an informed appreciation of the issues
FACTS: Executive Order No. 626-A in contention. It is indispensable that the
prohibited the transportation of carabaos two sides complement each other, as unto
and carabeef from one province to the bow the arrow, in leading to the
another. The carabaos of petitioner were correct ruling after examination of the
confiscated for violation of Executive problem not from one or the other
Order No 626-A while he was perspective only but in its totality. A
transporting them from Masbate to Iloilo. judgment based on less that this full
Petitioner challenged the constitutionality appraisal, on the pretext that a hearing is
of Executive Order No. 626-A. The unnecessary or useless, is tainted with the
government argued that Executive Order vice of bias or intolerance or ignorance, or

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 17
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

worst of all, in repressive regimes, the are instances when the need for
insolence of power. expeditions action will justify omission of
these requisites, as in the summary
The minimum requirements of due abatement of a nuisance per se, like a mad
process are notice and hearing which, dog on the loose, which may be killed on
generally speaking, may not be sight because of the immediate danger it
dispensed with because they are poses to the safety and lives of the people.
intended as a safeguard against official (3)Pornographic materials, contaminated
arbitrariness. It is a gratifying meat and narcotic drugs are inherently
commentary on our judicial system that pernicious and may be summarily
the jurisprudence of this country is rich destroyed. (4)The passport of a person
with applications of this guaranty as proof sought for a criminal offense may be
of our fealty to the rule of law and the cancelled without hearing, to compel his
ancient rudiments of fair play. We have return to the country he has fled. (5) Filthy
consistently declared that every person, restaurants may be summarily padlocked
faced by the awesome power of the State, in the interet of the public health and
is entitled to "the law of the land," which bawdy houses to protect the public morals.
Daniel Webster described almost two In such instances, previous judicial
hundred years ago in the famous hearing may be omitted without
Dartmouth College Case, as "the law violation of due process in view of the
which hears before it condemns, which nature of the property involved or the
proceeds upon inquiry and renders urgency of the need to protect the
judgment only after trial."It has to be so general welfare from a clear and
if the rights of every person are to be present danger.
secured beyond the reach of officials who,
out of mistaken zeal or plain arrogance, In the instant case, the carabaos were
would degrade the due process clause arbitrarily confiscated by the police station
into a worn and empty catchword. commander, were returned to the
petitioner only after he had filed a
This is not to say that notice and hearing complaint for recovery and given a
are imperative in every case for, to be sure, supersedes bond of P12,000.00, which was
there are a number of admitted ordered confiscated upon his failure to
exceptions. (1)The conclusive produce the carabaos when ordered by the
presumption, for example, bars the trial court. The executive order defined
admission of contrary evidence as long as the prohibition, convicted the petitioner
such presumption is based on human and immediately imposed punishment,
experience or there is a rational connection which was carried out forthright. The
between the fact proved and the fact measure struck at once and pounced upon
ultimately presumed therefrom. (2)There the petitioner without giving him a

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 18
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

chance to be heard, thus denying him to the subject sought to be attained. . . . .


the centuries-old guaranty of
elementary fair play.
 xxxxxxxxx

It has already been remarked that there So far as the requirement of due process is
are occasions when notice and hearing concerned and in the absence of other
may be validly dispensed with constitutional restriction a state is free to
notwithstanding the usual requirement adopt whatever economic policy may
for these minimum guarantees of due reasonably be deemed to promote public
process. It is also conceded that summary welfare, and to enforce that policy by
action may be validly taken in legislation adapted to its purpose. The
administrative proceedings as procedural courts are without authority either to
due process is not necessarily judicial declare such policy, or, when it is declared
only. In the exceptional cases accepted, by the legislature, to override it. If the
however, there is a justification for the laws passed are seen to have a reasonable
omission of the right to a previous relation to a proper legislative purpose,
hearing, to wit, the immediacy of the and are neither arbitrary nor
problem sought to be corrected and discriminatory, the requirements of due
the urgency of the need to correct it. process are satisfied, and judicial
determination to that effect renders a
court functus officio. . . . (Nebbia vs. New
York, 78 L. ed. 940, 950, 957.)

The test of reasonableness of a law is the


THE DUE PROCESS OF LAW LIMITATION appropriateness or adequacy under all
circumstances of the means adopted to
a. Reasonability, the test of the carry out its purpose into effect. Judged by
limitation; determination by legislature this test, disputed legislation, which is not
decisive. —
 We now come to due merely reasonable but actually necessary,
process as a limitation on the exercise of must be considered not to have infringed
the police power. It has been stated by the the constitutional limitation of
highest authority in the United States reasonableness.
that:
The necessity of the law in question is
. . . . And the guaranty of due process, as explained in the explanatory note that
has often been held, demands only that the accompanied the bill, which later was
law shall not be unreasonable, arbitrary or enacted into law:
capricious, and that the means selected
This bill proposes to regulate the retail
shall have a real and substantial relation
business. Its purpose is to prevent

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 19
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

persons who are not citizens of the substantial, which means relevant
Philippines from having a strangle hold evidence as a reasonable mind
upon our economic life. If the persons might accept as adequate to support
who control this vital artery of our a conclusion;
economic life are the ones who owe no 5. The Decision must have something
allegiance to this Republic, who have no to support itself;
profound devotion to our free 6. The Decision must be based on
institutions, and who have no evidence presented during hearing
permanent stake in our people's or at least contained in the record
welfare, we are not really the masters of and disclosed by the parties; and
our destiny. All aspects of our life, even 7. The decision must be rendered in a
our national security, will be at the manner that the parties can know
mercy of other people. In seeking to the various issues involved and the
accomplish the foregoing purpose, we reason for the decision rendered.
do not propose to deprive persons who (AngTibay v. Court of Industrial
are not citizens of the Philippines of Relations)
their means of livelihood. While this bill
seeks to take away from the hands of
persons who are not citizens of the Availability of due process in
Philippines a power that can be wielded extradition proceedings
to paralyze all aspects of our national
life and endanger our national security Neither the treaty nor the extradition law
it respects existing rights. The approval precludes these rights from a prospective
of this bill is necessary for our national extradite. An application of the basic twin
survival. due process rights of notice and hearing
will not go against the treaty or the
What are the essential requirements of implementing law. (Sec. of Justice v.
administrative due process? Lantion)

1. Right to hearing- it includes right


to present one’s case and submit Availability of due process in
evidence to support thereof; deportation proceedings
2. The tribunal or body or any of its
judges must act on its own Although a deportation proceeding does
Independent consideration of the not partake of the nature of a criminal
law and facts of the controversy; action, considering that it is a harsh and
3. The tribunal must consider the extraordinary administrative proceeding
evidence Presented; affecting the freedom and liberty of a
4. Evidence presented must be person, theconstitutional right of such

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 20
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

person to due process should not be denied. have a speedy, impartial, and public
Thus, the provisions of the Rules of Court of trial, to meet the witnesses face to
the Philippines particularly on criminal face, and to have compulsory
procedure are applicable to deportation process to secure the attendance of
proceedings (Lao Gi “Chia”, Sr. v. CA) witnesses and the production of
evidence in his behalf. However,
after arraignment, trial may proceed
notwithstanding the absence of the
accused provided that he has been
duly notified and his failure to
Alonte vs. Savellano Case Doctrine: appear is unjustifiable."

INDISPENSABLE ELEMENTS OF Jurisprudence acknowledges that due


CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS. It does seem process in criminal proceedings, in
to the Court that there has been undue particular, require (a) that the court or
precipitancy in the conduct of the tribunal trying the case is properly
proceedings. Perhaps the problem could clothed with judicial power to hear and
have well been avoided had not the basic determine the matter before it; (b)
procedures been, to the Court's that jurisdiction is lawfully acquired
perception taken lightly. And in this by it over the person of the accused; (c)
shortcoming, looking at the records of the that the accused is given an
case, the trial court certainly is not alone opportunity to be heard; and (d) that
to blame. judgment is rendered only upon lawful
hearing.
Section 14, paragraphs (1)
and (2), of Article III, of the The above constitutional and
Constitution provides the jurisprudential postulates, by now
fundamentals. elementary and deeply imbedded in our
own criminal justice system, are
"(1) No person shall be held to mandatory and indispensable. The
answer for a criminal offense principles find universal acceptance and
without due process of law. are tersely expressed in the oft- quoted
statement that procedural due process
"(2) In all criminal prosecutions, cannot possibly be met without a "law
the accused shall be presumed which hears before it condemns, which
innocent until the contrary is proceeds upon inquiry and renders
proved, and shall enjoy the right to judgment only after trial."
be heard by himself and counsel, to
be informed of the nature and cause
of the accusation against him, to
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 21
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

ALONTE V. SAVELLANO would not produce any legal effect since it


G.R. NO. 131652, MARCH 9, 1998 was the public prosecutor who had
direction and control of the prosecution
of the criminal action. He prayed for the
FACTS: On December 5, 1996, an denial of the motion to dismiss. The court
information for rape was filed against granted the motion to change venue.
petitioners Bayani M. Alonte, an
incumbent Mayor of Biñan Laguna and On September 17, 1997, the case was
Buenaventura Concepcion predicated on assigned by raffle to Branch 53, RTC
a complaint filed by Juvie-Lyn Manila, with respondent Judge Maximo A.
Punongbayan. Savellano, Jr.,presiding.

On December 13, 1996, Juvie- On October 7, 1997, Juvie-


lynPunongbayan, through her counsel lynPunongbayan, through Atty. Balbin,
Attorney Remedios C. Balbin, and submitted to the Manila court, a
Assistant Chief State Prosecutor Leonardo compliance where she reiterated her
Guiab, Jr., filed with the Office of the Court decision to abide by her Affidavit of
Administrator a petition for a change of Desistance.
venue and to have the case transferred
and tried by any of the Regional Trial However, in an Order, dated 09 October
Courts in Metro Manila. 1997, Judge Savellano found probable
cause for the issuance of warrants for the
During the pendency of the petition for arrest of petitioners Alonte and
change of venue, or on 25 June 1997, Concepcion without prejudice to, and
Juvie-lynPunongbayan, assisted by her independent of, this Courts separate
parents and counsel, executed an affidavit determination as the trier of facts, of the
of desistance. voluntariness and validity of the [private
complainant's] desistance in the light of
On June 28, 1997, Atty. Ramon C.Casano the opposition of the public prosecutor,
on behalf of petitioners, moved to have Asst. Chief State Prosecutor Leonardo
the petition for change of venue Guiyab.
dismissed on the ground that it had
become moot in view of complainant’s On 02 November 1997, Alonte voluntarily
affidavit of desistance. surrendered himself to Director Santiago
Toledo of the National Bureau of
On August 22, 1997, ACSP Guiab filed his Investigation (NBI), while Concepcion, in
comment on the motion to dismiss. Guiab his case, posted the recommended bail of
asserted that he was not aware of the P150,000.00.
desistance of private complainant and
opined that the desistance, in any case, On 07 November 1997, petitioners were

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 22
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

arraigned and both pleaded not guilty to case, and (ii) Assistant Provincial
the charge. The parties manifested that Prosecutor Alberto Nofuente, who
they were waiving pre-trial. The attested that the affidavit of desistance
proceedings forthwith went on. Per Judge was signed by Punongbayan and her
Savellano, both parties agreed to proceed parents in his presence and that he was
with the trial of the case on the merits.4 satisfied that the same was executed
According to Alonte, however, Judge freely and voluntarily. Finally,
Savellano allowed the prosecution to Campomanes manifested that in light of
present evidence relative only to the the decision of private complainant and
question of the voluntariness and validity her parents not to pursue the case, the
of the affidavit of desistance State had no further evidence against the
accused to prove the guilt of the accused.
It would appear that immediately She, then, moved for the "dismissal of the
following the arraignment, the case" against both Alonte and Concepcion.
prosecution presented private
complainant Juvie-lynPunongbayan Thereupon, respondent judge said
followed by her parents. During this that "the case was submitted for
hearing, Punongbayan affirmed the decision."
validity and voluntariness of her affidavit
of desistance. She stated that she had no On 10 November 1997, petitioner Alonte
intention of giving positive testimony in filed an "Urgent Motion to Admit to Bail."
support of the charges against Alonte and During the pendency thereof, Attorney
had no interest in further prosecuting the Philip Sigfrid A. Fortun, the lead counsel
action. Punongbayan confirmed: (i) That for petitioner Alonte received a notice
she was compelled to desist because of from the RTC Manila, Branch 53, notifying
the harassment she was experiencing him of the schedule of promulgation, on
from the media, (ii) that no pressures nor 18 December 1997, of the decision on the
influence were exerted upon her to sign case. The counsel for accused Concepcion
the affidavit of desistance, and (iii) that denied having received any notice of the
neither she nor her parents received a scheduled promulgation.
single centavo from anybody to secure the
On 18 December 1997, after the case was
affidavit of desistance.
called, Atty. Sigrid Fortun and Atty. Jose
Assistant State Prosecutor Marilyn Flaminiano manifested that Alonte could
Campomanes then presented, in not attend the promulgation of the
sequence: (i)Punongbayans parents, who decision because he was suffering from
affirmed their signatures on the affidavit mild hypertension and was confined at
of desistance and their consent to their the NBI clinic and that, upon the other
daughters decision to desist from the hand, petitioner Concepcion and his

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 23
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

counsel would appear not to have been heinous offenses can result in conviction
notified of the proceedings. The without trial (then with more reason that
promulgation, nevertheless, of the simpler offenses could end up with the
decision proceeded in absentia; the same result).
reading concluded: WHEREFORE,
judgment is hereby rendered finding the Jurisprudence acknowledges that DUE
two (2) accused Mayor BayaniAlonte and PROCESS IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS, in
Buenaventura `Wella Concepcion guilty particular, require (a) that the court or
beyond reasonable doubt of the tribunal trying the case is properly
heinous crime of RAPE, clothed with judicial power to hear and
determine the matter before it; (b) that
ISSUE: Was petitioner deprived of jurisdiction is lawfully acquired by it
PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS? over the person of the accused; (c) that
the accused is given an opportunity to
HELD: Yes. The respondent Judge be heard; and (d) that judgment is
committed grave abuse of discretion rendered only upon lawful hearing.
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
when, in total disregard of the Revised The Court must admit that it is puzzled by
Rules on Evidence and existing doctrinal the somewhat strange way the case has
jurisprudence, he rendered a Decision in proceeded below. Per Judge Savellano,
the case a quo on the basis of two (2) after the waiver by the parties of the pre-
affidavits (Punongbayans and Balbins) trial stage, the trial of the case did proceed
which were neither marked nor offered on the merits but that-
into evidence by the prosecution, nor
without giving the petitioner an “The two (2) accused did not present any
opportunity to cross-examine the countervailing evidence during the trial.
affiants thereof, again in violation of They did not take the witness stand to
petitioners right to due process (Article refute or deny under oath the truth of the
III, 1, Constitution). contents of the private complainant's
aforementioned affidavit which she
The respondent Judge committed grave expressly affirmed and confirmed in Court,
abuse of discretion amounting to lack but, instead, thru their respective lawyers,
or excess of jurisdiction when he they rested and submitted the case for
rendered a Decision in the case a quo decision merely on the basis of the private
without conducting a trial on the facts complainant's so called 'desistance' which,
which would establish that complainant to them, was sufficient enough for their
was raped by petitioner (Rule 119, purposes. They left everything to the so-
Article III, 1, Constitution), thereby called 'desistance' of the private
setting a dangerous precedent where complainant.”

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 24
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

According to petitioners, however, there courts must indulge every reasonable


was no such trial for what was presumption against waiver.
conducted on 07 November 1997, aside
from the arraignment of the accused, The Solicitor General has aptly
was merely a proceeding to determine discerned a few of the deviations from
the validity and voluntariness of the what otherwise should have been the
affidavit of desistance executed by regular course of trial: (1) Petitioners
Punongbayan. have not been directed to present
evidence to prove their defenses nor
While Judge Savellano has claims that have dates therefor been scheduled for
petitioners-accused were each the purpose;(2) the parties have not
represented during the hearing on 07 been given the opportunity to present
November 1997 with their respective rebutting evidence nor have dates been
counsel of choice; that none of their set by respondent Judge for the
counsel interposed an intention to cross- purpose; and (3) petitioners have not
examine rape victim admitted the act charged in the
JuvielynPunongbayan, even after she Information so as to justify any
attested, in answer to respondent judge's modification in the order of trial.There
clarificatory questions, the voluntariness can be no short-cut to the legal process,
and truth of her two affidavits - one and there can be no excuse for not
detailing the rape and the other detailing affording an accused his full day in
the attempts to buy her desistance; the court. Due process, rightly occupying
opportunity was missed/not used, hence the first and foremost place of honor in
waived. The rule of case law is that the our Bill of Rights, is an enshrined and
right to confront and cross-examine a invaluable right that cannot be denied
witness 'is a personal one and may be even to the most undeserving.
 This
waived.” case, in fine, must be remanded for
further proceedings.
It should be pointed out, however, that
the existence of the waiver must be
positively demonstrated. The standard
of waiver requires that it "not only must Aniag vs. COMELEC Case Doctrine:
be voluntary, but must be knowing,
intelligent, and done with sufficient THE RIGHT TO PRELIMINARY
awareness of the relevant INVESTIGATION, ALTHOUGH DOES
circumstances and likely NOT EMANATE FROM THE
consequences." Mere silence of the CONSTITUTION IS AN ESSENTIAL
holder of the right should not be so ELEMENT OF CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS.
construed as a waiver of right, and the Moreover, the manner by which

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 25
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

COMELEC proceeded against petitioner criminal justice. The right to have a


runs counter to the due process clause of preliminary investigation conducted
the Constitution. The facts show that before being bound over to trial for a
petitioner was not among those charged criminal offense and hence formally at
by the PNP with violation of the Omnibus risk of incarceration or some other
Election Code. Nor was he subjected by penalty is not a mere formal or technical
the City Prosecutor to a preliminary right; it is a substantive right . . . . [T]he
investigation for such offense. The non- right to an opportunity to avoid a process
disclosure by the City Prosecutor to the painful to anyone save, perhaps, to
petitioner that he was a respondent in the hardened criminals is a valuable right. To
preliminary investigation is violative of deny petitioner's claim to a preliminary
due process which requires that the investigation would be to deprive him of
procedure established by law should be the full measure of his right to due
obeyed. process.

