KEY POINTS OF DISCUSSIONS ON RECORDINGS

SECTION 5

Priest
Are subject to tax whether in the exercise of donation or compensation
income tax ( Lladoc vs commissioner of internal revenue case comparison)

Constitution only prohibits that there should be no religious test in civil and
political right

Benevolent neutrality
What is the test of determining the validity of governmental regulation affecting
religious expression?
1.-Clear and Present danger test
This is applied whenever there are other constitutional rights
involved religious freedom is invoked in conjunction w. Such other rights.
(speech, press or expression)
2. Compelling state interest
A. Has the statute or govt action created a burden on the free exercise
of religion
B. Is there a sufficiently compelling state interest to justify this
infringement of religious liberty
C. Third, the court asks: Has the state in achieving its legitimate
purposes used the least intrusive means possible so that the free
exercise is not infringed any more than necessary to achieve the
legitimate goal of the state?"
Why is it that in Gerona vs.Secretary of Education, et al. 106 PhiL2 (1959),
school children were compelled to salute the flag resulting in their expulsion
when they refused?Explain.
This was so because it was predicted that:"The flag ceremony wi
become a thing of the past or perhaps conducted with very few
participants, and the time will come when we would have citizens untaught
and inculcated in and not imbued reverence for the flag and love of country
admiration for national heroes, and patriotism. A pathetic, even tragic
situation, and all because a small portion of the school population imposed
its will demanded, and was granted an exemption.

What caused the Supreme Court in Ebralinag to uphold the exemption of the
Jehovah's Witnesses from saluting the flag? Explain.
It was the conviction that by exempting them from saluting the
flag,singing the national anthem, and reciting the patriotic pledge, this
small group which admittedly compromises a small portion of the school
population WILL NOT shake up this part of the globe and suddenly
produce a nation untaught and inculcated in and not imbued with
reverence for the flag and love of country,or admiration for national heroes.
Afterall, what they were merely asking is exemption from flag ceremony,
not exclusion from the public schools where they may study the
Constitution, the democratic way of life and of government and learn not
only hearts,sciences,Philippine history and culture, but also receive training
for a vocation or profession and be taught the virtue of patriotism, respect
for human rights,appreciation of national heroes, rights and duties of
citizenship, moral and spiritual values.
LIBERTY OF ABODE AND TRAVEL
SECTION 6“The liberty of abode and
of changing the same within the limits
prescribed by law shall not be
impaired except upon lawful order of
the court. Neither shall the right to
travel be impaired except in the
interest of national security, public
safety or public health, as may be
provided by law.
Q: What is liberty of abode?
ANS – Right to change one’s place. it
is the right of a person to have his
home in whatever place chosen by
him and thereafter to change it at will.
Q: Is it same as the right to travel?
ANS - No, However, they are distinct
constitutional right
Q: Is this an absolute right?
ANS – liberty of abode cannot be
impaired except upon lawful order of
the court. The lawful order of the
court is one of the limitation of
Section 6.
2 valid impairment
1. Law
2. Valid order of the court
RIGHT TO TRAVEL INCLUDES
1. RIGHT TO LEAVE THE
PHILIPPINES OR GO TO A
FOREIGN STATE
2. RIGHT TO TRAVEL WITHIN
THE PHILIPPINES
RIGHT TO RETURN TO THE
PHILIPPINES IS NOT INCLUDED
- As generally accepted principle
of international law and thus,
part of the law of the land.
HOW MAY RIGHT TO TRAVEL BE
IMPAIRED?
As may be provided by law.
ONLY CONGRESS CAN VALIDLY
IMPAIR THE RIGHT TO TRAVEL
Provided that
Without prejudice to authority of
courts of justice to validly impair such
right.
Limitations on the right to travel:
Interest of national security,
public safety or public health, as may
be provided by law
a. A lawful order of the court
-Is also a valid restriction on the right
to travel
B. sec 6 art 3 should be interpreted
to mean that whole the liberty travel
may be impaired even without court
order. The appropriate executive
officers or administrative authorities
are not armed with arbitrary
discretions o imposing limitations.
They can impose limits only on the
basis of “national security,public
safetyor public health and as may be
provided by law”.
C. Art. 13(2), Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, provide that everyone
has the right to leave any country,
including his own, and to return to his
country.
d) Art. 12(4), Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, provide that no
one shall be arbitrarily deprived of
the right to enter his own country.
Q: What are the basis of
administrative officers when
curtailing the right to travel?
ANS​ – National security, public
safety, and public health. Silverio vs.
Court of Appeals. Right to travel to
one’s country as long as impairment
is not arbitrary.
MARCOS VS MANGLAPUS
Residual power is exercised by
president Aquino.
Residual power
Residual meaning in
vernacular is “Latak or tira tira lang”
It means that is the power that
is inherent to the government but it
does not pertain. Belong to any
specific branch of the government.
JAR illustration by ATTY GAB.
Why does this power belong to the
president?
Because President is the HEAD OF
THE STATE
Right to return to the
philippinesCan be impaired
​as long as the impairment is
not arbitrary in accordance with the
express provision of civil and political
rights.
BAIL RESTRICTS THE RIGHT TO
TRAVEL
ADMINISTRATIVE POWER TO
IMPAIR
Supreme Court noted that:
The phrase​ “ as may be
provided by law” is intended to curtail
the abuses that may be committed by
a singular administrative agency”
Now ​As may provided by law
intend to limit the authority of
administrative agency by allowing
them to only impair the right to
travel if they are authorized by law
and the purpose of impairment is in
furtherance of national security,
public safety or public health.
Meaning​ that administrative
agencies do not exercise unlimited
discretion on arbitrary determination
of whether to impair the exercise of
that right.

