Constitutional Law 2 Dean Tony La Vińa Review Guide

UST Faculty of Law
Course Outline for Constitutional Law II

Second Semester, Academic Year 2020-2021
Dean Antonio Gabriel La Viña
Course scope and objectives
This course will cover the Bill of Rights and related topics like human rights and
environmental justice. It will aim to achieve the following outcomes by the end of the
course:
1. The students will be positioned to perform well in the political law bar exam by
enabling them to answer perfectly all questions on the Bill of Rights;
2. The students will acquire skills that will help them become good lawyers that
can advocate positions of their clients on the Bill of Rights.
3. The students will see a pathway to become a great lawyer and advocate for
the Bill of Rights, human rights, environmental justice, and similar great
causes.
Course requirements and weights
Group exercises (Class discussions, moot courts) 25 %

Prelims (Oral exams) 35 %
Finals (Written and Orals) 40 %
Incentive points
Voluntary recitation – 5 points to be added to Finals
Webinars, forums, etc – 5 points to be added to Group exercises
Classroom Policies
1. Our online classroom is a safe place for students, including for sharing of
ideas and opinions. Everyone is urged to respect each other. The professor is
committed to that as well. Specifically, students will not be insulted, intimidated,
sexually harassed (including so-called "green jokes"), embarrassed, etc. in class
and in other settings. Anyone who feel disrespected by the professor or the
classmates in the context of activities under this course is encouraged to give
immediate feedback directly to the Professor or through the class beadle.
Synchronous sessions and online meetings with the Professor will be recorded to
ensure transparency.
2. Each one’s contribution to the classroom learning experience is considered
valuable and will spell the fruitfulness of the semester. Therefore, everyone is
expected to actively participate in the class discussions and activities. The
professor will track participation using various assessment tools.
3. Plagiarism will NOT be tolerated. The first instance of plagiarism will merit a 0
for that requirement. The second instance will merit a failing grade for the whole
course, and elevation of the issue to the Dean for any possible sanction.
4. The professor will be taking pictures of class activities and post them to social
media platforms. Take note that students do not waive their privacy rights with
this but please inform the Professor if there is a preference not to be
photographed and/or posted.
Consultation Hours
Monday 10am-12pm or by appointment. For purpose of transparency, a third person
should join any such consultation.
You can also request to be Facebook friends. Search for Antonio Gabriel La Viña
(searchable as tonylavs 5) or follow me at twitter or instagram (tonylavs). Personal
messaging or texting the professor directly is prohibited except by the class
beadles. Email is preferred for communicating with the professor. While such
communication can be sent anytime, expect responses only during business hours.
This is intended to avoid communicating with each other during inappropriate hours.
Suggested but not required textbooks:
Constitutional Law, Isagani and Carlo Cruz (2015)

Bar Q and A: Political Law and Public International Law (2020), Prof. Carlo Cruz
I. Module 0: INTRODUCTION
Oedipus Rex http://classics.mit.edu/Sophocles/oedipus.html (Links to an external site.)

Oedipus at Colonus http://classics.mit.edu/Sophocles/colonus.html (Links to an external site.)
Antigone http://classics.mit.edu/Sophocles/antigone.html
Franz Kafka, Before the Law https://www.kafka-online.info/before-the-law.html
W. M. Reisman, Myth system and operational

code https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1018&context=yjil
Franz Kafka, Before the Law

https://www.kafka-online.info/before-the-law.html
A. Initial reflections on Bill of Rights jurisprudence
Aquino, Jr. vs. Enrile, 59 SCRA 18

Garcia-Padilla v. Enrile, 121 SCRA 472 (1983)
Ilagan vs. Enrile, G.R. No. 70748 October 21, 1985
Agcaoli vs Enrile G.R. No. L-68922 July 11, 1986
2
Enrile vs. Salazar G.R. 92163, June 5, 1990
Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan GR 213847 (August 18, 2015)
People vs Sapla G.R. No. 244045. June 16, 2020
Genuino vs De Lima, G.R. No. 197930, APRIL 17, 2018
De Lima vs Guerrero G.R. No. 229781 October 10, 2017
Brocka et. al. vs. Enrile G.R. No. 69863-65 (December 10, 1990)
B. Historical overview of Bill of Rights
*Read the Bill of Rights of all Philippine constitutions from the Malolos to the 1987
Constitution
*United States Constitution Bill of Rights (See amendments)