COMELEC argues that petitioner was Apparently, petitioner was merely invited
given the chance to be heard because he during the preliminary investigation of
was invited to enlighten the City Arellano to corroborate the latter's
Prosecutor regarding the circumstances explanation. Petitioner then was made to
leading to the arrest of his driver, and that believe that he was not a party
petitioner in fact submitted a sworn letter respondent in the case, so that his written
of explanation regarding the incident. explanation on the incident was only
This does not satisfy the requirement of intended to exculpate Arellano, not
due process the essence of which is the petitioner himself. Hence, it cannot be
reasonable opportunity to be heard and seriously contended that petitioner was
to submit any evidence one may have in fully given the opportunity to meet the
support of his defense. Due process accusation against him as he was not
guarantees the observance of both apprised that he was himself a
substantive and procedural rights, respondent when he appeared before the
whatever the source of such rights, be it City Prosecutor.
the Constitution itself or only a statute or
a rule of court. In Go v. Court of Appeals,
we held that —
ANIAG VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
While the right to preliminary G.R. NO. 104961, 7 OCTOBER 1994
investigation is statutory rather than
constitutional in its fundamental, since it FACTS: In preparation for the
has in fact been established by statute, it synchronized national and local elections
is a component part of due process in scheduled on 11 May 1992, the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 26
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

Commission on Elections (COMELEC) the firearms to Congress. The Office of the


issued Resolution 2323 (”Gun Ban”), City Prosecutor issued a resolution
promulgating rules and regulations on recommending that the case against
bearing, carrying and transporting of Arellano be dismissed and that the
firearms or other deadly weapons, on “unofficial” charge against Aniag be also
security personnel or bodyguards, on dismissed. Nevertheless, the COMELEC
bearing arms by members of security directing the filing of information against
agencies or police organizations, and Aniag and Arellano for violation of Sec.
organization or maintenance of reaction 261, par. (q), of BP 881 otherwise known
forces during the election period. as the Omnibus Election Code, in relation
Pursuant to the “Gun Ban,” Mr. Serapio P. to Sec. 32 of RA 7166
Taccad, Sergeant-at-Arms, House of
Representatives, wrote Congressman ISSUE:Whether or not the manner by
Francisc B. Aniag Jr., who was then which COMELEC proceeded against
Congressman of the 1st District of petitioner runs counter to the due process
Bulacan requesting the return of the 2 clause of the Constitution
firearms issued to him by the House of
Representatives. Aniag immediately HELD:Yes. The manner by which
instructed his driver, Ernesto Arellano, to COMELEC proceeded against petitioner
pick up the firearms from his house at runs counter to the due process clause
Valle Verde and return them to Congress. of the Constitution. The facts show that
The policemen manning the outpost petitioner was not among those
flagged down the car driven by Arellano charged by the PNP with violation of the
as it approached the checkpoint. They Omnibus Election Code. Nor was he
searched the car and found the firearms subjected by the City Prosecutor to a
neatly packed in their gun cases and preliminary investigation for such
placed in a bag in the trunk of the car. offense. The non-disclosure by the City
Arellano was then apprehended and Prosecutor to the petitioner that he was
detained. Thereafter, the police referred a respondent in the preliminary
Arellano’s case to the Office of the City investigation is violative of due process
Prosecutor for inquest. The referral did which requires that the procedure
not include Aniag as among those charged established by law should be obeyed.
with an election offense. The City The COMELEC argues that petitioner was
Prosecutor invited Aniag to shed light on given the chance to be heard because he
the circumstances mentioned in was invited to enlighten the City
Arellano’s sworn explanation. Aniag Prosecutor regarding the circumstances
explained that Arellano did not violate the leading to the arrest of his driver, and that
firearms ban as he in fact was complying petitioner in fact submitted a sworn letter
with it when apprehended by returning of explanation regarding the incident. This

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 27
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

does not satisfy the requirement of due application, that law is deemed void. Such
process the
 essence of which is the kind of statute violates the first essential
reasonable opportunity to be heard and requisite of due process of law because it
to submit any evidence one may have in denies the accused the right to be
support of his defense. Due process informed of the charged against him
guarantees the observance of both (Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G. R. No,
substantive and procedural rights, 148560, November 19, 2001)
whatever the source of such rights, be it
the Constitution itself or only a statute
or a rule of court.
What is the Overbreadth Doctrine?
Such constituted a violation of his right to
due process. Hence, it cannot be A facial challenge of the statute
contended that petitioner was fully given when a governmental purpose may not be
the opportunity to meet the accusation achieved by means which sweep
against him as he was not informed that unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade
he was himself a respondent in the case. the area of protected freedoms. (Ibid)
Thus, the warrantless search conducted
by the PNP is declared illegal and the
firearms seized during the search cannot Does the two facial challenge applies to
be used as evidence in any proceeding penal statute? Why?
against the petitioner. Resolution No. 92-
0829 is unconstitutional, and therefore, No. The overbreadth and the vagueness
set aside. doctrines have special application only
to free-speech cases, and are not
appropriate for testing the validity of
penal statutes.It added that, at any rate,
What are the two facial challenge on
the challenged provision, under which the
the constitutionality of a statute?
therein petitioner was charged, is not
1. Void-for-Vagueness Rule vague.
2. Overbreadth Doctrine
3. A facial challenge is allowed to be made
to a vague statute and to one which is
What is the Void-for-Vagueness Rule? overbroad because of possible "chilling
effect" upon protected speech. The
When a statute forbids or requires the theory is that "[w]hen statutes regulate
doing of an act in terms so vague that man or proscribe speech and no readily
of common intelligence must necessarily apparent construction suggests itself as
guess as to its meaning and differ as to its a vehicle for rehabilitating the statutes

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 28
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

in a single prosecution, the have not recognized an 'overbreadth'


transcendent value to all society of doctrine outside the limited context of
constitutionally protected expression is the First Amendment." Claims of facial
deemed to justify allowing attacks on overbreadth have been entertained in
overly broad statutes with no cases involving statutes which, by their
requirement that the person making terms, seek to regulate only spoken
the attack demonstrate that his own words and, again, that "overbreadth
conduct could not be regulated by a claims, if entertained at all, have been
statute drawn with narrow specificity." curtailed when invoked against
The possible harm to society in ordinary criminal laws that are sought
permitting some unprotected speech to to be applied to protected conduct." For
go unpunished is outweighed by the this reason, it has been held that "a
possibility that the protected speech of facial challenge to a legislative act is
others may be deterred and perceived the most difficult challenge to mount
grievances left to fester because of successfully, since the challenger must
possible inhibitory effects of overly establish that no set of circumstances
broad statutes. exists under which the Act would be
valid." As for the vagueness doctrine, it
This rationale does not apply to penal is said that a litigant may challenge a
statutes. Criminal statutes have general statute on its face only if it is vague in
in terrorism effect resulting from their all its possible applications. "A plaintiff
very existence, and, if facial challenge is who engages in some conduct that is
allowed for this reason alone, the State clearly proscribed cannot complain of
may well be prevented from enacting the vagueness of the law as applied to
laws against socially harmful conduct. the conduct of others."
In the area of criminal law, the law
cannot take chances as in the area of
free speech.

*para ma-impress si atty. Gab cite this SPOUSES ROMUALDEZ VS. COMELEC
also CAVEAT MUST BE CITED IN Case Doctrine
VERBATIM kunghindi never mind n lng
Petitioners buttress their claim of lack of
The overbreadth and vagueness due process by relying on the case of
doctrines then have special application Lacson v. Executive Secretary. Citing
only to free speech cases. They are inapt Lacson, petitioners argue that the real
for testing the validity of penal statutes. nature of the criminal charge is
As the U.S. Supreme Court put it, in an determined by the actual recital of facts in
opinion by Chief Justice Rehnquist, "we the Complaint or Information; and that

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 29
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

the object of such written accusations was claim that they were not able to refute or
to furnish the accused with such a submit documentary evidence against the
description of the charge against him, as charges that the COMELEC filed with the
will enable him to make his defense. Let it RTC. Petitioners were afforded due
be said that, in Lacson, this court resolved process because they were granted the
the issue of whether under the allegations opportunity to refute the allegations in
in the subject Informations therein, it is private respondent’s Complaint-Affidavit.
the Sandiganbayan or the Regional Trial On 2 April 2001, in opposition to the
Court which has jurisdiction over the Complaint-Affidavit, petitioners filed a
multiple murder case against therein Joint Counter-Affidavit with Motion to
petitioner and intervenors. In Lacson, we Dismiss with the Law Department of the
underscored the elementary rule that COMELEC. They similarly filed a
the jurisdiction of a court is Memorandum before the said body.
determined by the allegations in the Finding that due process was not
Complaint or Information, and not by dispensed with under the circumstances
the evidence presented by the parties in the case at bar, we agree with the
at the trial.29 Indeed, in Lacson, we stance of the Office of the Solicitor
articulated that the real nature of the General that petitioners were reasonably
criminal charge is determined not apprised of the nature and description of
from the caption or preamble of the the charges against them. It likewise
Information nor from the specification bears stressing that preliminary
of the provision of law alleged to have investigations were conducted whereby
been violated, they being conclusions petitioners were informed of the
of law, but by the actual recital of facts complaint and of the evidence submitted
in the Complaint or Information. against them. They were given the
opportunity to adduce controverting
Petitioners’ reliance on Lacson, however, evidence for their defense. In all these
does not support their claim of lack of due stages, petitioners actively participated.
process because, as we have said, the
charges contained in private respondent’s The void-for-vagueness doctrine holds
Complaint-Affidavit and the charges as that a law is facially invalid if men of
directed by the COMELEC to be filed are common intelligence must necessarily
based on the same set of facts. In fact, the guess at its meaning and differ as to its
nature of the criminal charges in private application.However, this Court has
respondent’s Complaint-Affidavit and that imposed certain limitations by which a
of the charges contained in the criminal statute, as in the challenged law
informations filed with the RTC, pursuant at bar, may be scrutinized. This Court has
to the COMELEC Resolution En Banc are declared that facial invalidation or an "on-
the same, such that, petitioners cannot its-face" invalidation of criminal statutes

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 30
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

is not appropriate.We have so enunciated void a mere COMELEC Resolution, not a


in no uncertain terms in Romualdez statute. Finally, Santiago v. Comelec held
v.Sandiganbayan, thus: that a portion of RA 6735 was
unconstitutional because of undue
In sum, the doctrines of strict scrutiny, delegation of legislative powers, not
overbreadth, and vagueness are because of vagueness.
analytical tools developed for testing "on
their faces" statutes in free speech cases Indeed, an "on-its-face"
or, as they are called in American law, invalidation of criminal statutes would
First Amendment cases. They cannot be result in a mass acquittal of parties
made to do service when what is involved whose cases may not have even
is a criminal statute. With respect to such reached the courts. Such invalidation
statute, the established rule is that 'one to would constitute a departure from the
whom application of a statute is usual requirement of "actual case and
constitutional will not be heard to attack controversy" and permit decisions to
the statute on the ground that impliedly it be made in a sterile abstract context
might also be taken as applying to other having no factual concreteness. In
persons or other situations in which its Younger v. Harris,this evil was aptly
application might be unconstitutional.' As pointed out by the U.S. Supreme Court in
has been pointed out, 'vagueness these words:
challenges in the First Amendment
context, like overbreadth challenges "[T]he task of analyzing a proposed
typically produce facial invalidation, statute, pinpointing its deficiencies, and
while statutes found vague as a matter of requiring correction of these deficiencies
due process typically are invalidated before the statute is put into effect, is
[only] 'as applied' to a particular rarely if ever an appropriate task for the
defendant.'" (underscoring supplied) judiciary. The combination of the relative
remoteness of the controversy, the impact
"To this date, the Court has not on the legislative process of the relief
declared any penal law unconstitutional sought, and above all the speculative and
on the ground of ambiguity." While amorphous nature of the required line-
mentioned in passing in some cases, the by-line analysis of detailed statutes, x xx
void-for-vagueness concept has yet to ordinarily results in a kind of case that is
find direct application in our jurisdiction. wholly unsatisfactory for deciding
In Yu Cong Eng v. Trinidad, the constitutional questions, whichever way
Bookkeeping Act was found they might be decided."
unconstitutional because it violated the
equal protection clause, not because it For this reason, generally disfavored is
was vague. Adiong v. Comelec decreed as an on-its-face invalidation of statutes,

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 31
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

described as a "manifestly strong the scope of otherwise valid criminal


medicine" to be employed "sparingly laws that reflect legitimate state
and only as a last resort." In interests in maintaining
determining the constitutionality of a comprehensive controls over harmful,
statute, therefore, its provisions that constitutionally unprotected conduct.
have allegedly been violated must be
examined in the light of the conduct Thus, claims of facial overbreadth are
with which the defendant has been entertained in cases involving statutes
charged. (Emphasis supplied.) which, by their terms, seek to regulate
only "spoken words" and again, that
We further quote the relevant ruling in "overbreadth claims, if entertained at
David v. Arroyo on the proscription anent all, have been curtailed when invoked
a facial challenge: against ordinary criminal laws that are
sought to be applied to protected
Moreover, the overbreadth doctrine is conduct." Here, the incontrovertible fact
not intended for testing the validity of a remains that PP 1017 pertains to a
law that "reflects legitimate state interest spectrum of conduct, not free speech,
in maintaining comprehensive control which is manifestly subject to state
over harmful, constitutionally regulation.
unprotected conduct." Undoubtedly,
lawless violence, insurrection and Second, facial invalidation of laws is
rebellion are considered "harmful" and considered as "manifestly strong
"constitutionally unprotected conduct." In medicine," to be used "sparingly and
Broadrick v. Oklahoma, it was held: only as a last resort," and is "generally
disfavored;" The reason for this is
It remains a matter of no little difficulty to obvious. Embedded in the traditional
determine when a law may properly be rules governing constitutional
held void on its face and when such adjudication is the principle that a person
summary action is inappropriate. But the to whom a law may be applied will not be
plain import of our cases is, at the very heard to challenge a law on the ground
least, that facial overbreadth that it may conceivably be applied
adjudication is an exception to our unconstitutionally to others, i.e., in other
traditional rules of practice and that its situations not before the Court. A
function, a limited one at the outset, writer and scholar in Constitutional Law
attenuates as the otherwise explains further:
unprotected behavior that it forbids
the State to sanction moves from pure The most distinctive feature of the
speech toward conduct and that overbreadth technique is that it marks
conduct even if expressive falls within an exception to some of the usual rules

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 32
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

of constitutional litigation. Ordinarily, the Court to refrain from constitutionally


a particular litigant claims that a protected speech or expression.
statute is unconstitutional as applied
to him or her; if the litigant prevails, Xxx xxxxxx
the courts carve away the
unconstitutional aspects of the law by And third, a facial challenge on the ground
invalidating its improper applications of overbreadth is the most difficult
on a case to case basis. Moreover, challenge to mount successfully, since the
challengers to a law are not permitted challenger must establish that there can
to raise the rights of third parties and be no instance when the assailed law
can only assert their own interests. In may be valid. Here, petitioners did not
overbreadth analysis, those rules give even attempt to show whether this
way; challenges are permitted to raise situation exists.
the rights of third parties; and the court
invalidates the entire statute "on its face," Petitioners likewise seek a facial review
not merely "as applied for" so that the of PP 1017 on the ground of vagueness.
overbroad law becomes unenforceable This, too, is unwarranted.
until a properly authorized court
construes it more narrowly. The factor Related to the "overbreadth" doctrine is
that motivates courts to depart from the the "void for vagueness doctrine" which
normal adjudicatory rules is the concern holds that "a law is facially invalid if
with the "chilling;" deterrent effect of the men of common intelligence must
overbroad statute on third parties not necessarily guess at its meaning and
courageous enough to bring suit. The differ as to its application." It is subject
Court assumes that an overbroad laws to the same principles governing
"very existence may cause others not overbreadth doctrine. For one, it is also an
before the court to refrain from analytical tool for testing "on their faces"
constitutionally protected speech or statutes in free speech cases. And like
expression." An overbreadth ruling is overbreadth, it is said that a litigant may
designed to remove that deterrent effect challenge a statute on its face only if it is
on the speech of those third parties. vague in all its possible applications.

In other words, a facial challenge using


the overbreadth doctrine will require the
Court to examine PP 1017 and pinpoint
its flaws and defects, not on the basis of SPOUSES CARLOS S. ROMUALDEZ AND
its actual operation to petitioners, but on ERLINDA R. ROMUALDEZ,
the assumption or prediction that its very PETITIONERS, VS. COMMISSION ON
existence may cause others not before ELECTIONS AND DENNIS GARAY,

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 33
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

RESPONDENTS. personally accomplish an


G. R. NO. 167011, APRIL 30, 2008 application form for registration
as prescribed by the
FACTS:Dennis Garay filed a case alleging Commission in three (3) copies
that petitioners made false and untruthful before the Election Officer on
representations in violation of Section any date during office hours
10[11] of Republic Act Nos. 8189, by after having acquired the
indicating therein that they are residents qualifications of a voter. The
of 935 San Jose Street, Burauen, Leyte, application shall, inter alia,
when in truth and in fact, they were and contain the following data:
still are residents of 113 Mariposa Loop, Periods of residence in the
Mariposa Street, BagongLipunanngCrame, Philippines and in the place of
Quezon City. registration and a statement
that the application is not a
The petitioners contended, inter alia that registered voter of any precinct.
Section 45(j) of the Voter’s Registration
Act was void for being vague as it did not 2. Section 45(j) of the same Act
refer to a definite provision of the law, the provides, inter alia, that the
violation of which would constitute an following shall be considered
election offense; hence, it ran contrary to election offenses under this Act:
Section 14(1) and section 14 (2), Article “Violation of any of the
III of the 1987 Constitution ( due process provisions of this Act”.
clause)
ISSUE:Whether or not RA No. 8189 is
Nevertheless, the Commission on Election vague for the void-for-vagueness rule to
(COMELEC) Charged the petitioners with apply
violations of Section 10 (g) and (j) , in
relation to Section 45 (J) of the Voter’s HELD: NO.The void-for-vagueness
Registration Act. doctrine holds that a law is facially invalid
if men of common intelligence must
1. Section 10(g) and Section 10(j) necessarily guess at its meaning and differ
of Republic Act No. 8189, as to its application. However, this Court
provides that a qualified voter has imposed certain limitations by which
shall be registered in the a criminal statute, as in the challenged
permanent list of voters in a law at bar, may be scrutinized. This Court
precinct of the city or has declared that facial invalidation or an
municipality wherein he resides “on-its-face” invalidation of criminal
to be able to vote in any election. statutes is not appropriate.
To register as a voter, he shall

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 34
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

Indeed, an “on-its-face” invalidation of December 18, 1989]


criminal statutes would result in a mass
acquittal of parties whose cases may not RATE FIXING POWER EXERCISED IN A
have even reached the courts. Such QUASI-JUDICIAL MANNER REQUIRES
invalidation would constitute a departure PRIOR NOTICE AND HEARING. While
from the usual requirement of “actual respondents may fix a temporary rate
case and controversy” and permit pending final determination of the
decisions to be made in a sterile abstract application of petitioner, such rate-fixing
context having no factual concreteness. order, temporary though it may be, is not
The rule established in our jurisdiction is, exempt from the statutory procedural
only statutes on free speech, religious requirements of notice and hearing, as
freedom, and other fundamental rights well as the requirement of
may be facially challenged. Under no case reasonableness. Assuming that such
may ordinary penal statutes be subjected power is vested in NTC, it may not
to a facial challenge. exercise the same in an arbitrary and
confiscatory manner. Categorizing such
Moreover, it is a well-settled principle of an order as temporary in nature does not
legal hermeneutics that words of a statute perforce entail the applicability of a
will be interpreted in their natural, plain different rule of statutory procedure than
and ordinary acceptation and would otherwise be applied to any other
signification, unless it is evident that the order on the same matter unless
legislature intended a technical or special otherwise provided by the applicable law.
legal meaning to those words. It is In the case at bar, the applicable statutory
succinct that courts will not substitute the provision is Section 16(c) of the Public
finding of probable cause by the Service Act which provides: "Section 16.
COMELEC in the absence of grave abuse Proceedings of the Commission, upon
of discretion. The abuse of discretion notice and hearing. — The Commission
must besopatent and gross as to amount shall have power, upon proper notice and
to an evasion of a positive duty or a hearing in accordance with the rules and
virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined provisions of this Act, subject to the
by law, or to act at all in contemplation of limitations and exceptions mentioned and
law as where the power is exercised in an saving provisions to the contrary: (c) To
arbitrary and despotic manner by reason fix and determine individual or joint
of passion or hostility. rates, . . . which shall be imposed,
observed and followed thereafter by any
public service; . . . ."