THE COURTS CAN IMPAIR THE

RIGHT TO TRAVEL
-​Some instances with regard to right
to bail may impair such right.
Because it is one of the essential
requisites of the right to bail is that
the accused shall at all times be
available to the calls of the court
when placed on such bail.
Which implies.
-once the courts acquires jurisdiction
over the person of the accused, the
latter is subject in compulsory
processes of the courts. The courts
can issue decisions, resolutions over
the accused and such freedom of
movement can be regulated.
RIGHT TO INFORMATION
Right to information. Sec. 7, Art.
Ill:
“​The​ right of the people to
information on matters of public
concern shall be recognized.
Access ​to official records, and to
documents and papers pertaining to
official acts, transactions, or
decisions, as well as to government
research data used as basis for
policy development shall be afforded
the citizen, subject to such limitations
as may be provided by law”.
Meaning of Recognition on the
first part
-​There is a corollary obligation on the
part of the document to respect it and
to respect it.
Right to information (sec 7 art 3)
and the policy of full public
disclosure(sec 28 art 2) :
- Are in a “splendid
symmetry”
BECAUSE​ the right to information
can only be considered to be a
meaningful right if there is a
corresponding commitment on the
part of the government to disclose
the information.
SCOPE OF THE RIGHT:
Right to information contemplates
1)​inclusion of negotiations or
stages leading to the
consummation of the transaction​,
Otherwise the people can never
exercise the right if no contract is
consummated, or if one is
consummated it may be too late for
the public to expose its defects.
2)Documents​ and as well as other
3)​government research data as
basis on policy development
However, the right only affords
access to records, documents and
papers
-which means the opportunity to
inspect and copy them at his
expense.
The exercise is also subject to
reasonable regulations to protect the
integrity of public records and to
minimize disruption of governmental
operations.
TEST OF Matters of Public
Concern:
“Public concern” like : Public interest”
is a term that eludes exact definition.
Both terms embrace a broad
spectrum of subjects which the public
may want to know either because:
(a) These directly affect their lives
or;
(b) Such matters naturally arouse
the interest of an ordinary
citizen

