Professional Documents
Culture Documents
HELD: The Supreme Court, in ruling this case had to lay down the foundations of right to travel.
The right to travel is part of the “liberty” of which a citizen cannot be deprived without due
process of law. It is part and parcel of the guarantee of freedom of movement that the
Constitution affords its citizen. Pertinently, Section 6, Article III of the Constitution. However,
the right to travel is not absolute. There are constitutional, statutory and inherent limitations
regulating the right to travel. Section 6 itself provides that the right to travel may be impaired
only in the interest of national security, public safety or public health, as may be provided by
law. Clearly, the Constitution has only set three considerations that may permit restriction on the
right to travel. A further requirement, therefore, needs legislative enactment to prevent inordinate
restraints by officials who may be tempted to wield authority under the guise of national security,
public safety or public health. Guided by the foregoing rules and principles, it is ruled that the
issuance of DOJ Circular No. 41 has no legal basis. There is no law particularly providing for
the authority of the secretary of justice to curtail the exercise of the right to travel, in the interest
of national security, public safety or public health. DOJ Circular No. 41 is not a law; it is not
legislative enactment which underwent the scrutiny and concurrence of lawmakers, and
submitted to the President for approval. It is a mere administrative issuance apparently designed
to carry out the provisions of an enabling law which the former DOJ Secretary was assigned to
carry out.