Philippine Communications Satellite "Moreover, although the rule-making


Corp. vs. Alcuaz [G.R. No. 84818, power and even the power to fix rates —

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 35
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

when such rules and/or rates are meant which apply in the case of the direct
to apply to all enterprises of a given kind application of a policy to a specific
throughout the Philippines — may individual) . . . It is said in 73 C.J.S. Public
partake of a legislative character, such is Administrative Bodies and Procedure, sec.
not the nature of the order complained of. 130, pages 452 and 453: Aside from
Indeed, the same applies exclusively to statute, the necessity of notice and
petitioner herein. What is more, it is hearing in an administrative proceeding
predicated upon the finding of fact — depends on the character of the
based upon a report submitted by the proceeding and the circumstances
General Auditing Office — that petitioner involved. In so far as generalization is
is making a profit of more than 12% of its possible in view of the great variety of
invested capital, which is denied by administrative proceedings, it may be
petitioner. Obviously, the latter is entitled stated as a general rule that notice and
to cross-examine the maker of said report, hearing are not essential to the validity of
and to introduce evidence to disprove the administrative action where the
contents thereof and/or explain or administrative body acts in the exercise of
complement the same, as well as to refute executive, administrative, or legislative
the conclusion drawn therefrom by the functions; but where a public
respondent. In other words, in making administrative body acts in a judicial or
said finding of fact, respondent performed quasi-judicial matter, and its acts are
a function partaking of a quasi-judicial particular and immediate rather than
character, the valid exercise of which general and prospective, the person
demands previous notice and hearing." whose rights or property may be affected
This rule was further explained in the by the action is entitled to notice and
subsequent case of The Central Bank of hearing.
the Philippines vs. Cloribel, et al. to wit:
"It is also clear from the authorities that
where the function of the administrative
body is legislative, notice of hearing is not PHILIPPINE COMMUNICATION
required by due process of law (See SATELLITE CORP. V. ALCUAZ
Oppenheiner, Administrative Law, 2 Md. G.R. NO. 84818, DEC 18, 1989
L.R. 185, 204, supra, where it is said: If the
nature of the administrative agency is
FACTS: By virtue of Republic Act 5514,
essentially legislative, the requirements of
the Philippine Communications Satellite
notice and hearing are not necessary. The
Corporation (PHILCOMSAT) was granted
validity of a rule of future action which
“a franchise to establish, construct,
affects a group, if vested rights of liberty
maintain and operate in the Philippines,
or property are not involved, is not
at such places as the grantee may select,
determined according to the same rules

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 36
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

station or stations and associated ISSUE: Whether the NTC is required to


equipment and facilities for international provide notice and hearing to
satellite communications.” Since 1968, it PHILCOMSAT in its rate-fixing order,
has been leasing its satellite circuits to which fixed a temporary rate pending
PLDT, Philippine Global Communications, final determination of PHILCOMSAT’s
and other telecommunication companies. application.
It was exempt from the jurisdiction of the
National Telecommunications HELD: YES. The order in question which
Commission (NTC). was issued by respondent Alcuaz no
doubt contains all the attributes of a
However, pursuant to Executive Order quasi-judicial adjudication. Foremost is
(EO) 196, it was placed under the the fact that said order pertains
jurisdiction, control and regulation of exclusively to petitioner and to no other.
NTC, including all its facilities and Further, it is premised on a finding of fact
services and the fixing of rates. although patently superficial, that there is
Implementing said executive order, NTC merit in a reduction of some rates
required PHILCOMSAT to apply for the charged based on initial evaluation of
requisite certificate of public petitioner’s financial statements- without
convenience.. On 9 September 1987, affording petitioner the benefit of an
PHILCOMSAT filed with NTC an explanation as to what particular aspect
application for authority to continue or aspects of the financial statements
operating and maintaining the same warranted a corresponding reduction
facilities, to continue providing the rate. No rationalization was offered nor
international satellite communications were the attending contingencies, if any,
services, and to charge the current rates discussed, which prompted respondents
applied for in rendering such services. to impose as much as a fifteen percent
Pending hearing, it also applied for a (15%) rate reduction. It is not far-fetched
provisional authority so that it can to assume that petitioner could be in a
continue to operate and maintain the better position to rationalize its rates vis-
facilities, provide the services and charge a-vis the viability of its business
therefor the aforesaid rates therein requirements. The rates it charges result
applied for. The NTC extended the from an exhaustive and detailed study it
provisional authority of PHILCOMSAT, conducts of the multi-faceted intricacies
but it directed PHILCOMSAT to charge attendant to a public service undertaking
modified reduced rates through a of such nature and magnitude. We are,
reduction of 15% on the present therefore, inclined to lend greater
authorized rates. PHILCOMSAT assailed credence to petitioner's ratiocination that
said order. an immediate reduction in its rates would
adversely affect its operations and the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 37
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

quality of its service to the public deterioration of the public service could
considering the maintenance have been shown and demonstrated to
requirements, the projects it still has to NTC. Reduction of rates was made
undertake and the financial outlay without affording PHILCOMSAT the
involved. Notably, petitioner was not even benefit of an explanation as to what
afforded the opportunity to cross- particular aspect or aspects of the
examine the inspector who issued the financial statements warranted a
report on which respondent NTC based corresponding rate reduction.
its questioned order. PHILCOMSAT was not even afforded the
opportunity to cross-examine the
At any rate, there remains the inspector who issued the report on
categorical admission made by which NTC based its questioned order.
respondent NTC that the questioned While NTC may fix a temporary rate
order was issued pursuant to its quasi- pending final determination of the
judicial functions. It, however, insists that application of PHILCOMSAT, such rate-
notice and hearing are not necessary fixing order, temporary though it may
since the assailed order is merely be, is not exempt from the statutory
incidental to the entire proceedings and, procedural requirements of notice and
therefore, temporary in nature. This hearing, as well as the requirement of
postulate is bereft of merit. reasonableness.

The NTC, in the exercise of its rate-fixing What are the requisites for judicial
power, is limited by the requirements of proceedings?
public safety, public interest,
reasonable feasibility and reasonable 1. There is an Impartial court or
rates, which conjointly more than tribunal clothed with judicial power
satisfy the requirements of a valid to hear and determine the matters
delegation of legislative power. The NTC before it;
order violates procedural due process
because it was issued motopropio 2. Jurisdiction is properly acquired
without notice to PHILCOMSAT and over the person of the defendant
without the benefit of a hearing. Said and over property which is the
order was based merely on an “initial subject matter of the proceeding;
evaluation,” which is a unilateral
evaluation, but had PHILCOMSAT been 3. The defendant must be given an
given an opportunity to present its side Opportunity to be heard; and
before the order in question was issued,
the confiscatory nature of the rate To be heard does not mean
reduction and the consequent verbal arguments in court; one may
be heard also through pleadings.
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 38
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

Where opportunity to be heard, disclosed to the parties affected. The


either through oral arguments or Court of Industrial Relations or any of its
pleadings, is accorded, there is no judges, therefore, must act on its or his
denial of due process. own independent consideration of the law
and facts of the controversy, and not
4. The judgment was rendered upon simply accept the views of a subordinate
lawful hearing and based on in arriving at a decision. The Court of
evidence adduced Industrial Relations should, in all
controversial questions, render its
decision in such a manner that the parties
to the proceeding can know the various
AngTibay vs. Court of Industrial issues involved, and the reasons for the
Relations Case Doctrine: decisions rendered. The performance of
this duty is inseparable from the
CARDINAL PRIMARY RIGHTS IN
ADMINISTRATIVE DUE PROCESS. There authority conferred upon it.
are cardinal primary rights which must be
respected even in proceedings of this
character. The first of these rights is the
right to a hearing, which includes the
right of the party interested or affected to ANG TIBAY VS. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL
present his own case and submit evidence RELATIONS (CIR)
in support thereof. Not only must the 69 PHIL 635; G.R. NO. 46496; 27 FEB
party be given an opportunity to present 1940
his case and to adduce evidence tending
to establish the rights which he asserts
but the tribunal must consider the FACTS: There was agreement between
evidence presented. While the duty to AngTibay and the National Labor Union,
deliberate does not impose the obligation Inc (NLU). The NLU alleged that the
to decide right, it does imply a necessity supposed lack of leather material claimed
which cannot be disregarded, namely, by ToribioTeodoro was but a scheme
that of having something to support its adopted to systematically discharge all
decision. Not only must there be some the members of the NLU, from work. And
evidence to support a finding or this averment is desired to be proved by
conclusion, but the evidence must be the petitioner with the records of the
substantial. Bureau of Customs and Books of Accounts
of native dealers in leather. That National
The decision must be rendered on the Worker's Brotherhood Union of AngTibay
evidence presented at the hearing, or at is a company or employer union
least contained in the record and dominated by ToribioTeodoro, which was
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 39
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

alleged by the NLU as an illegal one. The (1) the right to a hearing, which
CIR, decided the case and elevated it to includes the right to present
the Supreme Court, but a motion for new one's cause and submit evidence
trial was raised by the NLU. But the in support thereof;

AngTibay filed a motion for opposing the
said motion. (2) The tribunal must consider
the evidence presented;
ISSUE: Whether or not the motion for
new trial should be granted. (3) The decision must have
something to support itself;
HELD: Yes. The interest of justice would
be better served if the movant is given (4) The evidence must be
opportunity to present at the hearing the substantial;and
documents referred to in his motion and
such other evidence as may be relevant to (5) The decision must be based
the main issue involved. on the evidence presented at the
hearing; or at least contained in
It must be noted that the CIR is a special the record and disclosed to the
court. It is more an administrative board parties affected;
than a part of the integrated judicial
system of the nation. CIR is not narrowly
constrained by technical rules of
procedure, and equity and substantial Ateneo de Manila vs. Capulong Case
merits of the case, without regard to Doctrine:
technicalities or legal forms and shall not
MINIMUM STANDARD TO BE
be bound by any technical rules of legal
SATISFIED IN IMPOSING DISCIPLINARY
evidence but may inform its mind in such
SANCTION BY AN ACADEMIC
manner as it may deem just and equitable.
INSTITUTION.— Corollary to respondent
The fact, however, that the CIR may be said
students' contention of denial of due
to be free from rigidity of certain
process is their argument that it is the
procedural requirements does not mean
AngTibay case [69 Phil. 635 (1940)] and
that it can in justiciable cases coming
not the Guzman case [142 SCRA 699],
before it, entirely ignore or disregard the
which is applicable in the case at bar.
fundamental and essential requirements of
Though both cases essentially deal with
due process in trials and investigations of
the requirements of due process, the
an administrative character. There are
Guzman case is more apropos to the
cardinal primary rights which must be
instant case, since the
respected even in proceedings of this
character: latter deals specifically with the minimum

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 40
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

standards to be satisfied in the imposition and that respondent students have no


of disciplinary sanctions in academic right to examine affiants-neophytes,
institutions, such as petitioner university reveals that this is but a reiteration of our
herein, thus: "(1) the students must be previous ruling in Alcuaz vs. PSBA, Q.C.
informed in writing of the nature and Branch, 161 SCRA 20.
cause of any accusation against them; (2)
that they shall have the right to answer
the charges against them with the
assistance of counsel, if desired; (3) they
shall be informed of the evidence against
ATENEO DE MANILA UNIVERSITY VS.
them; (4) they shall have the right to
adduce evidence in their own behalf; and HON. JUDGE IGNACIO CAPULONG

(5) the evidence must be duly 222 SCRA 644; G.R. NO. 99327; 27 MAY
considered by the investigating committee 1993
or official designated by the school
authorities to hear and decide the case." FACTS: Leonardo H. Villa, a first year law
student of Petitioner University, died of
THE RIGHT TO CROSS-EXAMINATION serious physical injuries at Chinese
IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE GUARANTEE General Hospital after the initiation rites
OF DUE PROCESS. Respondent students of Aquila Legis. Bienvenido Marquez was
may not use the argument that since they also hospitalized at the Capitol Medical
were not accorded the opportunity to see Center. Petitioner Dean Cynthia del
and examine the written statements Castillo created a Joint Administration-
which became the basis of petitioners' Faculty-Student Investigating Committee
February 14, 1991 order, they were which was tasked to investigate and
denied procedural due process. Granting submit a report within 72 hours on the
that they were denied such opportunity, circumstances surrounding the death of
the same may not be said to detract from Lennie Villa. Said notice also required
the observance of due process, for respondent students to submit their
disciplinary cases involving students need written statements within twenty-four
not necessarily include the right to cross (24) hours from receipt. Although
examination. An administrative respondent students received a copy of
proceeding conducted to investigate the written notice, they failed to file a
students' participation in a hazing activity reply. In the meantime, they were placed
need not be clothed with the attributes of on preventive suspension. The
a judicial proceeding. A closer Investigating Committee found a prima
examination of the March 2, 1991 hearing facie case against respondent students for
which characterized the rules on the violation of Rule 3 of the Law School
investigation as being summary in nature Catalogue entitled "Discipline."

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 41
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

Respondent students were then required statement on the incident. Instead of filing
to file their written answers to the formal a reply, respondent students requested
charge. Petitioner Dean created a through their counsel, copies of the
Disciplinary Board to hear the charges charges. The nature and cause of the
against respondent students. The Board accusation were adequately spelled out in
found respondent students guilty of petitioners' notices. Present is the twin
violating Rules on Discipline which elements of notice and hearing.
prohibits participation in hazing
activities. However, in view of the lack of The Minimum standards to be satisfied
unanimity among the members of the in the imposition of disciplinary
Board on the penalty of dismissal, the sanctions in academic institutions, such
Board left the imposition of the penalty to as petitioner university herein, thus:
the University Administration.
Accordingly, Fr. Bernas imposed the (1) the students must be informed in
penalty of dismissal on all respondent WRITING of the nature and cause of any
students. Respondent students filed with accusation against them;
 (2) that they
RTC Makati a TRO since they are shall have the right to answer the
currently enrolled. This was granted. A charges against them with the
day after the expiration of the temporary assistance of counsel, if desired:
 (3)
restraining order, Dean del Castillo they shall be informed of the evidence
created a Special Board to investigate the against them
 (4) they shall have the
charges of hazing against respondent right to adduce evidence in their own
students Abas and Mendoza. This was behalf; and
 (5) the evidence must be
requested to be stricken out by the duly considered by the investigating
respondents and argued that the creation committee or official designated by the
of the Special Board was totally unrelated school authorities to hear and decide
to the original petition which alleged lack the case.
of due process. This was granted and
reinstatement of the students was It cannot seriously be asserted that the
ordered. above requirements were not met. When,
in view of the death of Leonardo Villa,
ISSUE: Was there denial of due process petitioner Cynthia del Castillo, as Dean of
against the respondent students. the Ateneo Law School, notified and
required respondent students on
HELD: There was no denial of due February 11, 1991 to submit within
process, more particularly procedural due twenty-four hours their written
process. The Dean of the Ateneo Law statement on the incident, the records
School, notified and required respondent show that instead of filing a reply,
students to submit their written respondent students requested through

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 42
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

their counsel, copies of the charges. While denied procedural due process.
of the students mentioned in the February Granting that they were denied such
11, 1991 notice duly submitted written opportunity, the same may not be said
statements, the others failed to do so. Thus, to detract from the observance of due
the latter were granted an extension of up process, for disciplinary cases involving
to February 18, 1991 to file their students need not necessarily include
statements. the right to cross examination. An
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
Indubitably, the nature and cause of the conducted to investigate students'
accusation were adequately spelled out in participation in a hazing activity need not
petitioners' notices dated February 14 be clothed with the attributes of a judicial
and 20, 1991. 30 It is to be noted that the proceeding. A closer examination of the
February 20, 1991 letter which quoted March 2, 1991 hearing which
Rule No. 3 of its Rules of Discipline as characterized the rules on the
contained in the Ateneo Law School investigation as being summary in nature
Catalogue was addressed individually to and that respondent students have no right
respondent students. Petitioners' to examine affiants-neophytes, reveals that
notices/letters dated February 11, this is but a reiteration of our previous
February 14 and 20 clearly show that ruling in Alcuaz.
respondent students were given ample
opportunity to adduce evidence in their Respondent students' contention that the
behalf and to answer the charges leveled investigating committee failed to consider
against them. their evidence is far from the truth
because the February 14, 1992 ordered
The requisite assistance of counsel was met clearly states that it was reached only
when, from the very start of the after receiving the written statements and
investigations before the Joint hearing the testimonies of several
Administration Faculty- Student witnesses. Similarly, the Disciplinary
Committee, the law firm of Gonzales Board's resolution dated March 10, 1991
Batiler and Bilog and Associates put in its was preceded by a hearing on March 2,
appearance and filed pleadings in behalf of 1991 wherein respondent students were
respondent students. summoned to answer clarificatory
questions.
Respondent students may not use the
argument that since they were not
accorded the opportunity to see and
examine the written statements which Southern Hemisphere Engagement
became the basis of petitioners' Network, Inc. vs. Anti-Terrorism
February 14, 1991 order, they were Council Case Doctrine:

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 43
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

In constitutional litigations, the power of show that


judicial review is limited by four exacting
requisites, viz: (1) it has personally suffered some actual
(a) there must be an actual case or or threatened injury as a result of the
controversy; allegedly illegal conduct of the
(b) petitioners must possess locus government,
standi; (2) the injury is fairly traceable to the
(c) the question of constitutionality must challenged action, and
be raised at the earliest opportunity; (3) the injury is likely to be redressed by
and a favorable action. (emphasis and
(d) the issue of constitutionality must be underscoring supplied.)
the lismota of the case.
While in our jurisdiction there is still no
Locus standi or legal standing requires a judicially declared terrorist organization,
personal stake in the outcome of the the United States of America[17] (US) and
controversy as to assure that concrete the European Union[18] (EU) have both
adverseness which sharpens the classified the CPP, NPA and Abu Sayyaf
presentation of issues upon which the Group as foreign terrorist organizations.
court so largely depends for illumination The Court takes note of the joint
of difficult constitutional questions. statement of Executive Secretary Eduardo
Ermita and Justice Secretary Raul
A party who assails the constitutionality Gonzales that the Arroyo Administration
of a statute must have a direct and would adopt the US and EU classification
personal interest. It must show not only of the CPP and NPA as terrorist
that the law or any governmental act is organizations. Such statement
invalid, but also that it sustained or is in notwithstanding, there is yet to be filed
immediate danger of sustaining some before the courts an application to declare
direct injury as a result of its the CPP and NPA organizations as
enforcement, and not merely that it domestic terrorist or outlawed
suffers thereby in some indefinite way. It organizations under RA 9372. Again, RA
must show that it has been or is about to 9372 has been in effect for three years
be denied some right or privilege to now. From July 2007 up to the present,
which it is lawfully entitled or that it is petitioner-organizations have conducted
about to be subjected to some burdens or their activities fully and freely without
penalties by reason of the statute or act any threat of, much less an actual,
complained of. prosecution or proscription under RA
9372.
For a concerned party to be allowed to
raise a constitutional question, it must The mere invocation of the duty to

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 44
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

preserve the rule of law does not, undertake and the anticipated reaction to
however, suffice to clothe the IBP or any it of a public official are merely theorized,
of its members with standing. The IBP lie beyond judicial review for lack of
failed to sufficiently demonstrate how its ripeness.
mandate under the assailed statute
revolts against its constitutional rights The possibility of abuse in the
and duties. Moreover, both the IBP and implementation of RA 9372 does not avail
CODAL have not pointed to even a single to take the present petitions out of the
arrest or detention effected under RA realm of the surreal and merely imagined.
9372. Such possibility is not peculiar to RA 9372
since the exercise of any power granted
RA 9372 is a penal statute and does not by law may be abused. Allegations of
even provide for any appropriation from abuse must be anchored on real events
Congress for its implementation, while before courts may step in to settle actual
none of the individual petitioner-citizens controversies involving rights which are
has alleged any direct and personal legally demandable and enforceable.
interest in the implementation of the law.
A facial invalidation of a statute is
It bears to stress that generalized allowed only in free speech cases,
interests, albeit accompanied by the wherein certain rules of constitutional
assertion of a public right, do not litigation are rightly excepted.
establish locus standi. Evidence of a direct
and personal interest is key. Petitioners assail for being
intrinsically vague and impermissibly
Petitioners’ obscure allegations of broad the definition of the crime of
sporadic “surveillance” and supposedly terrorism under RA 9372 in that terms
being tagged as “communist fronts” in no like “widespread and extraordinary
way approximate a credible threat of fear and panic among the populace”
prosecution. From these allegations, the and “coerce the government to give in
Court is being lured to render an advisory to an unlawful demand” are nebulous,
opinion, which is not its function. leaving law enforcement agencies with
no standard to measure the prohibited
Without any justiciable controversy, the acts.
petitions have become pleas for
declaratory relief, over which the Court The overbreadth and the vagueness
has no original jurisdiction. Then again, doctrines have special application only
declaratory actions characterized by to free-speech cases, and are not
“double contingency,” where both the appropriate for testing the validity of
activity the petitioners intend to penal statutes. It added that, at any