So whenever there is no law
prohibiting the disclosure of the
information​ and such information is
a matter of public concern or interest,
the government has no choice but
only to regulate the manner and type
of disclosure but cannot prohibit it
outright.
Even without law THESE
information can be withheld from
disclosure which are the
EXCEPTIONS:
This right does not extend to matters
recognized as
1.privileged information rooted in
separation of powers​, nor to
2​.information on ​military and
diplomatic secrets​,
3.​ information affecting n​ational
security​, and
4.​ ​information on investigations of
crimes by law enforcement
agencies BEFORE the actual
detention, actual apprehension,
actual arrest or actual prosecution
of the accused​.
(Chavez v PEA and AMARI)
Limitations on the right to
information
made in chavez vs pcgg
(a) National security Matters
(b) Trade secrets and Banking
Transactions
(c) Criminal matters
(d) Other confidential
information ​such as closed
door cabinet meetings,
executive sessions of either
congress, internal deliberations
of the supreme court or
Diplomatic correspondence
RIGHT TO INFORMATION IS A
SELF-EXECUTING ACT
It became operative upon
ratification of the 1987 consti.
Right of information vs
Information from disclosure
ROI
Merely relates to issues of public
concern
DISCLOSURE
Relates more to public interest
CONGRESS CAN ONLY PROVIDE
LIMITATIONS ON RIGHT TO
INFORMATIONS
3 purposes of a valid reasonable
regulation:
1) ​Prescribing the time and manner
of examination to prevent damage to
or lost of the records may be
avoided.
2)​ To prevent that undue interference
with the administrative agencies,
duties of the custodian of the books
and documents and other employees
3) ​Inspections on the documents in
custody may only be allowed 1 hour
per person.
DOCTRINE: Chavez vs PCGG
1.Full public disclosure extends to
information relative to the negotiation
of the public transactions.
- Such information must pertain
to definite propositions of the
government,
- Not necessarily to
intra-agency or inter-agency
recommendations or
communications during the
stage when common
assertions are still in the
process of being formulated or
are in the “​exploratory
stage”.
7 Guidelines made by the SC of
the PRIVILEGED DOCUMENTS OR
COMMUNICATIONS AND ARE NOT
SUBJECT TO DISCLOSURE:
1) COURT ACTIONS
-Such as the result of the raffle
of cases and the actions taken by the
court on each case included in the
agenda of the Court’s session on
acts done material to pending cases,
EXCEPT where a party litigant
request information on the result of
the raffle of the case pursuant to
Rule 7, section 3 of the IRSC
2) COURT DELIBERATIONS
-Deliberations of the members
in court session on cases and
matters pending before the court
3) COURT RECORDS
- Which are
“PREDECISIONAL” and
“DELIBERATIVE” ​in nature, in
particular, documents and
other communications which
are part of or related to the
deliberative process.
- Such as notes, drafts, research
paper, internal discussions,
internal memoranda, records
of internal deliberations and
similar paper.
4) CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
-Secured by justices, judges,
court officials and employees in the
course of their official functions,
mentioned in (2) and (3) above are
privileged even after their term of
office.
5) RECORDS OF CASES THAT
ARE STILL PENDING FOR
DECISION
-​Are privileged materials that
cannot be disclosed, except only for
pleadings, orders and resolutions
that have been made available by
the court to the general public.
6) THE PRINCIPLE OF COMITY OR
INTERDEPARTMENTAL
COURTESY
-​That the highest officials of
each department be exempt from the
compulsory processes of the other
departments.