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 45
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

rate, the challenged provision, under chances as in the area of free speech.
which the therein petitioner was
charged, is not vague. The overbreadth and vagueness
doctrines then have special application
A facial challenge is allowed to be only to free speech cases. They are
made to a vague statute and to one inapt for testing the validity of penal
which is overbroad because of possible statutes. As the U.S. Supreme Court put it,
"chilling effect" upon protected speech. in an opinion by Chief Justice Rehnquist,
The theory is that "[w]hen statutes "we have not recognized an
regulate or proscribe speech and no 'overbreadth' doctrine outside the
readily apparent construction suggests limited context of the First
itself as a vehicle for rehabilitating the Amendment." Claims of facial
statutes in a single prosecution, the overbreadth have been entertained in
transcendent value to all society of cases involving statutes which, by their
constitutionally protected expression terms, seek to regulate only spoken
is deemed to justify allowing attacks words and, again, that "overbreadth
on overly broad statutes with no claims, if entertained at all, have been
requirement that the person making curtailed when invoked against
the attack demonstrate that his own ordinary criminal laws that are sought
conduct could not be regulated by a to be applied to protected conduct."
statute drawn with narrow specificity." For this reason, it has been held that "a
The possible harm to society in facial challenge to a legislative act is
permitting some unprotected speech the most difficult challenge to mount
to go unpunished is outweighed by the successfully, since the challenger must
possibility that the protected speech of establish that no set of circumstances
others may be deterred and perceived exists under which the Act would be
grievances left to fester because of valid." As for the vagueness doctrine, it is
possible inhibitory effects of overly said that a litigant may challenge a statute
broad statutes. on its face only if it is vague in all its
possible applications. "A plaintiff who
This rationale does not apply to penal engages in some conduct that is clearly
statutes. Criminal statutes have proscribed cannot complain of the
general in terrorism effect resulting vagueness of the law as applied to the
from their very existence, and, if facial conduct of others."
challenge is allowed for this reason
alone, the State may well be prevented In sum, the doctrines of strict scrutiny,
from enacting laws against socially overbreadth, and vagueness are
harmful conduct. In the area of analytical tools developed for testing
criminal law, the law cannot take "on their faces" statutes in free speech

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 46
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

cases or, as they are called in American


law, First Amendment cases. They A statute or act suffers from the defect
cannot be made to do service when of vagueness when it lacks
what is involved is a criminal statute. comprehensible standards that men of
With respect to such statute, the common intelligence must necessarily
established rule is that "one to whom guess at its meaning and differ as to its
application of a statute is application. It is repugnant to the
constitutional will not be heard to Constitution in two respects: (1) it
attack the statute on the ground that violates due process for failure to
impliedly it might also be taken as accord persons, especially the parties
applying to other persons or other targeted by it, fair notice of the
situations in which its application conduct to avoid; and (2) it leaves law
might be unconstitutional." As has enforcers unbridled discretion in
been pointed out, "vagueness carrying out its provisions and
challenges in the First Amendment becomes an arbitrary flexing of the
context, like overbreadth challenges Government muscle. The overbreadth
typically produce facial invalidation, doctrine, meanwhile, decrees that a
while statutes found vague as a matter governmental purpose to control or
of due process typically are invalidated prevent activities constitutionally subject
[only] 'as applied' to a particular to state regulations may not be achieved
defendant." Consequently, there is no by means which sweep unnecessarily
basis for petitioner's claim that this broadly and thereby invade the area of
Court review the Anti-Plunder Law on protected freedoms.
its face and in its entirety.
As distinguished from the vagueness
Indeed, "on its face" invalidation of doctrine, the overbreadth doctrine
statutes results in striking them down assumes that individuals will understand
entirely on the ground that they might be what a statute prohibits and will
applied to parties not before the Court accordingly refrain from that behavior,
whose activities are constitutionally even though some of it is protected.
protected. It constitutes a departure from
the case and controversy requirement of A “facial” challenge is likewise
the Constitution and permits decisions to different from an “as-applied”
be made without concrete factual settings challenge.
and in sterile abstract contexts.
Distinguished from an as-applied
To be sure, the doctrine of vagueness challenge which considers only extant
and the doctrine of overbreadth do not facts affecting real litigants, a facial
operate on the same plane. invalidation is an examination of the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 47
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

entire law, pinpointing its flaws and obvious. If a facial challenge to a penal
defects, not only on the basis of its statute is permitted, the prosecution of
actual operation to the parties, but also crimes may be hampered. No
on the assumption or prediction that prosecution would be possible. A
its very existence may cause others not strong criticism against employing a
before the court to refrain from facial challenge in the case of penal
constitutionally protected speech or statutes, if the same is allowed, would
activities. effectively go against the grain of the
doctrinal requirement of an existing
The vagueness and overbreadth and concrete controversy before
doctrines, as grounds for a facial judicial power may be appropriately
challenge, are not applicable to penal exercised. A facial challenge against a
laws. A litigant cannot thus penal statute is, at best, amorphous
successfully mount a facial challenge and speculative. It would, essentially,
against a criminal statute on either force the court to consider third
vagueness or overbreadth grounds. parties who are not before it. As I have
The allowance of a facial challenge in said in my opposition to the allowance
free speech cases is justified by the aim of a facial challenge to attack penal
to avert the “chilling effect” on statutes, such a test will impair the
protected speech, the exercise of which State’s ability to deal with crime. If
should not at all times be abridged. As warranted, there would be nothing
reflected earlier, this rationale is that can hinder an accused from
inapplicable to plain penal statutes defeating the State’s power to
that generally bear an “in terrorem prosecute on a mere showing that, as
effect” in deterring socially harmful applied to third parties, the penal
conduct. In fact, the legislature may statute is vague or overbroad,
even forbid and penalize acts formerly notwithstanding that the law is clear as
considered innocent and lawful, so applied to him.[65] (Emphasis and
long as it refrains from diminishing or underscoring supplied)
dissuading the exercise of
constitutionally protected rights. It is settled, on the other hand, that the
application of the overbreadth doctrine is
The rule established in our limited to a facial kind of challenge and,
jurisdiction is, only statutes on free owing to the given rationale of a facial
speech, religious freedom, and other challenge, applicable only to free speech
fundamental rights may be facially cases.
challenged. Under no case may
ordinary penal statutes be subjected to By its nature, the overbreadth doctrine
a facial challenge. The rationale is has to necessarily apply a facial type of

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 48
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

invalidation in order to plot areas of examining the constitutionality of


protected speech, inevitably almost criminal statutes. In at least three cases,
always under situations not before the the Court brought the doctrine into play
court, that are impermissibly swept by in analyzing an ordinance penalizing the
the substantially overbroad regulation. non-payment of municipal tax on
Otherwise stated, a statute cannot be fishponds, the crime of illegal recruitment
properly analyzed for being substantially punishable under Article 132(b) of the
overbroad if the court confines itself only Labor Code, and the vagrancy provision
to facts as applied to the litigants. under Article 202 (2) of the Revised Penal
Code. Notably, the petitioners in these
In restricting the overbreadth doctrine to three cases, similar to those in the two
free speech claims, the Court, in at least Romualdez and Estrada cases, were
two cases, observed that the US Supreme actually charged with the therein assailed
Court has not recognized an overbreadth penal statute, unlike in the present case.
doctrine outside the limited context of the
First Amendment, and that claims of facial From the definition of the crime of
overbreadth have been entertained in terrorism in the earlier cited Section 3 of
cases involving statutes which, by their RA 9372, the following elements may be
terms, seek to regulate only spoken culled:
words. In Virginia v. Hicks, it was held (1) the offender commits an act
that rarely, if ever, will an overbreadth punishable under any of the cited
challenge succeed against a law or provisions of the Revised Penal Code, or
regulation that is not specifically under any of the enumerated special
addressed to speech or speech-related penal laws;
conduct. Attacks on overly broad statutes (2) the commission of the predicate crime
are justified by the “transcendent value to sows and creates a condition of
all society of constitutionally protected widespread and extraordinary fear
expression.” and panic among the populace; and
(3) the offender is actuated by the desire
American jurisprudence instructs that to coerce the government to give in to an
“vagueness challenges that do not involve unlawful demand.
the First Amendment must be examined
in light of the specific facts of the case at Before a charge for terrorism may be filed
hand and not with regard to the statute's under RA 9372, there must first be a
facial validity.” predicate crime actually committed to
trigger the operation of the key
In this jurisdiction, the void-for- qualifying phrases in the other
vagueness doctrine asserted under the elements of the crime, including the
due process clause has been utilized in coercion of the government to accede

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 49
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

to an “unlawful demand.” Given the and broad, in that terms like “widespread
presence of the first element, any attempt and extraordinary fear and panic among
at singling out or highlighting the the populace” and “coerce the
communicative component of the government to give in to an unlawful
prohibition cannot re-categorize the demand” are nebulous, leaving law
unprotected conduct into a protected enforcement agencies with no standard to
speech. measure the prohibited acts.

As earlier reflected, petitioners have ISSUE: Whether or not a penal statute


established neither an actual charge nor a may be assailed for being vague as
credible threat of prosecution under RA applied to petitioners.
9372. Even a limited vagueness analysis
of the assailed definition of “terrorism” is HELD: No. A limited vagueness analysis of
thus legally impermissible. The Court the definition of “terrorism” in RA 9372 is
reminds litigants that judicial power legally impossible absent an actual or
neither contemplates speculative imminent charge against them. A statute
counseling on a statute’s future effect on or act suffers from the defect of vagueness
hypothetical scenarios nor allows the when it lack comprehensible standards
courts to be used as an extension of a that men of common intelligence must
failed legislative lobbying in Congress. necessarily guess at its meaning and differ
as to its application.

SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE VS ANTI- A “facial” challenge is likewise different


TERRORISM COUNCIL from an “as applied” challenge. “Facial”
G.R NO. 178552, OCTOBER 5, 2010 challenge is an examination of the entire
law, pinpointing its flaws and defects, not
FACTS: The case consists of 6 petitions only on the basis of its actual operation to
challenging the constitutionality of RA the parties, but also on the assumption or
9372, “An Act to Secure the State and prediction that its very existence may
Protect our People from Terrorism,” aka cause others not before the court to
Human Security Act of 2007. Petitioner- refrain from constitutionally protected
organizations assert locus standi on the speech or activities.
basis of being suspected “communist
fronts” by the government, whereas Under no case may ordinary penal
individual petitioners invoke the statutes be subjected to a facial challenge.
“transcendental importance” doctrine and If facial challenge to a penal statute is
their status as citizens and taxpayers. permitted, the prosecution of crimes may
be hampered. No prosecution would be
Petitioners claim that RA 9372 is vague possible.

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 50
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

the intervention of the State. [See


discussion on Police Power,
Chapter IV.]

What are the requisites for school due ii) The means employed are
process proceedings? reasonably necessary for the
accomplishment of the purpose,
1. the students must be informed and not unduly oppressive on
in writing of the nature and individuals. In Kwong Sing v. City
cause of any accusation against of Manila, 41 Phil 103, an
them; ordinance requiring all laundry
2. that they shall have the right to establishments to issue their
answer the charges against receipts in English and Spanish
them with the assistance of was held valid. In Yu Eng Cong v.
counsel, if desired; Trinidad, 271 U.S. 500, the Court
3. they shall be informed of the declared as unconstitutional a law
evidence against them; prohibiting traders from keeping
4. they shall have the right to their books of accounts in a
adduce evidence in their own language other than English,
behalf; Spanish or any local dialect. See
5. the evidence must be duly also Layno v. Sandiganbayan, 136
considered by the SCRA 536; Deloso v.
investigating committee or Sandiganbayan, 173 SCRA 409.
official designated by the
school authorities to hear and iia) In GS/S v.Montesclaros,
decide the case 434 SCRA41, the Supreme
Court declared as invalid
Sec. 18, PD 1146, which
provides that the surviving
From Nachura:
spouse has no right to
survivorship pension
ASPECTS OF DUE PROCESS
benefits if the surviving
spouse contracted marriage
a) Substantive. This serves as a
with the pensioner within
restriction on government's law- and
three years before the
rule- making powers. The requisites are:
pensioner qualified for the
i) The interests of the public, in pension benefit. In a
general, as distinguished from pension plan where
those of a particular class, require employee participation is

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 51
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

mandatory, employees have judge”. In Galman v.


vested rights in the pension. Sandiganbayan, 144 SCRA
Thus, where the employee 43, the Court held that the
retires and meets the People was denied due
eligibility requirements, he process which requires an
acquires a vested right to impartial tribunal and an
benefits protected by the unbiased prosecution.
due process clause. Sec. 18,
PD 1146 is seriously ib) In Tabuena v.
oppressive in outrightly Sandiganbayan, 268 SCRA
denying the claim of a 332, reiterated in Imelda
dependent spouse for Romualdez Marcos v.
survivorship pension Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
benefits if the dependent 126995, October 6, 1998,
spouse contracted marriage the Supreme Court held
within the three-year that when the Court cross-
prohibited period. examined the accused and
witnesses, it acted with
b) Procedural. This serves as a over-zealousness, assuming
restriction on actions of judicial and the role of both magistrate
quasi- judicial agencies of government. and advocate, and thus
Requisites: denied the accused due
process of law. In Rivera v.
i) An impartial court or tribunal Civil Service Commission,
clothed with judicial power to 240 SCRA 43, and in
hear and determine the matter Singson v. National Labor
before it. Relations Commission, 274
SCRA 358, the Supreme
ia) In Javier v. Comelec, Court reiterated the rule
144 SCRA 194, there was that a public officer who
denial of due process when decided the case should not
Commissioner Opinion, be the same person to
who was formerly a law decide it on appeal because
partner of respondent he cannot be an impartial
Pacificador, obstinately judge. In GSIS v. Court of
insisted in participating in Appeals, G.R. No. 128523,
the case, thus denying the September 26, 1998, the
petitioner “the cold police chief inspector who
neutrality of an impartial had earlier recommended

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 52
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

that the application for People v. Castillo, 289 SCRA 213,


death benefits be approved, reiterated in Cosep v. People, 290
was held to be biased and SCRA 378, and in People v.
should have inhibited Galleno, 291 SCRA 761, the
himself from the Supreme Court said that questions
proceedings. which merely clear up dubious
points and elicit relevant evidence
ib1) But in People v. Herida, G.R. are within the prerogative of the
No. 127158, March 5, 2001, judge to ask.
reiterated in People v. Medenilla,
G.R. Nos. 131638-39, March 26, ib2) In People v. Larranaga, 421
2001, even as the transcript of SCRA 530, the Supreme Court said
stenographic notes showed that that the test is whether the
the trial court intensively intervention of the judge tends to
questioned the witnesses prevent the proper presentation of
(approximately 43% of the the case or the ascertainment of
questions asked of prosecution the truth in the matter where he
witnesses and the accused were interposes his questions or
propounded by the judge), the comments. When the judge
Supreme Court held that the remarked that the testimonies of
questioning was necessary. Judges two witnesses were incredible,
have as much interest as counsel in that another witness was totally
the orderly and expeditious confused and appeared to be
presentation of evidence, and have mentally imbalanced, and that two
the duty to ask questions that witnesses were liars, his
would elicit the facts on the issues comments were just honest
involved, clarify ambiguous observations intended to warn the
remarks by witnesses, and address witnesses to be candid to the
the points overlooked by counsel. court. He merely wanted to
Likewise, in People v. Adora, 275 ascertain the veracity of their
SCRA 441, it was held that the contradictory statements.
judge should be given reasonable
leeway in directing questions to ic) In Cruz v. Civil Service
witnesses in order to elicit Commission, G.R. No. 144464,
relevant facts; it is expedient to November 22, 2001, the Court
allow the judge to question a rejected petitioners' contention
witness so that his judgment may that they were denied due process
rest upon a full and clear ostensibly because the Civil
understanding of the facts. Thus, in Service Commission acted as

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 53
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

investigator, complainant, iia)


prosecutor and judge. The CSC is Itshouldbeemphasizedthattheservi
mandated to hear and decide ceofsummonsisnot only required
administrative cases instituted by to give the court jurisdiction over
it or instituted before it directly or the person of the defendant but
on appeal. Neither can it be denied also to afford the latter the
that petitioners were formally opportunity to be heard on the
charged after a prima facie case for claim made against him. Thus,
dishonesty was found to exist. compliance with the rules
They were properly informed of regarding the service of summons
the charges. They submitted an is as much an issue of due process
answer and were given the as of jurisdiction [Sarmiento v.
opportunity to defend themselves. Raon, G.R. No. 131482, July 3,
2002].
id) In Tejano v. Ombudsman,
G.R.No. 159190, June 30, 2005, the iib) While jurisdiction over the
petitioner attributed partiality to person of the defendant can be
Ombudsman Desierto for having acquired by the service of
participated in the reinvestigation summons, it can also be acquired
of the instant case despite his by voluntary appearance before
having earlier participated in the the court, which includes
initial preliminary investigation of submission of pleadings in
the same when he was Special compliance with the order of the
Prosecutor. The Supreme Court court or tribunal. [De los Santos v.
agreed with the petitioner, saying NLRC, G.R. No. 121327, December
that it is a steadfast rule that the 20, 2001],
officer who reviews a case on
appeal should not be the same iii) The defendant must be given an
person whose decision is under opportunity to be heard. Due process
review judges. is satisfied as long as the party is
accorded the opportunity to be heard.
ie) Read also Rule 137, Rules of If it is not availed of, it is deemed
Court, on disqualification of waived or forfeited without violating
the constitutional guarantee [Bautista
ii) Jurisdiction must be lawfully v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 157219
acquired over the person of the May 28, 2004].
defendant and over the property which
is the subject matter of the proceeding. iiia) In Ynot v. Intermediate
Appellate Court, supra., Executive

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 54
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

Order 626-A was declared conditions of its license.


violative of due process because
the owner of the carabaos iiib) Unicraft Industries v. Court
confiscated is denied the right to of Appeals, G.R. No. 134309,
be heard in his defense and March 26, 2001, states that, even
immediately condemned and as it is conceded that decisions of
punished. In Eastern Voluntary Arbitrators are
Broadcasting v. Dans, 137 SCRA generally accorded finality, where
628, the closure of radio station (as in this case) the petitioner was
DYRE where the order was issued not given the chance to present
summarily, without a hearing, was evidence, there is a violation of the
deemed violative of due process. In due process clause, and the
Tatad v. Sandiganbayan, 159 Arbitrator’s decision is null and
SCRA 70, it was held that the void.
unreasonable delay in the
termination of the preliminary iiic) Knowledge of insufficiency of
investigation by the Tanodbayan funds in or credit with the bank is
violated the guarantee of due presumed from the act of making,
process. In Gonzales v. Civil drawing, and issuing a check
Service Commission, 226 SCRA payment which is refused by the
66, there was deemed a denial of drawee bank for insufficiency of
due process where the notice to funds when presented within 90
petitioner to report back to work days from the date of issue. But
within five days otherwise he this presumption does not hold
would be dropped from the rolls, when the maker or drawer pays or
was sent to petitioner’s Quezon makes arrangements for the
City address when the office knew payment of the check within 5
where petitioner was temporarily banking days after receiving notice
residing in San Jose, California. In that such check had been
Lim v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. dishonoured. Thus, it is essential
111397, August 12, 2002, Supreme for the maker or the drawer to be
Court said that the closure of notified of the dishonor of the
Bistro violated the due process check, so that he can pay the value
clause. Instead of arbitrarily thereof, or make arrangements for
closing down the establishment’s its payment within the period
business operations, Mayor Lim prescribed by law. Absent such
should have given Bistro an notice of dishonor, the maker or
opportunity to rebut the the drawer cannot be convicted of
allegations that it violated the violating B.P. 22, as there would be

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 55
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

a violation of procedural due iiie) Likewise, in Torres v.


process [Caras v. Court of Gonzales, 152 SCRA 272, the
Appeals, G.R. No. 129900, October Supreme Court said that Sec. 64 of
2, 2001], the Revised Administrative Code is
not repugnant to the due process
iiid) Not all cases require a trial- clause, and the accused is not
type hearing. Due process in labor constitutionally entitled to another
cases before a Labor Arbiter is judicial determination of whether
satisfied when the parties are he breached the condition of his
given the opportunity to submit pardon. In Zaldivar v.
their position papers to which they Sandiganbayan, 166 SCRA 316,
are supposed to attach all the the Supreme Court declared that
supporting documents or “to be heard” does not only mean
documentary evidence that would verbal arguments in court. One
support their respective claims may be heard also through
[Mariveles Shipyard v. Court of pleadings. Where opportunity to
Appeals, G.R. No. 144134, be heard, either through oral
November 11, 2003; Zacarias v. arguments or pleadings, is
National Police Commission, G.R. accorded, there is no denial of
No. 119847, October 24, 2003]. procedural due process.
Thus, there is no denial of due
process where the DOLE regional iiif) Neither is the respondent
director decided a case on the entitled to notice and hearing
basis only of position papers during the evaluation stage of the
submitted by the parties extradition process. PD 1069
[Valladolid v. Inciong, 121 SCRA affords an extraditee sufficient
205]. Indeed, the NLRC and the opportunity to meet the evidence
Labor Arbiter are authorized to against him once the petition is
decide a case on the basis of filed in court. The time for the
position papers and documents extraditee to know the basis of the
submitted; the holding of an request for extradition is merely
adversarial trial depends on the moved to the filing in court of the
discretion of the Labor Arbiter and formal petition for extradition. The
the parties cannot demand it as a extraditee’s right to know is
matter of right [Fernandez v. momentarily withheld during the
NLRC, G.R. No. 105892, January 28, evaluation stage to accommodate
1998; Vinta Maritime v. NLRC, the more compelling interest of the
G.R. No. 113911, January 23, state to prevent escape of potential
1998]. extraditees which can be

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 56
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

precipitated by premature at the same time summoned to


information on the basis of the answer the petition and to appear
request for extradition. No less at the scheduled summary
compelling at that stage of the hearings. Prior to the issuance of
extradition proceedings is the the warrant, the judge must not
need to be more deferential to the inform or notify the potential
judgment of a co- equal branch of extraditee of the pendency of the
the government, the Executive, petition, lest the latter be given the
which has been endowed by our opportunity to escape and
Constitution with greater powers frustrate the proceedings. Thus,
over matters involving our foreign also, the grant by the judge of bail
relations [Secretary of Justice v. was deemed null and void, as
Judge Lantion, G.R. No. 139465, persons to be extradited are
October 17, 2000; Cuevas v. presumed to be flight risks.
Munoz, G.R. No. 140520, Accordingly, in the Resolution on
December 18, 2000]. the Motion for Reconsideration
[December 17, 2002], the Supreme
iiig) This was clarified in Court denied with finality Mark
Government of the United States Jimenez’ motion, saying that
of America v. Judge Puruganan, extradition is sui generis, and does
G.R. No. 148571, September 24, not fall within the ambit of the
2002, where the Supreme Court right to bail.
said that upon receipt of a petition
for extradition and its supporting iiigl) The ruling in Purugananwas
documents, the judge must study modified in Government of
them and make, as soon as HongKong v. Hon.
possible, a prima facie finding FelixbertoOlalia, Jr., G.R. No.
whether they are sufficient in form 153675, April 19, 2007, where the
and substance, whether they Supreme Court said that it cannot
comply with the Extradition ignore the modern trend in public
Treaty, and whether the person international law which places
sought is extraditable. If no prima primacy on the worth of the
facie finding is possible, the individual person and the sanctity
petition may be dismissed at the of human rights. While the
discretion of the judge. On the Universal Declaration of Human
other hand, if there is a prima facie Rights is not a treaty, the
finding, the judge must principles contained therein are
immediately issue a warrant for now recognized as customarily
the arrest of the extraditee, who is binding upon the members of the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 57
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

international community. In Mejoff 114944, June 21, 2001, it was held


v. Director of Prisons, this Court, that the lack of notice to, or
in granting bail to a prospective participation of, petitioners (who
deportee, held that under the had already been cleared by the
Constitution, the principles set Ombudsman in its original
forth in the Declaration are part of resolution) at the reinvestigation
the law of the land. If bail can be does not render the subsequent
granted in deportation cases, resolution (on reinvestigation) null
considering that the Universal and void, even if the said
Declaration of Human Rights subsequent resolution reinstated
applies to deportation cases, there the complaint against them. But in
is no reason why it cannot be the Resolution, dated May 29,
invoked in extradition cases. After 2002, on the Motion for
all, both are administrative Reconsideration in the said case,
proceedings where the innocence the Supreme Court said that the
or guilt of the person detained is petitioners were denied due
not in issue. process when the Special
Investigator reinstated the
iiig2) Citing Chief Justice Puno’s complaint against the petitioners
Separate Opinion in Puruganan, without their knowledge. At the
the Court, in Government of very least, they should have been
HongKong, adopted a new notified that the complaint against
standard to be used in granting them had not yet been finally
bail in extradition cases, disposed of. They should have
denominated “clear and been apprised of their possible
convincing evidence”. As Chief implication in the criminal case, to
Justice Puno explained, this enable them to meet any new
standard should be lower than accusation against them head-on
proof beyond reasonable doubt, and to prepare for their defense.
but higher than preponderance of
evidence. The potential extraditee iiii) The right of a party to cross-
must prove by “clear and examine the witness against him in
convincing evidence” that he is not a civil case is an indispensable part
a flight risk and will abide with all of due process [Ortigas v.
the orders and processes of the Lufthansa, 64 SCRA 610], But in
extradition court for entitlement to administrative proceedings,
bail. technical rules of procedure and
evidence are not strictly applied.
iiih) In Roxas v. Vasquez, G.R. No. Since nothing on record shows

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 58
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

that petitioner asked for cross- No. 136726, September 24, 2003,
examination, he cannot argue that it was held that there was no
he has been deprived of due denial of due process where the
process merely because no cross- appellate court dismissed
examination took place [Emin v. petitioner’s appeal for failure of
De Leon, G.R. No. 139794, the Office of the Solicitor General
February 27, 2002]. Likewise, it to file the required memorandum.
was held that where the As a rule, the negligence of counsel
petitioners were amply afforded binds the client. Moreover,
the opportunity to register petitioner in this case is not
objections to respondent’s offer of entirely blameless for the
evidence, there was no denial of dismissal of his appeal. After the
due process [Rodson Phil., Inc. v. OSG’s failure to file the answer to
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 141857, the petition for mandamus and
June 9, 2004]. damages, and to have the order
declaring the petitioner in default
iiij) The filing of a motion for lifted, petitioner should have
reconsideration cures the defect of already replaced the OSG with
absence of a hearing [Chua v. Court another lawyer. The same
of Appeals, 287 SCRA 33; principle was reiterated in
reiterated in Marohombsar v. Borromeo Bros. Estate v. Garcia,
Judge Adiong, A.M. No. RTJ-02- G.R. no. 139594-95, February 26,
1674, January 22, 2004]. The 2008.
essence of due process in
administrative proceedings is an iiil) There are cases in which
opportunity to explain one’s side notice and hearing may be
or an opportunity to seek dispensed with without violating
reconsideration of the action or due process. Among these are the
ruling complained of [Emin v. De cancellation of the passport of a
Leon, supra.]. In Quintos v. person sought for the commission
COMELEC, G.R. No. 149800, of a crime [Suntay v. People, 101
November 21, 2002, it was held Phil 833], the preventive
that petitioner was not denied due suspension of a civil servant facing
process because he subsequently administrative charges [Co v.
filed a motion for reconsideration Barbers, 290 SCRA 717], the
which the COMELEC considered distraint of property for tax
and acted upon, albeit unfavorably. delinquency; the padlocking of
restaurants found unsanitary or of
iiik) In Villaruel v. Fernando, G.R. theaters showing obscene movies,

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 59
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

and the abatement of nuisances Authority v. Evangelista, G.R. No.


per se. And in Equitable Banking 140945, May 16, 2005].
Corporation v. Calderon, G.R. No.
156168. December 14,
 2004, the
Supreme Court ruled that no
malice or bad faith attended the iv) Judgment must be rendered upon
Bank’s dishonor of Calderon’s lawful hearing. This is necessary,
credit card, inasmuch as the because otherwise, the right to a
dishonor was justified under its hearing would be rendered
Credit Card Agreement which meaningless. Relate this to Sec. 14, Art.
provided that the cardholder VIII, which provides that no decision
agreed not to exceed his approved shall be rendered by any court without
credit limit, otherwise the card expressing therein clearly and
privilege would be automatically distinctly the facts and the law on
suspended without notice to the which it is based.
cardholder.
iva) Due process demands that the
iiim) A person who is not parties to a litigation be informed
impleaded in a complaint cannot how the case was decided with an
be bound by the decision rendered explanation of the factual and legal
therein, for no man shall be reasons that led to the conclusions
affected by a proceeding in which of the court [Insular Life
he is a stranger. In this case, the Assurance Co. v. Young, G.R. No.
respondent is adversely affected 140964, January 16, 2002].
by such judgment, as he was the
subsequent purchaser of the ivb) In Lorbes v. Court of Appeals,
subject property, and title was G.R. No. 139884, February 15,
already transferred to him. It will 2001, it was held that courts
be the height of inequity to allow should be liberal in setting aside
respondent’s title to be nullified orders of default, because
without the respondent being judgments of default are frowned
given the opportunity to present upon unless in cases where it
any evidence in support of his clearly appears that the reopening
ostensible ownership of the of the case is intended for delay.
property. It is tantamount to a Where the order of default is
violation of the constitutional immoderate, there is a violation of
guarantee that no person shall be due process.
deprived of property without due
process of law [National Housing PUBLICATION AS PART OF DUE

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 60
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

PROCESS that the right to appeal is not a


natural right nor a part of due
In Tanada v. Tuvera, 146 SCRA 446, the process; it is merely a statutory
Court held that publication is imperative privilege, and may be exercised
to the validity of laws, presidential only in the manner and in
decrees and executive orders, accordance with the provisions of
administrative rules and regulations, and law. Accordingly, the constitutional
is an indispensable part of due process. requirement of due process may
Thus, in Republic {National be satisfied notwithstanding the
Telecommunications Commission) v. denial of the right to appeal,
Express Telecommunications, G.R. No. because the essence of due process
147096, January 15, 2002, the National is simply the opportunity to be
Telecommunciations Commission, in heard and to present evidence in
granting Bayantel the provisional support of one’s case. See also
authority to operate, applied the 1978 Producers Bank v. Court of
Rules of Practice and Procedure, and not Appeals, G.R. No. 126620, April 17,
the 1993 Revised Rules, because the latter 2002. In Barata v. Abalos, G.R. No.
had not yet been published (although the 142888, June 6, 2001, it was held
same had already been filed with the that the failure to provide the
National Administrative Register). complainant the right to appeal in
certain cases (e.g., from the
APPEAL AND DUE PROCESS decision of the Ombudsman) is not
a denial of due process. It may be
Appeal is not a natural right nor is it part noted that in appropriate cases
of due process [Tropical Homes, Inc. v. involving oppressive or arbitrary
NHA, 152 SCRA 540]; generally, it may be action, the complainant is not
allowed or denied by the legislature in its deprived of a legal recourse by
discretion. But where the Constitution certiorari under Rule 65 of the
gives a person the right to appeal, e.g., in Rules of Court, which applies
the cases coming under the minimum suppletorily to the Rules of
appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Procedure of the Ombudsman.
Court [Sec. 5(2), Art. VIII], denial of the
right to appeal constitutes a there is a b) In Sajotv. Court of Appeals, G.R.
statutory grant of the right to appeal, No. 109721, March 11, 1999, it was
denial of that remedy also constitutes a held that there was no denial of
denial of due process. due process where the court
denied the appeal due to the
a) In Alba v. Nitorreda, 254 SCRA negligence of the accused and of
753, the Supreme Court reiterated his counsel. An appellant must

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 61
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

strictly comply with the rules petitioner would deprive him of the full
inasmuch as appeal is purely a measure of his right to due process
statutory right. [Yusop v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
138859-60, February 22, 2001].

i) A preliminary investigation is
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION AND held before an accused is placed on
DUE PROCESS. trial to secure the innocent against
hasty, malicious and oppressive
It is doctrinally settled that the right to prosecution, and to protect him
preliminary investigation is not a from the trouble, expenses and
constitutional right, but is merely a right anxiety of a public trial. It is also
conferred by statute [Serapio v. intended to protect the State from
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148468, January having to conduct useless and
28, 2003]. The absence of a preliminary expensive trials. Thus, while the
investigation does not impair the validity right is statutory rather than
of the information or otherwise render constitutional, it is a component of
the same defective. The denial of the due process in administering
motion for reinvestigation cannot criminal justice [Victor Jose Tan
likewise invalidate the information or Uyv. Office of the Ombudsman,
oust the court of its jurisdiction over the G.R. Nos. 156399-400, July 27,
case [Budiongan v. De la Cruz, G.R. No. 2008].
170288, September 22, 2006]. The right
may be waived expressly or by failure to b) It is now provided in Sec. 1, Rule
invoke it [Benedicto v. Court of Appeals, 112, Rules on Criminal Procedure, that a
G.R. No. 125359, September 4, 2001]. It preliminary investigation is required to
may be forfeited by inaction, and cannot be conducted before the filing of a
be invoked for the first time on appeal complaint or information for an offense
[People v. Lagao, G.R. No. 118457, April where the penalty prescribed by law is at
8, 1997]. least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day, without
regard to the fine.
a) But where there is a statutory
grant of the right to preliminary i) However, when a person is
investigation, denial of the same is an lawfully arrested without a
infringement of the due process clause warrant involving an offense
[Go v. Court of Appeals, 206 SCRA 138]. which requires a preliminary
In such cases, the right to preliminary investigation, the complaint or
investigation is substantive, not merely information may be filed by a
formal or technical. To deny it to the prosecutor without need of such

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 62
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

investigation provided an inquest [Yusop v. Sandiganbayan, supra.].


has been conducted in accordance The right is not waived by the
with existing rules. In the absence filing of motion to be admitted to
or unavailability of an inquest bail. But the right is waived when
prosecutor, the complaint may be the accused fails to invoke it before
filed by the offended party or a or at the time of entering a plea at
peace officer directly with the arraignment [People v. Velasquez,
proper court on the basis of the G.R. No. 132635, February 21,
affidavit of the offended party or 2001; Benedicto v. Court of
arresting officer. Before the Appeals, supra],
complaint or information is filed,
the person arrested may ask for a iii) The preliminary investigation
preliminary
 investigation in conducted by the DOJ is merely
accordance with this Rule, but he inquisitorial; it is not a trial on the
must sign a waiver of the merits, and its sole purpose is to
provisions of Art. 125 of the determine whether a crime has
Revised Penal Code, as amended, been committed and whether the
in the presence of his counsel. respondent therein is probably
Notwithstanding the waiver, he guilty of the crime. It is not the
may apply for bail and the occasion for the full and exhaustive
investigation must be terminated display of the parties’ evidence,
within 15 days from its inception. and upon satisfaction of the
After the filing of the complaint or investigating prosecutor that
information in court without a probable cause exists based on the
preliminary investigation, the evidence presented, he may
accused may, within 5 days from terminate the preliminary
the time he learns of its filing, ask investigation and resolve the case
for a preliminary investigation [Judy Ann Santos v. People, G.R.
with the same right to adduce No. 173176, August 26, 2008].
evidence in his defense as
provided in this Rule [Sec. 7, Rule c) A preliminary investigation is
112, Rules on Criminal Procedure]. essentially an inquiry to determine
whether (1) a crime has been
ii) Be that as it may, the lack of committed,and (2) whether there is
preliminary investigation is not a probable cause that the accused is
ground for a motion to quash. The guilty thereof. The public prosecutor
case must be suspended with determines during the preliminary
respect to the petitioner even if the investigation whether probable cause
case is already undergoing trial exists; thus the decision whether or not to

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 63
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

dismiss the criminal complaint depends pending for six years clearly violates this
on the sound discretion of the prosecutor. mandate and the public official’s rights. In
Courts will not interfere with the conduct such event, the aggrieved party is entitled
of preliminary investigation or to the dismissal of the complaint [Roque
reinvestigation or in the determination of v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 129978, May 12,
what constitutes sufficient probable cause 1999]. This reiterates Tatad v.
for the filing of the corresponding Sandiganbayan, 159 SCRA 70, where the
information against the offender [Baviera Court said that unreasonable delay in the
v. Paglinawan, G.R. No. 168580, February termination of the preliminary
8, 2007]. In Sanrio Company v. Lim, G.R. investigation by the Tanodbayan violated
No. 168380, February 8, 2008, the the due process clause. But where the
Supreme Court reiterated the policy of delay is due to the complexity of the
non- interference with executive issues involved [Defensor- Santiago v.
discretion in the determination of Garchitorena, 228 SCRA 214], or is
probable cause. It held that a public caused by the petitioner’s own acts, not
prosecutor is afforded a wide latitude of by the inaction of the prosecution
discretion in the conduct of preliminary [Socrates v. Sandiganbayan, 253 SCRA
investigation. 559], there is no violation.

i) The possible exception to this i) The Court does not interfere


rule of non-interference, as held in with the Ombudsman’s discretion
Aguirre v. Secretary of Justice, in the conduct of preliminary
G.R. No. 170723, March 3, 2008, is investigation. The Ombudsman’s
where there is an unmistakable findings are essentially factual in
showing of grave abuse of nature, and the Supreme Court is
discretion amounting to excess of not a trier of facts [Serapio v.
jurisdiction on the part of the Sandiganbayan, supra.].
public prosecutor. Such grave
abuse of discretion will then justify
judicial intrusion into the precincts
of the executive. ADMINISTRATIVE DUE PROCESS

d) Consistent with the rights of all In AngTibay v. CIR, 69 Phil 635, the Court
persons to due process of law and to enumerated the requisites of
speedy trial, the Constitution commands administrative due process, as follows:
the Office of the Ombudsman to act (a) The right to a hearing, which includes
promptly on complaints filed against the right to present one’s case and submit
public officials. Thus, the failure of said evidence in support thereof; (b) The
office to resolve a complaint that has been tribunal must consider the evidence

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 64
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

presented; (c) The decision must have extradition proceeding an extraditee does
something to support itself; (d) The not have the right of access to evidence in
evidence must be substantial; (e) The the hands of the government. But during
decision must be rendered on the the judicial phase he has. Secretary v.
evidence presented at the hearing, or Judge Lantion
at least contained in the record and
disclosed to the parties; (f) The tribunal Does a teacher in a school
or any of its judges must act on its or his administrative proceeding have a right
own independent consideration of the to be assisted by counsel?
facts and the law of the controversy, and
not simply accept the views of a Yes. Due process demand this. Gonzales
subordinate in arriving at a decision; and v. NLRC and Ateneo de Davao, GR No.
(g) The board or body should, in all 125735, August 26, 1999
controversial questions, render its
In said case, petitioner through a letter
decision in such a manner that the parties
refused to take part in the investigation
to the proceeding will know the various
unless the rules of procedure laid down
issues involved, and the reasons for the
by the Committee be revised, contending
decision.
that the same were violative of her right
Due process in quasi-judicial proceedings to due process. Petitioner specifically
before the COMELEC requires notice and objected to the provision which stated: x
hearing. The proclamation of a winning xx 3) Counsel for Ms. Lorlene Gonzales
candidate cannot be annulled if he has not shall not directly participate in the
been notified of any motion to set aside investigation but will merely advise Ms.
his proclamation. In Namil v. COMELEC, Gonzales x xx (par. 3)
G.R. No. 150540, October 28, 2003, the
Ruling: The NLRC, in our view, appears to
COMELEC issued the questioned order
have skirted several important issues
annulling the proclamation on the basis of
raised by petitioner foremost of which is
private respondent’s allegations and the
the absence of due process. Upon being
recommendation of the law department,
notified of her termination, she has the
without giving notice to the candidate
right to demand compliance with the
proclaimed. Thus, the COMELEC order
basic requirements of due process.
was declared void.
Compliance entails the twin requirements
From Bernas: of procedural and substantial due
process. Ample opportunity must be
Does an extraditee have a right of afforded the employee to defend herself
access to the evidence against him? either personally and/or with assistance
of a representative; to know the nature of
During the executive phase of an her offense; and, to cross examine and
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 65
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

confront face to face the witnesses against clause or by construction.