7) THESE PRIVILEGES
-​Belong to the Supreme court
as an institution, not to any justice or
judge in his or her individual
capacity, Since the Court is higher
than individual justices or judges, no
sitting or retired justice or judge, not
even the Chief Justice, may claim
exception without the consent of the
court.
- Meaning that without the
authority or conformity of the
SUPREME COURT no member of
the court can disclose that
information, even if that member of
the court would want to volunteer to
give the information.
(ACCORDING TO THE SUPREME
COURT IN THE CASE OF
CORONA)
RIGHT TO FORM ASSOCIATION
SEC 8:
“​The right of the people, including
those employed in the public and
private sectors, to form unions,
associations or societies for
purposes not contrary to law shall not
be abridged.” The right is reinforced
by Sec. 2(5), Art 9-b, and sec 3 par.
2 art 13.
“EVERY WORD IS DELIBERATE
MEANING EVERY WORD HAS ITS
MEANING”
-ATTY GAB
SCOPE:
-​The right to form, or join,
unions or associations, includes the
right not to join or, if one is already a
member, to disaffiliate from the
association.
-In (Volkschel Labor Union v
Bureau of Labor Relation,) the right
of a labor union to disaffiliate from a
labor federation was held to be part
of the right to association.
The phrase “those employed in
the public and private sectors,”
-That phrase only underscores
or emphasizes the privacy of the right
of association of those who are
employed in the public and private
sector
BUT is not limitive and only
emphasizes the right to
association.
THEREFORE
- JOBLESS INDIVIDUALS ​can
too enjoy this provision of sec
8 of article 3 right to form
association.
THE RIGHT TO STRIKE:
Even if the provision expressly
guarantees the right to form unions in
public and private sectors,
Members of the civil service
may not declare a strike to enforce
economic demands (Alliance of
Goverment Workers v Ministry of
Labor and Employment)
BANGALISAN V CA
The ability to strike is not essential to
the right of association
RIGHT OF THE SOVEREIGN TO
PROHIBIT STRIKES OR WORK
STOPPAGES BY PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES
Was clearly recognized at
common law; thus, it has been
frequently declared that modern rules
which prohibit strikes, either by
statute or by judicial decision, simply
incorporate or reassert the common
law rules.
THE RIGHT IS NOT ABSOLUTE
1) In ​(​People vs Ferrer​) It was held
that the ​anti-subversion act​ does
not violate this provision, because
the purpose of the statue was to
outlaw only those organizations
aimed at the violent overthrow of the
government and that the government
has a right to protect itself against
subversion is a proposition too plain
to require elaboration.
2) (Occeana v Comelec) ​It was held
that the right to association was not
violated when ​political parties were
prohibited​ from participating in the
barangay elections in order to insure
the non-partisanship of candidates;
political neutrality is needed to
discharge the duties of barangay
officials.
3) (Victoriano v. Elizalde Rope
Workers Union, supra.,reiterated
in Gonzales v. Central Azucarera
de Tarlac,) ​the Supreme Court
upheld the validity of ​RA 3350,
allowing workers to dissociate
from or not to join a labor union​,
despite a closed shop agreement, if
they are members of any religious
sect which prohibits affiliation of their
members in any such labor
organization.
4) (UNITED PEPSI COLA
SUPERVISORY UNION V
LAGUESMA) ​It was held that art 245
of the Labor Code which makes
MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES
INELIGIBLE TO JOIN, ASSIST OR
FORM A LABOR UNION​, does not
violate sec 8 art 3.Those who qualify
as top or middle managers are
executives who receive from their
employers information that is not only
confidential but also not generally
available to the public, or to their
competitors, or to other employees.
And, finally, in In Re: Edition, 84
SCRA 554, it was held that
compulsory membership of a lawyer
in the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines does not violate the
constitutional guarantee.
WORKERS EMPLOYED IN THE
PUBLIC SECTOR ARE ALLOWED
TO ASSOCIATE
-The law did not distinguish between
employees of public and private
sector; thus, they can associate.
-However, those employed in the
public sector are prohibited from
engaging in a strike.
PUBLIC OFFICERS
-are not allowed strike
DOCTRINE
(SSS Employees association vs CA)
THE RIGHT TO STRIKE IS NOT
INCLUDED IN THE GUARANTEE
OF ASSOCIATION TO
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES.
REMEDY OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
-Government employees may,
therefore, through their unions or
associations, either petition the
Congress for the betterment of the
terms and conditions of employment
which are within the ambit of
legislation or negotiate with the
appropriate government agencies for
the improvement of those which are
not fixed by law .
-If there are any unresolved
grievances, the dispute may be
referred to the Public Sector
Labor-Management Council for
appropriate action .
-But employees in the civil
service may not resort to strikes,
walkouts and other temporary work
stoppages, like workers in the private
sector, to pressure the Government