her. Likewise, due process requires that
the decision must be based on established A statute is not rendered uncertain and
facts and on a sound legal foundation. void merely because general terms are
used therein, or because of the
It is precisely to demand compliance with employment of terms without defining
these requirements that petitioner at the them; much less do we have to define
very onset of the investigation demanded every word we use. Besides, there is no
the revision of the rules laid down by the positive constitutional or statutory
Investigative Committee. The adamant command requiring the legislature to
refusal of the Committee to accede to this define each and every word in an
demand resulted in her failure to confront enactment.
and cross-examine her accusers. This is
not harping at technicalities as wrongfully The Plunder Law under which former
pointed out by the NLRC but a serious president Estrada is being prosecuted is
violation of petitioner's statutory and not vague. The words “series” and
constitutional right to due process that “combination” of crimes can be
ultimately vitiated the investigation. understood in their ordinary meaning.
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan
When is a law so “vague” as not to
satisfy the due process need for notice? Art 202 of the RPC defines vagrants
thus: “Any person found loitering
It is vague when it lacks comprehensible about public or semi-public buildings
standards that men “of common or places or tramping or wandering
intelligence must necessarily guess as to about the country or the streets
its meaning and differ as to its without visible means of support…”
application.” It is repugnant to the The law prohibiting vagrancy is
Constitution in two respects: (1) it challenge as vague. Decide
violates due process for failure to accord
persons especially the parties targeted by The void-for-vagueness doctrine holds
it, fair notice of the conduct to avoid; and that a law is facially invalid men of
(2) it leaves law enforcers unbridled common intelligence must necessarily
discretion in carrying out its provisions guess at its meaning and differ as to its
and becomes an arbitrary flexing of the application. This is not such a law.
Government muscle. Romualdez vs. COMELEC

But to be unconstitutional the law must Is publication a requirement of due


be utterly vague on its face, that is to say, process?
it cannot be clarified by either a saving

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 66
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

Yes. The rule that requires publication for means such relevant evidence as a
the effectivity of laws applies not only to reasonable mind accept as adequate to
statutes but also to presidential decrees support a conclusion.
and executive orders promulgated by the
President in the exercise of legislative Are notice and hearing always
powers whenever the same are validly required in administrative
delegated by the legislature or, at present, proceedings?
directly conferred by the Constitution.
Administrative rules and regulations In quasi-judicial proceedings, yes; but in
must also be published if their purpose is the performance of executive or
to enforce or implement existing law legislative functions, such as issuing
pursuant also to a valid delegation. internal rules and regulations, an
Republic vs. Pilipinas Shell administrative body need not comply
with the requirements of notice and
Is respondent in an administrative hearing.
case entitled to be informed of the
findings and recommendations of an
investigating committee created to Without conducting any hearing the
inquire into charges filed? National Telecommunications
Communication ordered PHILCOMSAT
No. He is entitled only to the to reduce its rates by 15% Valid?
administrative decision based on
substantial evidence made of record, and Changing existing rates is quasi-judicial in
a reasonable opportunity to meet the nature. Hence it must be preceded by a
charges and the evidence presented hearing. The fact of the order being
against him during the hearing of the merely interlocutory does not alter the
investigation committee. It is the situation because for all practical
administrative resolution, not the purposes it is final as to the period
investigating report, which should be the covered. PHILCOMSAT v. Alcuaz
basis of any further remedies that the
losing party in an administrative case
might wish to pursue. Pefianco v. Moral Police officer Torcita was charged on
twelve counts of conduct of
What quantum of proof is needed in unbecoming an officer. The twelve
administrative proceedings? counts were dismissed but he was
convicted of Simple Irregularity in the
In administrative proceedings, the Performance of Duty of having alcohol
quantum of proof required is only in his breath. Proper?
substantial evidence. Substantial evidence

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 67
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

No. While the definition of the more


serious offense is broad, and almost all- Is the requirement of substantive due
encompassing, a finding of guilt for an process a rigid concept?
offense, no matter how light, for which
one is not properly charged and tried Definitely not. The heart of substantive
cannot be countenanced without violating due process is the requirement of
the rudimentary requirements of due “reasonableness”, or absence of exercise
process. Summary Dismissal Board v. of arbitrary power. These are necessarily
Torcita relative concepts which depend on the
circumstances of every case.
What kind of due process is required
in deportation proceedings? What is the presumption when the
State acts to interfere with life, liberty,
Although deportation proceedings are not or property?
criminal in nature, the consequences can
be as serious as those of a criminal Generally, the presumption is that the
prosecution. The provisions in the Rules action is valid. (in rare cases, however, as
of Court for criminal cases are applicable. in the imposition of “prior restraint,” to be
Lao Gi alias Chia, Jr. v. CA discussed under Sec. 4, there is a
presumption of invalidity).

When do laws which interfere with life,


liberty, or property satisfy substantive Is the allowable scope of reasonable
due process? interference with property the same as
that with life or liberty?
To justify the State in interposing its
authority in behalf of the public, it must No. Rarely has a law interfering merely
appear, (1) that the interests of the public with property rights been declared
generally, as distinguished from those of a unconstitutional.
particular class, require such
interference; and, (2) that the means are Ordinance No. 4964 of Manila reads: “It
reasonably necessary for the shall be prohibited for any operator of
accomplishment of the purpose, and not any barber shop to conduct the
unduly oppressive upon individuals. The business of massaging customers or
legislature may not, under the guise of other persons in any adjacent room or
protecting the public interest, arbitrarily rooms of said barber shop, or in any
interfere with private business or impose room or rooms within the same
unusual and unnecessary restrictions building where the barber shop is
upon lawful occupations. US v. Toribio located as long as the operator of the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 68
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

barber shop and the rooms where “wash up” rates for such abbreviated
massaging is conducted is the same stays. The ordinance was invalidated as
person.” Does this amount to violative of the right to property of motel
deprivation of property without due operators (as in the Laguio case) and of
process? liberty of potential clients. The hotel
No. This is valid exercise of police power, operators were allowed to raise the issue
under the general welfare clause, for the of liberty of clients by appealing to “third
protection of morals. Velasco v. Mayor party standing”. White Light Corp v. City
Villegas of Manila

In an effort to curb immorality, the city


of Manila passed an ordinance which May the state prohibit candidates for
disallows “the operation of sauna board examinations from attending
parlors, massage parlors, karaoke review classes or similar exercises?
bars, night clubs, day clubs, super
clubs, discotheques, cabarets, dance The Court said that the rule of the
halls, motels and inns in the Ermita- Professional Regulatory Commission
Malate area. Valid? which restricts reviewees from attending
review classes, briefing conferences or
Conceding for the nonce that the Ermita- the like, and receiving any hand out,
Malate area teems with houses of ill- review material, etc. was unreasonable
repute and establishments of the like and arbitrary and violative of the
which the City Council may lawfully academic freedom of schools. Lupangco
prohibit, it is baseless and insupportable v. CA
to bring within that classification sauna
parlors, massage parlors, karaoke bars, The City of Butuan issues an ordinace
night clubs, day clubs, super clubs, prescribing that children between the
discotheques, cabarets, dance halls, ages of 7 and 12 should be charged
motels and inns. This is not warranted only half the admission price in movie
under the accepted definitions of these houses. Is this a valid exercise of police
terms. The enumerated establishments power?
are lawful pursuits which are not per se
offensive to the moral welfare of the No. For the benefit of parents then the
community. City of Manila v. Judge cost is passed on to cinema owners. There
Laguio is no discernible relation between the
ordinance and the promotion of public
A Manila ordinance prohibits motels, etc. health, safety, morals, and the general
from offering short-time admission, as welfare. Balacuit v. CFI
well admission, as well as pro-rated or

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 69
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

Note: A Texas statute making it a crime process clause?


for two persons of the same sex to engage
in certain intimate sexual conduct was Due process applies and protects all
held to violative the Due Process Clause. persons, without regard to any difference
Petitioners were free as adults to engage of race, color, or nationality. Artificial
in private conduct in the exercise of their persons are covered by the protection but
liberty under the Due Process Clause. only insofar as their property is
Lawrence v. Texas concerned. Smith Bell and Co v.
Natividad. It includes aliens and their
means of livelihood. Villegas vs. Hui
ALBA-NOTES: Cheng

What is the basic purpose of the Bill of What is meant by life?


Rights?
Life includes the right of an individual to
The purpose of the Bill of Rights is to his body in its completeness, and extends
protect the people against arbitrary and to use of God-given faculties which make
discriminatory use of political power. This life enjoyable. Justice Malcolm
bundle of rights guarantees the
preservation of our natural rights which
include personal liberty and security What is meant by liberty?
against invasion by the government or
any of its branches or instrumentalities. Liberty includes the right to exist
Certainly, in the hierarchy of rights, the and the right to be free from arbitrary
Bill of Rights takes precedence over the personal restraint or servitude. It includes
right of the State to prosecute, and when the right of the citizen to be free to use
weighed against each other, the scales of facilities in all lawful ways. Rubi vs.
justice tilt towards the former. Thus, relief Provincial Board of Mindoro
may be availed of to stop the purported
enforcement of criminal law where it is
necessary to provide for and orderly What is meant by property?
administration of justice, to prevent the
use of the strong arm of the law in an Property means anything that can come
oppressive and vindictive manner, and to under the right of ownership and be the
afford adequate protection to subject of contract. It represents more
constitutional rights. Aldo, et al v. than the things that a person owns; it
Diokno, et al includes the right to secure, and dispose
of them. Tonaco v. Thompson
Who are protected under the due

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 70
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

Is the constitutional guarantee against What are some basic standards of due
deprivation of life, liberty, or property process?
absolute? Why?
Due process must not overrun the bounds
No, for as long as the deprivation is with of reason and result in sheer oppression.
due process. What it prohibits is It must be free from arbitrariness and it
deprivation of life, liberty or property must be based on the sporting idea of fair
without due process of law. play. Ermita Hotel and Motel Assn. v.
City Mayor

What does deprivation of life and


liberty include? Accused was charged with the crime of
rape. His counsel withdrew, such that,
It includes more than inflicting personal when asked whether he was ready to
harm and actual physical restraints by the present his evidence, he manifested
direct operation of enactments of the that he was not. The trial court issued
legislature. A person may be deprived of an order directing that the accused has
life and liberty by the removal of those already waived his right to present
safeguards which restrain one individual evidence and the case considered
from violating the personal rights of submitted for decision. He was
others. convicted. Was his conviction proper?

No, because he was deprived of the right


When is a person deprived of his to due process, as he was not given the
property? opportunity to present his evidence. A
simple forewarning that the next time
A person is deprived of his property not that he would not be ready with his
only when it is physically taken from him defense evidence, he would be deemed to
but also when its value is destroyed or have waived his right to present it, does
when itscapability for enjoyment or its not satisfy the constitutional right of the
adaptability to some particular aspect is accused to due process.
impaired. There is deprivation of
property without due process of law Moreover, the court knew that accused
where the owner is constrained to devote has no counsel. It should have first asked
it, wholly or in part to public use without him if he would wish to solicit the
just compensation. Black Constitutional services of another counsel. People v.
Law Macarang

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 71
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

An accused filed an Urgent Ex-Parte He contended that the judgment was


Motion to Leave for Abroad. It was void for lack of due process as he was
granted by the judge on the same day it not given the opportunity to be heard.
was filled without notice of hearing to Is his contention correct? Why?
the complainant and the prosecution.
Is the action of the court proper? Why? No. Due process, in essence, is simple
opportunity to be heard but this
No, because the prosecution and the opportunity was not denied to Villaruel.
complaint were deprived of the right to Throughout the proceedings, the trial
due process. The essence of due process is court and the Court of Appeals, gave him
the right to be heard. Therefore, every the opportunity to present his side but he
motion which may prejudice the rights of failed to do so. His former counsel, the
the party should be set for hearing. The OSG, was negligent. This negligence,
intendment of the law will never be however, binds him, but the negligence of
achieved if notice is not served, such as in the OSG could not relieve him of the
this case. effects of such negligence and prevent the
decision of the trial court from becoming
A motion without notice of hearing is pro final and executor.PanfiloVillaruel, Jr. v.
forma, a mere scrap of paper. It presents Fernando, et al
no question which the court could decide.
The court has no reason to consider it and
the clerk has no right to receive it.
Give an example of how the lack of due
Fajardo v. CA
process may be cured.

The lack of due process may be cured by


PanfiloVillaruel, Jr., the former
the filing of a motion for reconsideration.
assistant secretary of the ATO, ordered
Galvez vs. CA
the detail of three (3) employees to
another office. Despite pleas for their Is the right to due process waivabale?
return, he refused, hence, they filed a
petition for mandamus to recall them Yes. The right to be heard is as often
to their mother unit. He was waived as it is invoked, and validly so, as
represented by counsel, the OSG, but long as the party is given an opportunity
no answer was filed, hence, a motion to to be heard on his behalf. If he opts to be
declare him in default. Judgment was silent where he has a right to speak, he
rendered. A motion for cannot later be heard to complain that he
reconsideration was filed but it was was unduly silenced. Stronghold
denied. On appeal, the judgment was Insurance Co., Inc. v. CA, GR No. 88050,
affirmed. It became final and executor. Jan. 30, 1992

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 72
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

The petitioner contended that his right The protection afforded by the
to due process was violated when the Constitution does not limit to the
HRET denied his motion for additional property alone. Property is more than the
period to make a formal offer of mere thing which a person owns. It
evidence. On the contrary, he was includes the right to acquire, use and
given ample time to do so and the dispose it. Property consists of the free
HRET has been very lenient to him. use, enjoyment and disposal of a man’s
Rule on the contention. Explain. acquisitions without control and
diminution saved by the law of the land.
The contention is not correct since he was The Constitution protects these essential
given all the opportunities to make an attributes BloUmparAdiong v. COMELEC
offer of evidence and to be heard. In
Villarosa v. HRET, it was held that “the
essence of due process is the reasonable
opportunity to be heard and submit Is the right to bear firearms a
evidence in support of one’s defense. To constitutionally protected right?
be heard does not mean verbal arguments Explain.
in court; one may be heard also through
pleadings. Where opportunity to be No. Possession of firearms by the citizens
heard, either through oral arguments or in the Philippine is the exception, not the
pleadings, is accorded, there is no denial rule. The right to bear arms is a mere
of due process. statutory privilege, not a constitutional
right. It is a mere statutory creation. In
The 2004 Rules of the HRET provide for a the United States, it was said that the right
definite period of time within which a of the people to keep and bear arms is not
party should complete or terminate their a right granted by the Constitution.
presentation of evidence which is 20 Neither is it in ay way dependent upon
working days, preferably successive, that instrument. (US v.
including the form of offer of evidence. Cruikshank).Likewise, in People v.
(Sec. 59). He was warned that the Persce, it was said that neither is there
extension granted would be the last but any constitutional provision securing the
he chose not to heed such warning and right to bear arms which prohibits
failed to use the additional time wisely. legislation with reference to such
Only petitioner deserves to be blamed for weapons as are specifically before the
the woes that befell him. Rep. Alvin court for consideration. The provision in
Sandoval v. HRET the Constitution of the United States that
the right of the people to keep and bear
Does due process protect the property arms shall not be infringed is not
of a person only? Why? designed to control legislation by the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 73
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

state. Chavez v. Romulo become essential in the pursuit of


livelihood. Suspension of issued
license thus involve state action that
adjudicates important interest of the
It was contended that the revocation of licenses.” Rule on the contention.
his PTCFOR pursuant to the guidelines Explain.
deprived him of his vested right
without due process of law and in Petitioner’s reliance on Bell is misplaced.
violation of the equal protection of law. This case involves a driver’s license, not a
Is the contention correct? Why? license to bear arms. The catena of
American Jurisprudence involving license
No. A license authorizing a person to to bear arms is perfectly accord with the
enjoy a certain privilege is neither a ruling that a PTFCOR is neither a property
property nor property right. In Tan v. nor a property right.
Director of Forestry,it was ruled that “a
license is merely a permit or privilege to A PTFCOR, just like ordinary licenses in
do what otherwise would be unlawful, other regulated fields, may be revoked
and is not a contract between the any time. It does not confer an absolute
authority granting it and the person to right, but only a personal privilege to be
whom it is granted; neither is it property exercised under existing restrictions, such
or a property right, nor does it create a as may thereafter be reasonably imposed.
vested right.” In a more emphatic A licensee takes his license subject to such
pronouncement, it was held in Opposa v. conditions as the Legislature sees fit to
Factoranthat: impose, and one of the statutory
conditions of this license is that it might
“Needless to say, all license be revoked by the selectmen at their
may thus be revoked or pleasure. Such license is not a contract,
rescinded by execute action. It and a revocation of it does not deprive the
is on a contract, property or defendant of any property, immunity, or
property right protected by the privilege within the meaning of these
due process clause of the words in the Declaration of Rights. The US
Constitution.” Chavez v. Supreme Court, in Dolye v. Continental
Romulo Ins. Co., held: “The correlative power to
revoke or recall a permission is a
Petitioner, in arguing that his PTCFOR necessary consequence of the main
is a constitutionally protected
power.” A mere license by the State is
property right, relied heavily on Bell v.
always revocable. Chavez v. Romulo
Burson, wherein the U.S. Supreme
Court ruled that “once a license is Assuming that the PTFCOR constitutes
issued, continued possession may

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 74
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

a property right protected by the The contention is not correct as the


Constitution, is the same absolute? guideline do not entirely prohibit
Explain. possession of firearms. What they
proscribe is merely the carrying of
No, since it is subject to the State’s police firearms outside of residence. However,
power. All property in the state is held those who wish to carry firearms outside
subject to its general regulations, of their residences may re-apply for a new
necessary to the common good and PTCFOR. This is a reasonable regulation.
general welfare. In the number of cases, If the carrying of firearms is regulated,
tests have been laid down to determine necessarily, crime incidents will be
the validity of a police measure, thus: curtailed. Criminals carry their weapons
to hunt for their victims, they do not wait
1. The interest of the public in the comfort of their homes. With the
generally, as distinguished revocation of al PTCFOR, it would be
from those of a particular class, difficult for criminals to roam around
requires the exercise of police with their guns. On the other hand, it
power; would be easier for the PNP to apprehend
2. The means employed are them.
reasonably necessary for the
accomplishment of the purpose Laws regulating the acquisition or
and not unduly oppressive possession of guns have frequently been
upon individuals. upheld as a reasonable exercise of the
police power. In States v. Reams, it was
Deeper reflection will reveal that the test held that the legislature may regulate the
merely reiterates the essence of the right to bear arms in a manner conducive
constitutional guarantees of substantive to the public peace. With the promotion of
due process, equal protection and non- public peace as its objective and
impairment of property rights. Chavez v. revocation of all PTCFOR as the means, it
Romulo can be said that the issuance of the
assailed Guidelines constitutes a
reasonable exercise of police power.
Chavez v. Romulo
There was a ban against carrying of
firearms. Guidelines were
promulgated by the Chief of the PNP,
one of which is the prohibition against State the basis for the issuance of the
carrying of firearms outside of Guidelines. Explain
residence. It was questioned as
unreasonable and oppressive. Rule on The basis for the issuance of the
the contention. Explain. Guidelines was the need for peace and
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 75
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

order to the proliferation of crimes which the COMELEC free. They contended
tend to disturb the peace of the that (1) it takes property without due
community, hence, the nationwide ban. process of law; (2) it violates the
Undeniably, the motivating factor in the eminent domain clause of the
issuance of the Guidelines is the interest Constitution which provides for
of the general public. Chavez v. Romulo payment of just compensation; (3) it
denies broadcast media the equal
It was contended that the guidelines protection of the laws; (4) it violates
are ex post facto. Is the contention the terms of the franchise of GMA
correct? Why? Network Inc., (5) it is in excess of the
power given to the COMELEC to
No. InMekin v. Wolfe, an ex post facto law supervise or regulate the operation of
has been defined as one- (a) which makes media of communication or
an action done before the passage of the information during the period of
law and which was innocent when done election. Rule on the contentions of the
criminal, and punishes such action; or (b) petitioners. Explain.
which aggravates a crime or makes it
greater than it was committed; or (c) (1) Due Process Clause
which changes the punishment and
inflicts a greater punishment than the law GMA contended that Sec. 92 is a
annexed to the crime when it was violation of the due process clause and
committed; or (d) which alters the legal the eminent domain provision of the
rules of evidence and receives less or Constitution by taking airtime from the
different testimony than the law required stations without payment of just
at the time of the commission of the compensation. It claimed that its
offense in order to convict the defendant. revenues come from sale of airtime to
advertisers. Is the contention correct?
Ex post facto law prohibits retrospectivity Why?
of penal laws.Lacson v. Executive
Secretary.The assailed Guidelines cannot No, the contention is without merit. All
be considered as an ex post facto law broadcasting companies, whether by
because it is prospective in application. radio or by television stations, is licensed
Contrary to petitioner’s argument, it by the government. Airwave frequencies
would not result in the punishment of have to be allocated, as there are more
acts previously committed. Chavez v. individuals who want to broadcast than
Romulo there are frequencies to assign.
Petitioners questioned the validity of Radio and television broadcasting
Sec. 92 of BP Blg. 881 requiring that companies, which are given franchises, do
radio and television time be given to
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 76
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

not own the airwaves and frequencies No, because airtime is not a finished
through which they transmit broadcast product and not owned by the broadcast
signals and images. They are merely given company, hence, no private property is
the temporary privilege of using them. taken by the requirement that they
Since a franchise is a mere privilege, the provide airtime to the COMELEC.
exercise of the privilege may reasonably
be burdened with the performance by the The provision for COMELEC time does not
grantee of some form of public service. constitute the use and operation of the
stations of GMA Network. The COMELEC
In the earlier case of PLDT v. NTC, it was does not take over the operation of radio
held: and television stations but only the
allocation of airtime to the candidates for
“Such regulation of the use the purpose of ensuring equal
and ownership of opportunity, time and the right to reply as
telecommunications systems mandated by the Constitution. In fact, the
is in the exercise of the franchise is mandated to render adequate
plenary police power of the public service time and this implements
State for the promotion of the Sec. 92 of BP Blg. 881. Its purpose is to
general welfare.” enable the government to communicate
with the people on matters of public
In granting of the privilege to operate interest. In sum, the law is not an invalid
broadcast stations and thereafter amendment to GMA’s franchise but the
supervising radio and television stations, enforcement of a duty voluntarily
the State spends considerable public assumed by it in accepting a public grant
funds in licensing and supervising such of privilege.
stations. It would be strange if it cannot
even require the licensees to render (3) Equal Protection Clause
public service by giving free airtime.
Telecommunications and Broadcast GMA contended that Sec. 92 of BP Blg.
Attorneys of the Philippines, Inc. and GMA 881 singles out radio and television
Network, Inc. v. Comelec stations to provide airtime for free.
They contended that newspapers and
(2) Eminent Domain magazines are not similarly required
as, in fact, in Phil. Press Institute v.
It was contended that in requiring the COMELEC, the right to the payment of
broadcast media to provide air space compensation of print media for the
to the COMELEC, it took their property print space was upheld. Is the
without due process of law. Is the contention correct? Why?
contention correct? Why?

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 77
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

No. there is a lot difference between print the COMELEC is authorized to supervise
and broadcast media. In the allocation of or regulate is the use by media of
limited resources, relevant conditions information of their franchises or permits,
may validly be imposed on the grantees while what Congress (not the COMELEC)
and licensees. The reason for this is that, prohibits is the sale or donation of print
the government spends public funds for space or airtime for political ads. In other
the allocation and regulation of the words, the object of supervision or
broadcast industry, which it does not do regulation is different from the object of
in print media. To require the radio and the prohibition. It is another fallacy for
television broadcast industry to provide GMA to contend that the power to
airtime for the COMELEC does not regulate does not include the power to
infringe the equal protection clause. prohibit. This may have force if the object
Another reason is the unique and of the power were the same.
pervasive influence of the broadcast
media, which makes it somewhat lesser in In the second place, the prohibition in Sec.
scope than the freedom accorded to 11(b) of RA NO. 66646 is only half of the
newspaper and print media. Eastern regulatory provision in the statute. The
Broadcasting Corp. v. Dans, Jr. other half is the mandate to the COMELEC
to procure print space and airtime for
Hence, the claim of denial of equal allocation to candidates. Osmeña v.
protection is not correct. The pleas to COMELEC
invalidate Sec. 92 would pave the way for
a return to the old regime where With the prohibition on media advertising
moneyed candidates could monopolize by candidates themselves, the COMELEC
media advertising to the disadvantage of Time and COMELEC Space are about the
candidates with less resources. only means through which candidates can
advertise their qualifications and
(4) Requirement of COMELEC Time is a programs of government. More than
reasonable exercise of State’s merely depriving candidates of time for
power to regulate use of franchise. their ads, the failure of broadcast stations
to provide air time unless paid by the
It was argued that the power to government would clearly deprive the
supervise or regulate given to the people of their right to know. Sec. 7, Art.
COMELEC under Sec. 4, Art. IX-C of the III of the 1987 Constitution which
Constitution does not include the provides that “the right of the people to
power to prohibit. Is the contention information on matters of public concern
correct? Why? shall be recognized,” while Sec. 6, Art. XII
states that “the use of property bears a
No, the contention is not correct for what social function and the right to own,

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 78
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

establish, and operate economic for TEFASCO to construct the specialized


enterprises is subject to the duty of the terminal complex which was envisioned
State to promote distributive justice and to be mutually beneficial to both of them.
to intervene when the common good so The authorization assumed the character
demands.” of a truly binding contract between the
parties. Thus, it was arbitrary,
An agreement between TEFASCO and unreasonable and unfair PPA to add new
PPA was entered into granting the burdens and uncertainties into the
former the right to construct agreement of which TEFASCO had no
specialized terminal complex with port prior knowledge even in the context of
facilities and services in Davao City to regulation. After the parties have entered
ease the acute congestion in the into the contract, accepted the conditions
government ports in Davao City. After thereof, it was too late for PPA to change
the former stated the construction, the rules of engagement. Terminal
PPA imposed additional burdens, such Facilities and services Corporation v.
as application for construction permits PPA
with other conditions; 10%
government share out of arrastre and A bill was filed lowering the age for the
stevedorings gross income and 100% members in the SangguniangKabataan
wharfage and berthing charges. The to less than eighteen years of age and
former complied but later on filed an postponing the election for the
action for refund of government share SangguniangKabataan. Petitioners,
it paid and damages as a result of the who claimed to be twenty years old,
illegal exaction from its clients of fled a petition to prevent the
100% berthing and wharfage fees, and enactment of the law on the ground
nullification of the agreement where that their opportunity to run for the
TEFASCO agreed to pay the illegal SangguniangKabataanis a property
exactions. PPA contended that the right protected by the Constitution.
added condition are in the concept of While the case was pending, the bill
regulation invoking the principle of was enacted into law and became the R
regulatory permits impressed with A No. 9164. Is the contention correct?
contractual character. The court ruled
for TEFASCO and considered the No. Membership in the
modifications unjustified, arbitrary SangguniangKabataanis not a property
and unreasonable. Is the ruling right protected by the Constitution,
correct? Why? because it is a mere statutory right.
Congress may amend at any time the law
Yes. When the parties entered into the to change or even withdraw the statutory
contract, it was more of a mere privilege right. Montesclaros v. COMELEC

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 79
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

Pursuant to the Extradition Treaty dismissed a case without giving the


between the Philippines and the State the chance to present evidence,
United States, the government of the was there lack of due process? Why?
United States requested the
extradition court to issue a warrant for Yes, because even the State is entitled to
the arrest of respondent. Respondent due process. It would constitute a grave
argued that his detention prior to the abuse of discretion amounting to lack of
conclusion of the extradition jurisdiction to deprive the State of the
proceedings would deprive him of opportunity to be heard. Uy v. Genato
liberty without due process of law. Is
the contention proper? Why? Pursuant to the Extradition Treaty
between the Philippines and the
No. Due process does not always call for a United States, the United States
prior opportunity to be heard. A requested the extradition of private
subsequent opportunity to be heard is respondent. The Government of the
enough. Respondent will be given full United States filed a petition for
opportunity to be heard when the extradition. Respondent filed a motion
extradition court hears the petition for asking that the application for his
extradition. Government of the United arrest be set for hearing. Rule on the
States of America v. Purganan contention of the petitioner. Explain.

Does due process require that a person The contention is not proper. The
be actually heard? Why? Constitution does not require a notice or a
hearing before the issuance of a warrant
No, it does not. It is sufficient that he was of arrest. To determine probable cause for
given the opportunity to be heard. He the issuance of arrest warrants, the
need not be heard. Antonio v. CA Constitution requires only the
examination under oath or affirmation of
Does due process require that there be complaints and the witnesses they may
trial? Why? produce. If the accused were to be
allowed to be heard and to present
No, it does not always require trial-type evidence during the prima facie
proceeding. The essence of due process is determination for the issuance of a
found in the opportunity to be heard and warrant of arrest, such a procedure could
the submission of evidence. To be heard convert determination of a prima facie
does not necessarily mean oral arguments case into a full blown trial of the entire
in court. It may be through pleadings. proceedings Government of the United
Zaldivar v. SB States of America v. Purganan
Suppose a trial judge pre-emptively During the preliminary investigation,
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 80
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

the respondents moved that the case None, because the right to counsel is
be considered submitted for resolution equally enforceable in criminal and civil
instead of filing the counter-affidavits. cases. This is so because what are
When the case was filed in court, the protected are not only life and liberty, but
accused claimed they were denied due also property. Sps. Dy v. CA
process. Is their contention correct?
Why? The members of a union barricaded
the gates of the north in order to
No, because the failure to submit counter- pressure the court to render judgment
affidavits was a waiver of the opportunity in their favor. In case the court renders
to be heard. Due process in preliminary a judgment in their favor, do you think
investigation merely requires the there was deprivation of the right to
submission of counter-affidavits. Soliven due process? Why?
v. Makasiar
Yes, because the decision was the result of
The resolution of a case before the a mob where there was no independent
Department of Labor was rendered on judgment.Nestle Phils. v. Sanchez.In a
the basis of position papers. Was there similar decision, the requirement of due
due process? process was likewise violated. This is
especially so if the publicity is focused on
Yes, because the resolution based on the guilt of the accused.Martelino v.
position papers is a recognized procedure Alejandro
in labor cases. It is not violative due
process. Pantranco North v. Drilon Even before the prosecution could
finish presenting its evidence, the
Is there compliance with the due judge informed the petitioners that
process clause if an accused was their case was weak and advised them
represented by a non-lawyer during to settle the case. They sought his
the trial? Why? disqualification on the ground of lack
of impartiality. Decide
No, because a non-lawyer could not have
fully represented the accused as he could The conduct of the judge is not in
not have properly prepared the defense of consonance with the standard of cold
the accused resulting in his conviction. neutrality of an impartial judge. He should
Delgado v. CA be disqualified. Castillo v. Juan

In a case for reconveyance of property, Accused were charged with the crime
X was represented by a non-lawyer. of kidnapping from ransom. At the
Was there due process? Why? presentation of their evidence, the
witnesses failed to appear as the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 81
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

subpoena issued were not served. The committed murder. When B


court considered the case submitted surrendered, he was charged with
for decision and convicted them. They murder, but sought the disqualification
claimed that they were denied due of the judge. Is the act of B correct?
process and their right to have Why?
compulsory process to secure the
attendance of witnesses and the Yes, because the statement in the prior
production of evidence in their behalf. decision renders it is impossible for him
Rule on their contention. Explain to be free from suspicion that in deciding
the present case, he will be biased. The
Their contention is correct. Procedural case should be decided by another judge.
due process cannot be satisfied without a A judge has the duty not only to render
law which hears before it condemns, impartial decision but also to render it in
which proceeds upon inquiry and renders a manner as to be free from suspicion as
judgment only after trial. Alonte v. to his impartiality. Martinez v. Gironella
Savellano, Jr.The constitutional right of
the accused to be heard his defense is X was charged with estafa before a
inviolable. No court of justice under our judge. He was moved to inhibit the
system of government has the power to judge on the ground that in the
deprive him of that right. People v. discussion on the amendment to Art.
Lumagne, Jr. 315, RPC, the judge stated that he
agreed with the view of Sen. Padilla. It
As the subpoena were not served because was assigned to the same judge. X
the addressee was not known at the given move to inhibit him, but it was denied.
address and the other having received it Is the denial correct? Why?
very late, the court should have reset the
case and allowed the presentation of Yes, because the voluntary inhibition in
evidence. Its failure to do so deprived the the criminal case does not justify his
accused of the right to due process. inhibiting himself in a civil case just
because X is one of the parties. The
For it is well settled that the right to be alleged bias in the criminal case was
heard by himself and counsel is one of the based on the understanding by
constitutional rights to the accused. Not respondent of a doctrine of law. It was not
only this, but he likewise has the right to directed against petitioner. Castro v.
present evidence for his defense. People Reyes
v. Hipolito Diaz
X asked for an extension of 15 days to
In acquitting A who was charged as an file answer. He was granted five (5)
accessory in a murder case, the judge days. The order was sent by mail but
stated that the evidence showed that B was received by him after the lapse of
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 82
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

the period granted. He was declared in process of law.” (Sec. 1, Art. III, 1987
default and judgment was rendered Constitution). As witness, he had no idea
against him. His motion for that the he himself was on trial. What is
reconsideration was denied. His worst, the complainant was punished for
appeal was disapproved although it acts not declared by law to constitute a
was perfected on time. Was he penal offense. He was denied due process.
deprived of due process? Why?
In StateProsecutors v. Muro, the judge
Yes, he was denied due process. A dismissed the cases against Mrs.
sporting opportunity to be heard and the Imelda Marcos without any motion to
rendition of judgment only after a lawful quash or suasponte. Discuss its effects.
hearing by an impartial judge are
essential elements of procedural due It was a blatant denial of elementary due
process. X should be given full process to the Government. It is indicative
opportunity to present his side. Azul v. of bad faith and partiality. The lightning
Castro speed by which the judge resolved to
dismiss the cases without the benefit of a
Pasigan, a barangay chairman, hearing and without reasonable notice to
received a report that a carabao was the prosecution, inevitably opened him to
lost. He found it near the house of suspicion of having acted out of partiality
Vicente Dumo, Sr., already dead. Seeing for the accused.
a cart under Dumo’s house, he took it
and used to haul the carabao to the Judge Muro dismissed the cases of Mrs.
municipal building. A criminal case Imelda Marcos without a motion, but it
against Dumo was filed. Pasigan was a was done after her arraignment and
witness, but after trial, he was without the consent of the accused. If
convicted for violation of the the prosecution should appeal or re-
fundamental law against human rights file the cases, can she invoke double
and sentenced to pay a fine of P200.00. jeopardy? Why?
Is the act of the judge valid?
No, because the State was denied due
No, because there was lack of due process process. This is so despite the acquittal of
and he was not informed of the nature of the accused. In Galman vs. SB, it was said
the accusation against him. In Pasigan v. that the cardinal precept is that where
Judge Azura, the Supreme Court said that there is a violation of basic constitutional
the judge lost sight of an even more rights, courts are ousted of their
fundamental and familiar constitutional jurisdiction. Thus, the violation of the
precept: “No person shall be deprived of State’s right to due process raises a
life, liberty, or property without due serious jurisdictional issue which cannot
be glossed over or disregarded at will
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 83
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

where the denial of the fundamental right that he should report within five (5)
to due process is apparent, a decision days, otherwise, he would be dropped
rendered in disregarded of that right is from the rolls. The letter was returned
void for lack of jurisdiction. to sender on Sept. 27, 1990. ATI also
published a notice of similar import in
The Constitution requires that a the Philippine Journal. When he came
decision should contain the facts and back, he reported for duty, but he
the law upon which it is based. What found out that another person had
could be the reason? Explain. been appointed to his position. He
protested to the CSC. Not having
It is a constitutional requirement that a obtained the relief he sought, he went
decision should contain the facts and the to the Supreme Court invoking due
law upon which it is based. In Nicos process. If you were the ponente, how
Industrial Corp. vs. CA, the Supreme would you decide? Explain.
Court held that it is a requirement of due
process that the parties to a litigation be I would decide in favor of Gonzales. He
informed of how it was decided with an was not afforded due process. ATI knew
explanation of the factual and legal his address in the USA, yet, the letter was
reasons. This requirement, however, does addresses to him at Quezon City. The
not apply to interlocutory orders because sending of the letter at his local address
the requirement refers only to decisions did not constitute a substantial
on the merits. compliance with the demands of due
process. The ruling of the CSC cut too
Inocencio Gonzales has been employed deeply on the petitioner’s right to
in the government for 36 years. Twice, continue his employment and unduly
he received merit awards for diluted the protection of due process.
continuous, dedicated and faithful Notice by publication was not proper
service. In 1990, his children in the since ATI knew his address; hence, it had
USA had problems, hence, he went no legal warrant to notify him through the
there and applied for and was granted newspapers.
leave for six (6) months. As the
problems persisted, he wrote the In a setting of scarcities, it is bad enough
Director of ATI asking for additional to lose a job; it is worse, if it is taken away
leave without pay, stating his address by the government itself without due
in the letter. It was not acted upon process of law. The Constitution abhors
promptly. On Sept. 5, 1990 or three (3) such arbitrariness. Gonzales v. CSC
months thereafter, the Assistant
Director wrote him at his address in X was charged with an offense in court.
Quezon City declaring him AWOL and He was arraigned in absentia;

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 84
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

thereafter, he was tried and convicted failed to appear, hence, an order of


in absentia. Was there compliance with being in default was issued. (Note that
the due process clause in the this was decided under the old rule).
Constitution? Why? Judgment was rendered, but he filed a
motion to set aside. It was denied. On
None. In Nolasco vs. Enrile, the SC said appeal, the CA remanded the case for
that the actual arraignment is a matter of the cross-examination of witnesses.
due process. It requires the actual More than one year after the finality of
presence of the accused as it is through the CA ruling, the defendant moved for
the arraignment that the accused is the scheduling of the case but at the
informed of the nature of the accusation trial, the plaintiff’s counsel manifested
against him. that plaintiff was already dead; the
other witness was abroad. Defendant
Arraignment inabsentia thru publication moved to strike out the testimonies
of the charge sheet is violative of due and it was granted. The order was
process. appealed. Was the order valid? Why?
What is the requirement if an alleged No, it was void. This is so because the
alien being deported, claims to be a delay in the cross-examination was
Filipino? Explain. caused by the respondent and it was
considered a waiver of the right especially
If, in a deportation proceeding, an alleged so that he knew the health of the plaintiff.
alien claims Filipino citizenship supports It is harsh to strike out the testimonies
such claim with substantial evidence, he is
since plaintiff had no fault at all. While the
entitled to a judicial determination of his
right to cross-examination is part of due
status. There must be full-blown trial. The
process, it is personal and can be waived.
power of review by the Supreme Court is
Fulgado v. CA
not sufficient, because it is not a trier of
facts. The determination that a Filipino May the court summarily grant an
has ceased to be so, is so momentous and application for bail in a capital offense
far reaching that it should not be left to where evidence of guilt is strong?
summary proceedings before an Why?
administrative tribunal. One being
denaturalized deserves a full-blown trial No. The prosecution must be heard and
or day in court. Yu v. Santiago allowed to present evidence. If
prosecution is denied the right, there is
X, an old man filed, a complaint for violation of due process, and the order
annulment of contract, accounting and granting bail is void. People v. Calo.The
partition. After answer was filed, pre- conduct of a hearing although summary in
trial was conducted.. The defendant

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 85
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

nature is mandatory. was verbally apprised of the charges


against him, hence, there was
X was charged with violation of PD No. substantial compliance with the rule.
772. When arraigned, she pleaded not Is the contention correct? Why?
guilty. At the pre-trial, x informed the
court that she has a title, a building No. The requirements of due process
permit, and survey plan. She was were not complied with. There was no
acquitted without the prosecution substantial compliance as the conferences
presenting its evidence. Is the acquittal cannot be considered substitutes for the
valid? Why? actual observance of the notice and
hearing. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. v. NLRC
No. There was lack of due process. The
prosecution was not given the Is preliminary investigation a part of
opportunity to be heard and to object to due process such that the information
the admission of the documents. A trial can be quashed? Why?
should have been undertaken to
determine once and for all whether the No, because it is not one among the rights
place where the structure was built guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. It is not a
belongs to U.P. or to the accused. The creation of the Constitution. Its origin is
prosecution was deprived of the statutory and it exists and the right
opportunity to present evidence and thereto can be invoked when so
rebut the representation of the accused. established and granted by law. If not
Both parties are entitled to due process. waived, absence thereof may amount to a
People v. Santiago, et al denial of due process. However, lack of it
is not a ground to quash or dismiss a
X was convicted by the Sandiganbayan complaint or information. Much less does
on the ground that he is a gangster. Is it affect the court’s jurisdiction.Bunye, et
the conviction valid? Why? al v. SB

No. A criminal statute violates due X sued Y before the Metropolitan Trial
process if it does not define the offense Court, Manila for ejectment. Y failed to
with reasonableness. A law that make it a file an answer, hence, the MTC
crime to be a gangster without specific rendered a judgment motupropio. Y
standard is void for its vagueness. A contends now that he was deprived of
person cannot be made to guess what due process when the court rendered
violation he committed. Gallego v. SB judgment on the basis of the complaint
and documents. Decide.
X was dismissed from employment but
the employer failed to furnish him with Y is not correct. Under the Rules on
notice. The employer conteded that X Summary Procedure, the court can render

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 86
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

judgment motupropio if the defendant creditors of due process. NDC v. PNB. It


fails to answer under Sec. 4 of the said violated the guarantee against non-
Rules Santiago v. Guadiz impairment of contract clause.