to accede to their demands.
Q:
Is a closed-shop agreement a
violation of the right to associate?
A:
No. He is free to accept or not the
employment contract containing the
agreement.
DOCTRINE:
Victoriano vs Elizalde Rope
Workers’ Union
-​The right to join associations
includes the right not to join.
Q: May the right to Association be
bargained through a medium of
contract?
A:
No, Because it is a fundamental right.
DOCTRINE:
IN RE: IBP MEMBERSHIP DUES
DELINQUENCY OF ATTY.
MARCIAL EDILLON
-​The right to association is not
violated by integrating the bar.
-The SC maintains that the IBP
does not make a lawyer a member of
any group of which he is not already
a member of.​ By virtue of his
passing the Bar exams,​ ​Edillon
automatically becomes an IBP
member.
-To compel a lawyer to be a
member of the Integrated Bar is not
violative of his constitutional freedom
to associate.​ Integration does not
make a lawyer a member of any
group of which he is not already a
member.​ He became a member of
the Bar when he passed the Bar
examinations. All that integration
actually does is to provide an official
national organization for the
well-defined but unorganized and
incohesive group of which every
lawyer is already a member.
-​Bar integration does not
compel the lawyer to associate
with anyone. He is free to attend or
not attend the meetings of his
Integrated Bar Chapter or vote or
refuse to vote in its elections as he
chooses. The ​only compulsion to
which he is subjected is the
payment of annual dues​. S ​ uch
compulsion is justified as an
exercise of the police power of the
state​. The Court further maintains
that said IBP fees is a regulatory
measure intended to raise funds for
carrying out its objectives and
purposes of the integration.
“RIGHT OF EXPROPRIATION”
SEC.9: ​Private property shall not be
taken for public use without just
compensation.
(see discussion in Eminent Domain)
“NON-IMPAIRMENT OF
CONTRACT”
SEC 10:​ “No law impairing the
obligation of contracts shall be
passed”
(See louie notes)
“FREE ACCESS TO COURTS”
SEC 11: “​Free access to courts and
quasi-judicial bodies and adequate
legal assistance shall not be denied
to any person by reason of poverty”
(See LOUIE NOTES AGAIN)
CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION
SEC 12: “ ​(1) Any person under
investigation for the commission of
an offense shall have the right to be
informed of his right to remain silent
and to have competent and
independent counsel preferably of
his own choice. If the person cannot
afford the services of counsel, he
must be provided with one. These
rights cannot be waived except in
writing and in the presence of
counsel.
(2) No torture, force, violence, threat,
intimidation, or any other means
which vitiate the free will shall be
used against him. Secret detention
places, solitary, incommunicado, or
other similar forms of detention are
prohibited.
(3) Any confession or admission
obtained in violation of this or section
17 hereof shall be inadmissible in
evidence against him.
(4) The law shall provide for penal
and civil sanctions for violations of
this section as well as compensation
to the rehabilitation of victims of
torture of similar practices, and their
families.
WHO ARE LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICERS?
-​These are officers who are in
charge of enforcing the law and have
the duty to prosecute.
WHEN DOES CUSTODIAL
INVESTIGATION BEGIN?
-​From the moment the person is take
into custody, custodial investigation
begins even if no questioning is yet
elicited from him.
-So custodial investigation begins
when a person is taken into custody
and the law enforcement officer
starts to ask question in relation to a
crime of which the person being
interrogated is a suspect, so
custodial investigation begins when
the questioning ceases to be a
general inquiry in an unsolved crime,
and starts to focus on a particular
individual as a suspect.
UNDER RA 7438
-​The practice of issuing an invitation
to a person who is investigated in
connection with an offense on which
a suspect, of which is suspected to
have committed the crime, it is the
liability of the inviting officer.
WHAT ARE THE RIGHT OF A
PERSON UNDER CUSTODIAL
INVESTIGATION ACCORDING TO
THE SC IN THE CASE OF PP VS
AYSON
1) ​Right to remain silent and to have
competent and independent counsel
preferably of his own choice.
2) ​Right to be informed of his rights.
3) ​Not to be subjected to violence,
force, threat, or intimidation or any
means which vitiates the free will
shall be used against him. Secret
detention places, solitary in
communicado, or other similar forms
of detention are prohibited.
4)​ To have evidence obtained in the
violation of these rights excluded as
evidence. ( The right not to admit any
evidence in violation of his
constitutional rights )
RIGHT TO BAIL
SEC13:
[Sec. 13, Art. Ill: “All persons,
except those charged with
offenses punishable by reclusion
perpetua when evidence of guilt is
strong, shall, before conviction, be
bailable by sufficient sureties, or
be released on recognizance as
may be provided by law. The right
to bail shall not be impaired even
when the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus is suspended.
Excessive bail shall not be
required. ’’]
Bail​ is the security given for the
release of a person in custody of the
law, furnished by him or a bondsman,
conditioned upon his appearance
before any court as may be required
[Rule 114, Sec. 1, Rules of Court],
The right to bail emanates​ from the
right to be presumed innocent.
2 kinds of Bail
1) As a matter of right
2) discretionary
Forms of Bail
1) Cash deposits
2) Corporate surety
3) Property bond
4) Recognizance
Is hearing required for bail?
-Yes, hearing is required even if it is
a matter of right in order to determine
the amount of bail.
VOLUNTARY SURRENDER AND
POST BAIL
So one must not wait to be arrested.
INSTANCE WHERE A PERSON
NOT CHARGED CAN POST BAIL.
=A WITNESS CAN POST BAIL. TO
GUARANTEE APPEARANCE
WHEN THE COURT NEEDS HIM
(4) duties of
Judge
1. Notify the prosecutor after hearing
of the application for bail or require
him to submit his recommendation. 2.
Conduct the hearing of the
application for bail.
3. Decide whether the evidence of
guilt of the accused is strong based
on summary hearing.
4. If the guilt of the accused is not
strong, discharge the accused upon
the approval of the bail bond,
otherwise, petition should be denied.
Q: is there any circumstance that
bail is a matter of right?
A: offense not punishable by death,
reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment when evidence of guilt
is not strong
Q:when is bail matter of discretion
A:
Upon conviction by the Regional Trial
Court of an offense not
punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua, or life imprisonment,
admission to bail is discretionary.
The application for bail may be
filed and acted upon by the trial
court despite the filing of a notice
of appeal, provided it has not
transmitted the original record to the
appellate court.
However, if the decision of the trial
court conviction the accused
changed the nature of the offense
from non-bailable to bailable, the
application for bail can only be filed
with and resolved by the appellate
court. (Section 5 Rule 114)
Q: is there other instance when
bail is matterof discretion
​A:when the offense charged is
punishable by RP, Life imprisonment
or death . the court will exercise its
discretion to determine the weight of
evidence of guilt.
If the evidence of guilt is strong, the
discretion ceases, the court need to
deny it. Its its not a matter of right nor
discretion.
Similarly,after hearing and the court
exercise its discretion, the court
determines that the evidence of guilt
is weak the discretion cease. The
court has no choice but to grant it
because bails becomes a matter of
right
four fold application of the court
whenever the application of bail is
filed before the court
A​: In​ Basco v. Rapatalo​, the
Supreme Court laid down the four
fold duties of the court;
1​)Notify the prosecutor of the hearing
of the application for bail or require
him to submit his recommendation
2​)Conduct a hearing for the
application for bail regardless of
whether or not the prosecution
refuses to present evidence to show
that the guilt of the accused is strong
for the purpose of enabling the court
to exercise its sound discretion
3)​Decide whether the evidence of the
guilt of the accused is strong based
on the summary of evidence of the
prosecution.
4​)If the guilt of the accused is not
strong, discharge the accused upon
the
approval of the bail bond otherwise
deny the application for bail.
Purpose of the hearing when bail
is a matter of right​.
- ​to know the reasonable amount
of bail​. that is the only issue in a
hearing when bail is a matter of right.
But in practice upon the issuance of
a warrant of arrest there is already a
recommended amount of bail. The
accused may file a motion​ in order
to reduce the amount of bail​, and
that is the time when a hearing for
the determination of the reasonable
amount of bail shall be established
by the court.
Purpose of the hearing when bail
is a matter of discretion.
-​weight of evidence and fixing the
reasonable amount of bail.
factors that the court should
consider in determining the
amount of bail under sec9 rule 114
a​)​Financial ability​ of the accused to
give bail
b​)​Nature and circumstances​ of the
offense
c)Penalty​ for the offense charged
d)Character and reputation​ of the
accused
e​)​Age and health​ of the accused
f)Weight of the evidence​ against
the accused
g​)​Probability of the accused
appearing​ at the trial
h​)​Forfeiture​ of the bail
i)​The ​fact that the accused was a
fugitive​ from justice when arrested
j)Pendency of other cases​ where
the accused is on bail these factors
are not exclusive, other factors may
be considered by the court
RIGH TO BAIL IS A WAIVABLE
RIGHT, AND NO REQUIRED
FORMALITY.
3 day motion rule
Yes​. In Baylon v. Judge Sison the
Supreme court ruled that the reason
given by the respondent judge that
the non observance of the three day
motion rule is justified because of the
urgent motion for the petition for bail
and time is of the essence is
untenable.
what are the substantive basis of
this?
right to be heard. Right of the
prosecution the opportunity to
prepare in order to establish the
weight of evidence.
ONLY EXCEPTION TO THE
GENERAL RULE
WHEN SUCH ACCUSED WAS
CONVICTED WITH FINAL
JUDGEMENT AND ​FILE FOR
PROBATION​.
=HE WILL BE ALLOWED TO POST
BAIL.