Suppose in the case above, he filed a X, an employee of ABC Corporation was


motion for extension to file answer, charged with an offense, but he was
would your answer be the same? Why? dismissed on another ground. Was the
dismissal valid? Why?
Yes, because such motion is a prohibited
one which can be disregarded by the No, because the dismissal violated his
court. In both cases, Y was given the right to due process. He was not correctly
opportunity to be heard. Gachon v. informed of the charges, hence, could not
Devera be expected to defend himself adequately.
Gold City Integrated Port Services v.
May a law be given effect if it was not NLRC
published? Why?
Can the PCGG conduct preliminary
No. The publication requirement goes investigation after it sequestered the
into the due process clause. It is unfair to properties of a person? Why?
the people if law would take effect
without them knowing the said laws No, because it would not be an impartial
through their publication Tañada v. body. For it to do so, would deprive the
Tuvera, for publication gives the people person whose properties were
presumptive knowledge of the law. sequestered of the right to due process. In
Cojuangco vs. PCGG, the SC said that the
A decree was issued by then Pres. PCGG has the power to conduct
Marcos to rehabilitate Agrix preliminary investigation of cases
Development Corporation, cancelling involving violations of the Anti-Graft and
all mortgages, liens and encumbrances Corrupt Practices Act. However, it should
on properties of said corporation. Phil. inhibit itself from conducting the
Veteran’s Bank questioned it as preliminary investigation and should
unconstitutional invoking due process. refer the case to the Ombudsman, for due
Rule on the contention. process demands that the one conducting
the preliminary investigation must be
The decree is unconstitutional because impartial. It could not be impartial
the means employed to rehabilitate Agrix because it earlier sequestered the
was oppressive as it cancelled all properties of the petitioner and sued him
mortgages, liens, interests, penalties and for the forfeiture of ill-gotten wealth.
charges without paying any
consideration. The decree deprived the What are the requirements of

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 87
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

procedural due process in the interests of the public. LBP v. Paden


suspension or dismissal of employee?
Explain. An employee of the BID was charged
administratively for dishonesty,
Procedural due process basically requires oppression, misconduct and conduct
that suspension or dismissal comes only grossly prejudicial to the best interest
after notice and hearing. Thus, the of the service in connection with his
minimum requirements of due process act of extorting money from a foreign
are: (1) that the employees or officers national. He filed various pleadings
must be informed of the charges before the Board of Discipline and
preferred against them, and the formal several motions. He participated in all
way by which the employees or officers the stages of the proceedings. He
are informed is by furnishing them with a elevated his case to the Secretary of
copy of the charges made against them; Justice. Was there due process? Why?
and (2) that they may have a reasonable
opportunity to present their side of the Yes. Due process in an administrative
matter, that is to say, their defenses context does not require trial-type
against the charges and to present proceedings similar to those in courts of
evidence in support of their defenses. LBP justice. Where opportunity to be heard
v. Paden either through oral arguments or through
pleadings is accorded, there is no denial
Substantive due process requires that of procedural due process. Liguid v.
the suspension or dismissal be “for Camano, Jr.A formal or trial-type hearing
cause”. Explain the concept of for cause is not at all times and in all instances
provided by law. essential. The requirements are satisfied
where the parties are afforded fair and
It means for reasons, which the law and reasonable opportunity to explain their
sound public policy recognize as sufficient side of the controversy at hand. The
removal that is legal cause, and not standard of due process that must be met
merely causes which the appointing in administrative tribunals allows a
power in the exercise of discretion may certain degree of latitude as long as
deem sufficient. It is implied that officers fairness is not ignored. In other words, it
may not be removed at the mere will of is not legally objectionable for being
those vested with the power of removal violative of due process for an
or without cause. Moreover, the cause administrative agency to resolve a case
must relate to and affect the based solely on position papers, affidavits
administration of the office, and must be or documentary evidence submitted by
restricted to something of a substantial the parties as affidavits of witnesses may
nature directly affecting the rights and take the place of direct testimony.

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 88
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

Samalio v. CA energy resources because of the spiraling


prices of petroleum products. Equal
If an employee is dismissed for just protection does not require adherence to
cause under Article 282 of the Labor all-or-nothing policy. Whether or not
Code, what requirements must be met other measures should have been
in order that there may be no denial of adopted is left to the policy discretion of
the right to due process especially if the political branches. Bautista v. Juinio
the employee asks for a hearing?
Explain. Petitioner operated several taxicabs.
The drivers asked for payments of
Procedural due process require the emergency cost of living allowance
employer to give the employee two under PD No. 525. Petitioner argued
notices. In Agabon v. NLRC, it was said that the application of P.D. No. 525
that procedurally, (1) if the dismissal is would violative substantive due
based on a just cause under Art. 282, the process since the drivers were
employer must give the employee two governed by the boundary system. Is
written notices and a hearing or this contention correct? Why?
opportunity to be heard if requested by
the employee before terminating the No, because the measure is a police power
employment; a notice specifying the measure. To nullify it on the ground of
grounds for which dismissal is sought, a violation of substantive due process,
hearing or an opportunity to be heard and there must be a facial foundation of
after hearing or opportunity to be heard, invalidity. Since the decree was inspired
a notice of the decision to dismiss. by the constitutional mandate of social
Salvador v. J. Marketing Corp., et al justice and protection to labor, it is not
arbitrary.EM Transport, Inc. v. Calano
LOI No. 869 which prohibited the use
of motor vehicles with the H and EH X, Y, and Z were charged with murder.
license plates on week-ends and After reinvestigation, the Provincial
holidays was questioned on the ground Prosecutor moved for the dismissal of
that they were denied the right to use the same. The court dismissed the
their car on such days and violated the case. On appeal by the offended party
due process clause and equal to the DOJ, the latter ordered the
protection clause as other motor refilling of the case. The accused
vehicles were not banned on such contended that they would be placed in
days. Decide. double jeopardy. The prosecution
contended that the order of dismissal
Due process cannot be invoked, because is void because it was issue without a
LOI 869 is an exercise of the police power hearing. Rule on the contention.
of the State. It seeks to conserve the use of
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 89
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

The contention is not proper. Since it was sufficient compliance with the
the prosecution who moved for the requirements of due process.
dismissal, a hearing is not necessary. It is
axiomatic that a hearing is necessary only The Sandiganbayan issued a hold
in contentious motions. The motion is not departure order against Miriam
contentious. The complainants are Defensor-Santiago because of news
precluded from questioning the discretion reports that she was going abroad
of the fiscal in moving for the dismissal of despite her Anti-Graft cases. She
the criminal action, hence, the hearing on contended that there was no due
the motion is useless and futile. People v. process as she was not notified of any
Vergara hearing. Is her contention proper?
Why?
X was ordered expelled from the U.P
College of law for misstating the family No, because a hold departure order is but
income in his application for reduced an exercise of the court’s inherent power
tuition fees. He appealed to the Board to preserve and to maintain the
of Regents which reduced his penalty effectiveness of its jurisdiction over the
to suspension for one (1) year. The case and the person of the accused.
order was challenged contending that Santiago v. Vasquez
he was denied due process because he
was not notified of the meeting of the X was charged with selling shabu in a
Board. Rule on the contention. buy-bust operation. Can he be
convicted of possession? Why?
The contention is not proper. Due process
does not require that he be notified of the No, because that would deny him the right
board meeting. The rules of the U.P. do to due process, as the same was not
not require the presence during board charged in the information. There is a
meetings, of individuals whose cases are difference between sale and possession.
being taken up by the Board of Regents. Sale is defined as a contract whereby one
UP Board of Regents v. Telan of the contracting parties obligates
himself to transfer the ownership of and
The Central Bank closed the Rural to deliver a determinate thing, and the
Bank of Buhi, Inc. without conducting a other to pay therefor a price certain in
prior hearing. Was it deprived of the money or its equivalent. Possession is the
right to due process? Why? holding of a thing or the enjoyment of a
right. People v. Del Rosario
No. A bank may be closed without
conducting prior hearing, otherwise, X was charged with murder. He was
there would be a bank run. CB v. CAThe convicted after trial but claimed that
hearing conducted after it is closed is there was no fair trial because of the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 90
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

barrage of publicity by the press. He appellant was given a day-today, gavel-to-


added that the judge was [pressured gavel coverage does not by itself prove
because Vice-President Joseph Estrada that the publicity so permeated the mind
and Secretary Drilon even attended of the trial judge and impaired his
hearings. President Aquino even impartiality. For one, it is impossible to
visited Maureen Hultman while in the seal the minds of members of the bench
hospital. He contended that the trial from pre-trial and other off-court
judge failed to protect him from publicity of sensational criminal cases.
prejudicial publicity and disruptive Our judges are learned in the law and
influences which attended the trained to disregard off-court evidence
prosecution of his case. Rule on his and on-camera performances of parties to
contention. a litigation. Their mere exposure to
publication and publicity stunts does not
His contention is not correct. It is true per se fatally infect their impartiality.
that the print and broadcast media gave People v. Teehankee
the case pervasive publicity, just like all
high profile and high stake criminal trials. What may be the net effect if there is
The right of an accused to a fair trial is not pervasive publicity of the trial of the
compatible to a free press. To be sure, accused? Explain.
responsible reporting enhances an
accused’s right to a fair trial for as well At best, he can only conjure possibility of
pointed out, “a responsible press has prejudice on the part of the trial judge due
always been regarded as the handmaiden to the barrage of publicity that
of effective judicial administration, characterized the investigation and trial
especially in the criminal field xxx. The of the case. In Martelino, et al v.
press does not simply publish information Alejandro, et al, this standard of
about trials but guards against the possibility of prejudice was not respected
miscarriage of justice by subjecting the and what was adopted was the test of
police, prosecutors, and judicial processes actual prejudice for to warrant a finding
to extensive public scrutiny and of prejudicial publicity, there must be
criticism.” People v. Teehankee allegation and proof that the judges have
been unduly influenced, not simple that
Is pervasive publicity per se they might be, by the barrage of publicity,
prejudicial to the right of an accused to in the case at bar, the records do not show
fair trial? Why? that the trial judge developed actual bias
against appellant as a consequence of the
No. pervasive publicity is not per se extensive media coverage of the pre-trial
prejudicial to the right of an accused to and trial of his case. The totality of
fair trial. The mere fact that the trial of circumstances of the case does not prove

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 91
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

that the trial judge acquired a fixed a case must be considered in


opinion as a result of prejudicial publicity order to determine the
which is incapable of change even by prejudice in the mind of the
evidence presented during the trial. court through the barrage of
Appellant has the burden to prove this publicity.
actual bias and he has not discharged the
burden. People v. Teehankee On 13 March 2001, the
KapisananngmgaBrodkastersngPilipin
Cite two (2) tests in determining as (KBP), an association representing
whether a court was prejudiced by an duly franchised and authorized
over publicity of a crime. television and radio networks
throughout the country, sent a letter
1. Possibility of Prejudice requesting the Supreme Court to allow
testwhere the day-to-day or live media coverage of the anticipated
gavel-to-gavel coverage does trial of plunder and other criminal
not by itself prove that the cases filed against former President
publicity so permeated the Joseph E. Estrada before the
mind of the trial judge and Sandiganbayan in order “to assure the
impaired his partiality. The test public of full transparency in the
was rejected in People v. proceedings of an unprecedented case
Teehankee, Jr, and in in our history.” The request was
Martelino v. Alejandro, where seconded by Mr. Cesar N. Sarino in his
it was said that our judges are letter of 5 April 2001 to the Chief
learned in the law and trained Justice and, still later, by Senator
to disregard off-court evidence Renato Cayetano and Attorney Ricardo
and on-camera performances Romulo.
of parties to a litigation. Their
mere exposure to publications On 17 April 2001, the Honorable
and publicity stunts does not Secretary of Justice Hernando Perez
per se fatally infect their formally filed an instant petition,
impartiality. invoking the constitutional right of the
2. Test of actual prejudice people to be informed on matters of
where, to warrant a finding of public concern which can best be
prejudicial publicity, there recognized, served and satisfied by
must be proof that the judges allowing the live radio and television
have been unduly influenced, coverage of the concomitant court
not simply that they might be, proceedings, and that will also serve
by the barrage of publicity. The the dual purpose of ensuring the
totality of the circumstances in desired transparency in the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 92
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

administration of justice in order to to quantify the influence, or pressure that


disabuse the minds of the supporters media can bring to bear on them directly
of the past regime of any and all and through the shaping of public
unfounded notions, or ill-perceived opinion, it is a fact, nonetheless, that,
attempts on the part of the present indeed, it does so in so many ways and in
dispensation, to ‘railroad’ the instant varying degrees. The conscious or
criminal cases against the former unconscious effect that such a coverage
president Joseph Ejercito Estrada. may have on the testimony of witnesses
Decide and the decision of judges cannot be
evaluated but, it can likewise be said, it is
The petition should be denied. not at all unlikely for a vote of guilt or
Admittedly, the press is a mighty catalyst innocence to yield to it. It might be
in awakening public consciousness, and it farcical to build around them an
has become an important instrument in impregnable armor against the influence
the quest for truth. of the most powerful media of public
opinion. In Re: Request for TV Coverage
The propriety of granting or denying the of Trial of the Plunder Cases of former
petition involve the weighing out of the President Estrada
constitutional guarantees of freedom of
the press and the right to public Is the accused entitled to public trial?
information, on the one hand, and the Explain.
fundamental rights of the accused, on the
other hand, along with the constitutional An accused has a right to a public trial but
power of a court to control its it is a right that belongs to him, more than
proceedings in ensuring a fair and anyone else, where his life or liberty can
impartial trial. be held critically in balance. A public trial
aims to ensure that he is fairly dealt with
When these rights race against one and would not be unjustly condemned
another, jurisprudence tells us that the and that his rights are not compromised
right of the accused must be preferred to in secret conclaves of long ago. A public
win. trial is not synonymous with publicized
trial; it only implies that the court doors
Witnesses and judges may very well be must be open to those who wish to come,
men and women of fortitude, able to sit in the available seats, conduct
thrive in hardy climate, with every reason themselves with decorum and observe
to presume firmness of mind and resolute the trial process. In the constitutional
endurance, but it must also be conceded sense, a courtroom should have enough
that “television can work profound facilities for a reasonable number of the
changes in the behavior of the people it public to observe the proceedings, not too
focuses on.” Even while it may be difficult
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 93
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

small as to render the openness negligible held that the television coverage of
and not too large as to distract the trial judicial proceedings is an inherent denial
participants from their proper functions, of due process rights of an accused and
who shall then be totally free to report also identified as being likely prejudices:
what they have observed during the
proceedings. “1. The potential impact of
television x xx is perhaps of the
In case of conflict between the greatest significance. X xx. From
Freedom of the press and right to the moment the trial judge
public information as against the right announces that a case will be
of the accused to due process, which televised it becomes a cause
will prevail? Explain. celebre. The whole community, x
xx becomes interested in all the
The courts recognize the constitutionally morbid details surrounding it. The
embodied freedom of the press and the approaching trial immediately
right to public information. It also assumes an important status in the
approves of media’s exalted power to public press and the accused is
provide the most accurate and highly publicized along with the
comprehensive means of conveying the offense with which he is charged.
proceedings to the public and in Every juror carries with him into
acquainting the public with the judicial the jury box these solemn facts and
process in action; nevertheless, within the thus increases the chance of
courthouse, the overriding consideration prejudice that is present in every
is still the paramount right of the accused criminal case. X xx
to due process which must never be
allowed to suffer diminution in its 3. The quality of the testimony in
constitutional proportions. Justice Clark criminal trials will often be
thusly pronounced, “while a maximum impaired. The impact upon a
freedom must be allowed the press in witness of the knowledge that
carrying out the important function of he is being viewed by a vast
informing the public in a democratic audience is simply incalculable.
society, its exercise must necessarily be Some may be demoralized and
subject to the maintenance of absolute frightened, some cocky and
fairness in the judicial process.” give to overstatement;
memories may falter, as will
Is television coverage of trial of an anyone speaking publicly, and
accused denial of due process? Why? accuracy of statement may be
severely undermined. X xx.
Yes. The Supreme Court citing Estes v. Indeed, the mere fact that the
Teves, the United States Supreme Court
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 94
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

trial is to be televised might coverage will inevitably result


render witnesses reluctant to in prejudice.”
appear and thereby impede the
trial as well as the discovery of Live television and radio coverage
the truth. could have mischievous
4. A major aspect of the problem potentialities for intruding upon
is the additional the detached atmosphere that
responsibilities the presence of should always surround the
television places on the trial judicial process.
judge. His job is to make
certain that the accused What measure is adopted in the
receives a fair trial. This most admissibility of out-of-court
difficult task requires his identification of an accused? Explain.
undivided attention. X xx
In resolving the admissibility of
5. Finally, we cannot ignore the
and relying on out-of-court identification
impact of courtroom television
of suspects, courts have adopted the
on the defendant. Its presence
totality of circumstances test where they
is a form of mental - if not
consider the following factors, viz: (1) the
physical – harassment,
witness’ opportunity to vie the criminal at
resembling a police line-up or
the time of the crime; (2) the witness’
the third degree. The inevitable
degree of attention at that time; (3) the
close-up of his gesture and
accuracy of any prior description given by
expressions during the ordeal
the witness; (4) the level of certainty
of his trial might well
demonstrated by the witness at the
transgress his personal
identification; (5) the length of time
sensibilities, his dignity, and his
between the crime and the identification;
ability to concentrate on the
and (6) the suggestiveness of the
proceedings before him –
identification procedure.” People v.
sometimes the difference
Macapanas
between life and death –
dispassionately, freely and As a result of an audit report by the
without the distraction of wide COA on Selected Transactions
public surveillance. A &WalisTingting for the City of
defendant on trial for a specific Parañaque, several anomalies were
crime is entitled to his day in discovered. The COA disallowed
court, not in a stadium, or a city certain transactions, and accused was
or nationwide arena. The charged with violation of the Anti-Graft
heightened public clamor and Corrupt Practices Act. Before
resulting from radio television arraignment, Mayor Joey Marquez filed
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 95
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA

a motion seeking referral of the defend himself as long as the steps to be


disbursement vouchers, purchase taken will not be in violation of the
requests and authorization requests to rules.Joey Marquez v. SB
the NBI, but the SB denied it ruling that
the court can validly determine forgery
from its own independent examination
of the documentary evidence as he
interposed the defense forgery. Is the
denial correct? Why?

No, as it deprived the accused of the right


to due process. The accused bears the
burden of submitting evidence to prove
the fact that his signatures were indeed
forged. In order to be able to discharge his
burden, he must be afforded reasonable
opportunity to present evidence to
support his allegation. This opportunity is
the actual examination of the signatures
he is questioning by no less than the
country’s premier investigative force –
the NBI. If he is denied such opportunity,
his only evidence on this matter is
negative testimonial evidence which is
generally considered as weak. And, he
cannot submit any other examination
result because the signatures are on the
original documents which are in the
control of either the prosecution or the
graft court.

He should not be deprived of his right to


present his own defense. How the
prosecution, or even the court, perceives
his defense to be is relevant. To them, his
defense may seem feeble and his strategy
frivolous, but he should be allowed to
adduce evidence of his own choice. The
court should not control how he will

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM


"A person who fall and gets back up is much stronger than a person who never fell"
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY

Page | 96