PNP IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE

MARTIAL COURT. AND IS NOT
SAME WITH AFP.
BECAUSE PNP ARE CIVILIANS.

IN EXTRADITION CASES TP BE
ABLE TO POST BAIL
CLEAR AND CONVINCING
EVIDENCE.

RIGHTS OF THE
ACCUSED
SEC 14:
1) No person shall be held to answer
for a criminal offense without due
process of law.
2) In all criminal prosecutions, the
accused shall be presumed innocent
until the contrary is proved, and shall
enjoy the right to be heard by himself
and counsel, to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation
against him, to have a speedy,
impartial and public trial, to meet the
witnesses face to face, and to have
compulsory process to secure the
attendance of 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
appear is unjustifiable.
PART NOT RELEVANT
TRIAL IN ABSENTIA because not right of
the accused but right of the prosecution.
What is the consequence of trial in
absentia?
A:
The accused waived his right to appear in
the trial. He cannot present evidence. He
cannot be present in person or in counsel.
He loses his legal standing.
When is the Presence of the Accused
Mandatory
A:
1​. D​ uring arraignment and plea​ (Rules of
Court, Rule 116, Sec. 1).
2​. D ​ uring trial, for identification​, unless
the accused has already stipulated on his
identity during the pre-trial and that he is the
one who will be identified by the witnesses
as the accused in the criminal case; or
3​.​ During promulgation of sentence​,
unless for a light offense (Rules of Court,
Rule 120, Sec. 6). Upon the termination of a
trial in absentia, the court has the duty to
rule upon the evidence presented in court.
The court need not wait for the time until the
accused who escaped from custody finally
decides to appear in court to present his
evidence and cross-examine the witnesses
against him. To allow the delay of
proceedings for this purpose is to render
ineffective the constitutional provision on
trial in absentia (People v. Mapalao)
What is the difference between section 1
and section 7​ (both in article 3 or the 1987
consti)?
ANS –
Section 14 only pertains to criminal
proceedings, and it applies to criminal due
process. Section 14 also applies to the
rights of an accused. On the other hand,
section 1 pertains to any kind of
proceedings. It also covers both substantive
and procedural due process; thus, it applies
to all parties in the proceedings.
DELAY IN PRELIMINARY
INVESTIGATION
Will result in the dismissal of the case.
Justice delayed is justice denied.
May an accused tried in absentia be
convicted in absentia likewise appeal in
absentia?
A:
This is one the issue in the case of People
v. Mapalao, the Supreme court ruled that
the​ accused while at large, cannot seek
relief from the court​ as he is ​deemed to
have waived his right ​and has no standing
in court. Upon promulgation of the
judgment, he failed to appear without
justifiable cause although his bondsmen
and counsel were given notice, he is
therefore waived his right to appeal.
"By reasonable doubt
is not meant that which of possibility
may arise, but it is that doubt engendered
by an investigation of the whole proof and
an inability, after such investigation, to let
the mind rest easy upon the certainty of
guilt.
Absolute certainty of guilt is not
demanded by the law to convict of any
criminal charge but “moral certainty”
-and this certainty is required as to every
proposition of proof requisite to constitute
the offense."
DIRECT EVIDENCE
is required to in order to sustain conviction
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
Is not enough to warrant conviction
EQUIPOISE RULE
= it is applied in order to assess a specific
type of evidence. Not to determine whether
the accused is to be acquitted or convicted.
Because once the accused was able to
establish even an iota of reasonable doubt,
the court has no choice but to acquit him.
Eg, by atty gab.
2 columns of evidence one to acquit 1 to
convict. 4th evidence will establish the 50
percent then apply equipoise rule in the
evidence.
CORPORATIONS MAY COMMIT
CRIMINAL ACT, BUT ONLY THE
DIRECTORS AND THE OFFICERS CAN
ONLY BE INDICTED NOT THE
CORPORATION ITSELF.
=Corporation is not included with this right.
4 obligations of the court
1​. t​ o inform​ the defendant his right to
have an attorney before being
arraigned.
2​. T ​ o ask ​if he wishes to be
represented by a counsel
3​. If he so desires, and is unable to
employ an attorney, the court must
assign​ attorney de officio to assist
him.
4.​ If the accused decided to procure
an attorney of its own, the court
must grant​ him a reasonable time
thereof.
RIGHT TO COUNSEL
=IS A WAIVABLE RIGHT. ​With accordance
to rule 115.
elements of the general right to be heard
It includes:
1)​ the right to be present at trial;
2)​ the right to counsel;
3)​ the right to an impartial judge;
4)​ the right of confrontation; and
5)​ the right to compulsory process to secure
the attendance of witnesses.
Suspension of the
WHEN AVAILABLE
Privilege of the Writ of 1 ​Illegal detention cases
2​ Custody cases.
HABEAS CORPUS
When available. Habeas corpus
Sec 15:
restores the liberty of an individual
The privilege of the writ of habeas
subjected to physical restraint.
corpus shall not be suspended
=The high prerogative of the writ was
except in cases of invasion or
devised and exists as a speedy and
rebellion when public safety requires
effectual remedy to relieve persons
it.
from unlawful restraint and is the best
Definition of a writ of habeas
and only sufficient defense of
corpus:
personal freedom.
“A writ issued by a court directed to a
= It secures to the prisoner the right
person detaining another,
to have the cause of his detention
commanding him to produce the
examined and determined by a court
body of the prisoner at a designated
of justice, and to have the issue
time and place, with the day cause of
ascertained as to whether he is held
his caption and detention, to do, to
under lawful authority.
submit to, and to receive whatever
the court or judge awarding the writ
Suspension of privilege does not
shall consider in his behalf.”
suspend right to bail

PURPOSE
two (2) conditions must concur for
=To determine the legality of arrest
the valid exercise of the authority
or detention.
to suspend the privilege to the
=Only the privilege is suspended
writ, to wit:
NOT the writ of habeas corpus.
(a)​ there must be "invasion,
insurrection, or rebellion" or —
If after the writ has been served
pursuant to paragraph
and an answer has been produced
(2), section 10 of Art. VII of the
stating that the person is detained
Constitution — "imminent danger
due to rebellion or invasion
thereof," and
=​The custodial is not compelled to
(b)​ "public safety" must require the
produce the body.
suspension of the privilege. The
Presidential Proclamation under
consideration declares that there has
been and there is actually a state of
rebellion and that "public safety
requires that immediate and effective
action be taken in order to maintain
peace and order, secure the safety of
the people and preserve the authority
of the State."
Sec. 4. ​When writ not allowed or
discharged authorized.​ —
=If it appears that the person alleged
to be restrained of his liberty is in the
custody of an officer under process
issued by a court or judge
=or by virtue of a judgment or order
of a court of record, and that the
court or judge had jurisdiction to
issue the process, render the
judgment
; or make the order, the writ shall not
be allowed;
or if the jurisdiction appears after the
writ is allowed, the person shall not
be discharged by reason of any
informality or defect in the process,
judgment, or order.
Nor shall anything in this rule be
held to authorize the discharge of a
person charged with or convicted of
an offense in the Philippines, or of a
person suffering imprisonment under
lawful judgment.
A writ of habeas corpus
=(literally to "produce the body") is a
court order to a person (prison
warden) or agency (institution)
holding someone in custody to
deliver the imprisoned individual to
the court issuing the order.
“​In case of invasion or rebellion​,
when the public safety requires it,
(the President) may,
​for a period not exceeding sixty
days​, suspend the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus x x x .
Within forty- eight hours​ from x x x
the suspension of the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus, the President
shall submit a report in person or in
writing to the Congress.
The Congress,​ voting jointly​, by a
vote of at least a majority of all its
members in regular or special
session, may revoke such
proclamation or suspension, which
revocation shall not be set aside by
the President.
Upon the initiative of the President,
the ​Congress may, in the same
manner, extend ​such proclamation
or suspension for a period to be
determined by the Congress, if the
invasion or rebellion shall persist and
public safety requires it.
The​ Supreme Court may review​, in
an appropriate proceeding filed by
any citizen, the sufficiency of the
factual basis for the proclamation of
martial law or the suspension of the
privilege of the writ or the extension
thereof, and must promulgate its
decision thereon ​within thirty days
from filing,

WRIT OF HABEAS DATA

=​is a remedy available to any person
whose right to privacy in life, liberty
or security is violated or threatened
by an unlawful act of any official or
employee, or of a private individual or
entity engaged in the gathering,
collecting or storing of data or
information.

The writ of habeas data functions

as an​ independent remedy as well
as a complement to the writs of
habeas corpus and amparo—both of
which are aimed at protecting the
right to life, liberty and security,
especially of victims of politically
motivated crimes.

Under the writ of habeas data

= a person can compel the release of
information, or to update, rectify,
suppress or destroy database,
information or files in the control of
the respondents in a petition.

SPEEDY DISPOSITION
OF CASES
SEC 16:
All persons shall have the right to a
speedy disposition of cases before
all judicial, quasi judicial, or
administrative bodies.
In ascertaining whether the right to
speedy disposition of cases has
been violated, the following ​factors
must be considered:
(a)​ the length of the delay;
(b)​ the reasons for the delay;
(c)​ the assertion or failure to assert
such right by the accused; and
(d)​ the prejudice caused by the
delay.
3 instances where speedy
disposition is violated
1)when the proceedings are attended
by vexatious, capricious and
oppressive delays,
2) or when unjustified
postponements of the trial are asked
for and secured,
3) or when without cause or
justifiable motive a long period of
time is allowed to elapse without the
party having his case tried.
Q: ​State the difference between
right to speedy trial and speedy
disposition of cases.
ANS – In speedy disposition of
cases, It involves all proceedings and
involves all parties. It also pertains to
all stages of trial especially during
trial proper. On the other hand,
speedy trial in Section 14 specifically
involves criminal proceedings and is
only intended for the accused. It only
involves trial proceedings and those
anterior to it.
Q: State the difference between
right to speedy trial and speedy
disposition of cases.
ANS – I​n speedy disposition of
cases​, It involves all proceedings
and involves all parties. It also
pertains to all stages of trial
especially during trial proper.
On the other hand, ​speedy trial in
Section 14 ​specifically involves
criminal proceedings and is only
intended for the accused. It only
involves trial proceedings and those
anterior to it.
During trial, how to determine
which would be applied?
ANS –
It basically depends on whose right
was violated. If it is the right of the
prosecution that was violated, refer to
the right to speedy disposition of
cases.
But if it is only the accused, resort to
sec. 14.
Thus, any party to a case may
demand expeditious action on all
officials who are tasked with the
administration of justice

Proceedings before and anterior to

trial are covered by speedy
disposition of cases

But proceedings subsequent to

trial are not included.
 ​ ne may be subjected to physical
O
RIGHT TO SELF-
evidence.
INCRIMINATION According to Justice Holmes:
SEC 18: “The prohibition of compelling a man
No person shall be compelled to be a in a criminal court to be a witness
witness against himself. against himself, is a prohibition of the
use of physical or moral compulsion,
Q: Who are entitled to invoke this to extort communications from him,
right? not an exclusion of his body as
ANS – evidence, when it may be material.
The accused and the ordinary
witness; but not with the same extent
because an accused occupies a
different tier of protection as
compared to ordinary witness. An
ordinary witness may be compelled
to take the witness stand and claim
the privilege as each question
requiring an incriminating answer is
shot at him.
On the other hand, the accused may
altogether refuse to take the witness
stand and refuse to answer any and
all questions. He need not wait for an
incriminating question.
The RATIONALE behind this is for in
reality the purpose of calling an
accused as a witness for the
prosecution would be to incriminate
him.

Q: What is the essence of this

constitutional guarantee?
ANS –
TESTIMONIAL COMPULSION.