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.pdf
*French Declaration on the Rights of Man

http://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/conseil-
constitutionnel/root/bank_mm/anglais/cst2.pdf
*The Magna Carta

http://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/articles/magna-carta-english-translation
C. International human rights law
*Universal Declaration on Human Rights

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
*International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights

https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20999/volume-
999-I-14668-English.pdf
*International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CESCR.aspx
*United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf
D. Reframing rights before new technologies and social media
 Vivares vs. STC, G.R. No. 202666 (September 29, 2014)

 Disini, Jr., et al. v. Sec. of Justice, GR no. 203335 (February 18,
2014}
II. MODULE 1. DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION
3
(a) [Knowledge] Enable the student to know and recall Article III, Section 1 of the
1987 Constitution. In particular, enhance comprehension of the following concepts:
 Hierarchy of rights under the Bill of Rights (Doctrine of Preferred

Freedoms)
 Right to life
 Right to liberty
 Right to property
 Due process (substantive and procedural due process)
 Test applied to determine compliance with substantive due process
 Cardinal primary requirements of due process in administrative
proceedings
 Due process in academic disciplinary proceedings
 Due process in labor matters
 Equal protection of the laws
 Test applied to determine compliance with equal protection of the laws
 Test of valid classification
 Standards of review (rational basis, strict scrutiny, intermediate
scrutiny)
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to understand the constitutional limitations to the
powers of the State, identify issues in controversies involving deprivation of life,
liberty or property and equal protection of the laws, and develop the appropriate
framework of analysis, whether in relation to advocacy or adjudication.
Enable the student to understand the requirements of due process in various

settings, from judicial to quasi-judicial, and insist on their due observance.
Enable the student to understand the application of the equal protection of the laws
clause, particularly in relation to the doctrine of hierarchy of rights.
Enable the student to evaluate proposed legislation, as well as statutes that are
passed, for their compliance with the limitation imposed under the due process and
equal protection clauses.
(c) [Value] Enable the graduate to develop a due regard for the standards imposed
under this provision on governmental action and an intuition for acting on the basis of
the protection extended to individuals under this provision.
Enable the graduate to understand developments in the concepts and standards

under this provision and for his legal practice to be thereby informed.
(d) References and materials:
Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due

process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.
Due process
Carino vs. Insular Government 212 U.S. 449 (1909)
4
U.S. v. Toribio, 15 Phil. 85 (1910)
U.S. v. Pompeya, 31 Phil. 245, 253-254 (1915)
Ople v. Torres 293 SCRA 141
Alcuaz v. PSBA 161 SCRA 7
Philcomsat v. Alcuaz 180 SCRA 218
Ynot v. IAC, GR No. 74457, 20 March 1987
Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators v. City Mayor of Manila, 20 SCRA 849
Tanada v. Tuvera, 146 SCRA 446
Ang Tibay v. CIR, 69 Phil 635
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2001
Diosdado Guzman vs. National University, G.R. No. L-6828 July 11, 1986
Cudia vs. PMA Superintendent, GR No. 211362 (February 24. 2015)
Galman vs. Sandiganbayan, 144 SCRA 43
Equal protection
Rubi vs. Provincial Board Mindoro, G.R. No. L-14078, March 7, 1919
Ichong v. Hernandez, 101 Phil. 1155 (1957)
Garcia vs. Drilon G.R. No. 179267 (2013)
Cruz vs. NCIP, G.R. No. 135385. (December 6, 2000)

Biraogo vs. Truth Commission, GR No. 193036 (December 7, 2010)
US Jurisprudence
Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)

Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896)
Lochner vs. New York 198 U.S. 45 (1905)
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)
Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972)
Roe vs. Wade 410 US 113, 35 L ED 2D 147 (1973)
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)
In re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal.4th 757 (2008
US vs. Windsor (June 26, 2013), see
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf
Obergefell vs. Hodges http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf
Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. Vs. Colorado Rights Commission, 584 US ___ (2018)
III. MODULE 2: PERSONAL SECURITY AND PRIVACY
A. Searches and Seizures
 Search (requirements in the issuance of search warrant)

 Arrest (requirements in the issuance of arrest warrant)
5
 Probable cause
 Personal determination by judge
 Valid warrantless search
 Valid warrantless arrest
 Test of reasonableness in warrantless search
 Requisites of plain view search
 Requisites of search of moving vehicle
 Requisites of valid stop and frisk
 Requisites of valid search incident to lawful arrest
 Requisites of consented search
 Exclusionary rule
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to understand the requisites of reasonable searches
and seizures as undertaken by the State through law enforcement, and develop
framework of analysis, whether in relation to advocacy or adjudication.
Enable the student to provide advice in relation to rights in relation to the

implementation of warrantless search and seizure (arrest), under the various
circumstances and context in which they may take place.
Enable the student to advice law enforcement and citizens alike on adherence to
these constitutional requirements.
passed, for their compliance with the limitation imposed under the provision on
searches and seizures.

Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any
purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue
except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after
examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may
produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or
things to be seized.
Stonehill v. Diokno, 20 SCRA 383

Burgos v. Chief of Staff, 133 SCRA 800
Roan v. Gonzales, 145 SCRA 687
Umil v. Ramos, 187 SCRA 311
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1
Manalili v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 113447, October 7, 1997
6
People v. Huang Zhen Hua, G.R. No. 139301, September 29, 2004
Nolasco v. Pano, 139 SCRA 152
People vs Sapla G.R. No. 244045. June 16, 2020
US Jurisprudence
Olmstead vs. U.S., 277 US 438 (Read also the Dissenting Opinion of Justice Brandeis)
Katz vs. U.S., 394 US 347.
Terry vs. Ohio, 392 US 1.
B. Privacy of communication and correspondence
1987 Constitution. In particular, enhance comprehension of the following concepts
and those related to the right of privacy:
 Right of privacy
 Privacy of correspondence and communication
 Right against unreasonable searches and seizures
 Right against self-incrimination
 Exclusionary rule
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to understand the general right of privacy.
Enable the student to analyze disputes that implicate the right of privacy, such as
those related to unreasonable searches and seizures.
Enable the student to develop framework of analysis, whether in relation to advocacy

or adjudication.
Enable the student to evaluate related statutes and proposed legislation, as well as
statutes that are passed, for their compliance with the limitation imposed under the
provision on privacy of communication and correspondence.
Enable the student to familiarize himself or herself with related legislation, such as
the Data Privacy Act.
Enable the student to distinguish the operation of this provision as against the right
against self-incrimination.

7
Section 3. (1) The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable
except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires
otherwise, as prescribed by law.
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be
inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.
Ople v. Torres, 293 SCRA 141

Sabio v. Gordon, G.R. No. 174340, October 17, 2006
Alejano v. Cabuay, G.R. No. 160792, August 25, 2005
Morfe v. Mutuc, 22 SCRA 424
People of the Philippines vs. Andre Marti, 193 SCRA 57.
Pollo vs. Chairperson Karina Constantino-David, G.R. No. 181881, 18 October 2011.
Belo- Henares vs. Guevarra, A.C. No. 11394, 1 December 2016.
See also Writ of Habeas Data (See AM 08-1-16) and R.A. 4200 (Anti-Wiretapping Act).
IV. MODULE 3: THE GREAT FREEDOMS
A. Freedom of speech, of expression, of the press, or the right of the people

peaceably to assemble
1987 Constitution. In particular, enhance comprehension of the following freedoms
and those concepts and tests related to them:
 Freedom of speech and expression

 Freedom of the press
 Right to assemble and petition
 Distinction between content based and content neutral regulation
 Clear and present danger and other tests
 Prior restraint
 Subsequent punishment (libel, cyberlibel)
 When actual malice is required
 Facial challenge as a remedy
 Application to social media
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to understand these rights and freedoms and
appreciate their value for individuals and society.
Enable the student to invoke these rights and freedoms and defend themselves and
others in specific situations
Enable the student to apply concepts and tests to determine (critique and also
defend) the validity of governmental action (legislative and executive) intended to
restrict or punish the exercise of any of these rights and freedoms.
8
Enable the student to reinterpret these rights and freedoms in the context of changes
in communications of new technology (such as cybertechnology) and the emergence
of social media and other new platforms.
Enable the student to analyze and to adjudicate disputes, using rigorous methods of
constitutional interpretation (including resort to precedent), where these rights and
freedoms are invoked.
(c) [Value] Enable the graduate to have a high regard for these political and civil
rights, defending them when they are threatened and exercising them for the good of
society.
Enable the graduate to pursue a career on civil rights advocacy or as a government

official – a politician, a government lawyer, or a judge in charge of protecting and
enhancing these rights in our society.

Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression,

or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the
government for redress of grievances.
New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 US 713

Schenk v. US, 249 US 47
Dennis v. United States, 341 US 494
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 US 444
Eastern Broadcasting v. Dans, Jr., 137 SCRA 628
Gonzales v. COMELEC, 27 SCRA 835
National Press Club vs. COMELEC, 207
US v. O'Brien, 391 US 367
United States v Bustos, 37 Phil. 741 (1918)
Chavez vs. Gonzalez, G.R. No. 168338 (February 15, 2008)
David vs. Arroyo, 489 SCRA 160
Adiong vs Comelec, GR no. 103956 (March 31, 1992)
SWS vs. Comelec, GR no. 147571 (May 5, 2001)
Diocese of Bacolod vs. Comelec. GR No. 205728 (Jan. 21, 2015)
Disini, Jr., et al. v. Sec. of Justice, GR no. 203335 (February 18, 2014}
Gonzalez vs. Katigbak, GR No. L-69500 (July 22, 1985)
Reyes vs. Bagatsing, 125 SCRA 553
Bayan vs. Ermita, GR. no. 169838 (April 25, 2006)
David vs. Arroyo, 489 SCRA 160
B. Freedom of Religion clauses
1987 Constitution. In particular, enhance comprehension of the two freedom of
9
religion clauses in the constitution – establishment and free exercise clauses – and
related concepts and doctrines:
 Free exercise of religion

 Establishment clause - exceptions
 Separation of church and state
 Strict neutrality
 Benevolent neutrality/Accomodation
 Compelling state interest
 Restrictions on prayer and worship in public places
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to understand freedom of religion and appreciate it’s
value for individuals and society.
Enable the student to invoke this freedom and defend themselves and others in
specific situations.
restrict the exercise of this right, or in case of establishment of religion, expand
government actions that may be considered as violating that clause.
constitutional interpretation (including resort to precedent), where freedom of religion
is invoked.
(c) [Value] Enable the graduate to have a high regard for the two freedom of religion
clauses, defending them when they are threatened and exercising them for the good
of society.
Enable the graduate as a lawyer, in private practice or as a government official to

protect and enhance freedom of religion in our society.

Section 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or

prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious
profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be
allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.
Estrada v. Escritor, AM No. P-02-1651, June 22, 2006

Ebralinag v. Div. Of City Schools, 219 SCRA 256
Garces v. Estenzo, 104 SCRA 510
Pamil v. Teleron, 36 SCRA 413
Islamic Dawah Council vs. Executive Secretary, 405 SCRA 497
Request of Muslim Employee in the Different Courts in Iligan City (Re: Office Hours)
A.M. No. 02-2-10-SC, 14 December 2005.
10
In Re: Letter of Tony Q Valenciano on the Holding of Religious Rituals at the Hall of
Justice Building in Quezon City, A.M. no. 10-4-19-SC, 7 March 2017.
C. Liberty of abode and right to travel
1987 Constitution. In particular, enhance comprehension of the freedom of abode
and travel in the constitution and related concepts and doctrines:
 Freedom of abode
 Freedom to travel
 Power of state to regulate these rights
 National security, public safety or public health restrictions
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to understand freedom of abode and right to travel and
appreciate it’s importance for individuals and society.
Enable the student to defend themselves and others in specific situations where
these rights are restricted and violated.
restrict the exercise of these rights.
constitutional interpretation (including resort to precedent), where these rights are
invoked.
(c) [Value] Enable the graduate to have a high regard for the liberty of abode and
right to travel, defending them when they are threatened and exercising them for the
good of society, while appreciating the need for restricting the rights for valid
reasons..

protect and enhance liberty of abode or right to travel in our society, and for the latter
to have the skills to limit their exercise when needed but always in a manner
consistent with the constitution.

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.
Marcos v. Manglapus, 177 SCRA 668
11
Manotoc v. CA, 142 SCRA 149
Yap v. CA, 358 SCRA 564
Villavicencio v. Lukban, 39 Phil. 778
Genuino vs. De Lima, G.R. Nos. 197930, 17 April 2018
Zabal vs Duterte G.R. No. 238467, February 12, 2019
D. Right to information
1987 Constitution. In particular, enhance comprehension of the rights of citizens to
information and related concepts:
 Right to information
 Exceptions to right to information
 Necessity of freedom of information act
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to understand citizens; right to information and
appreciate it’s importance for individuals and society.
Enable the student to advocate this right to information and compel the government
to recognize and implement the right.
defend) the validity of governmental action (legislative and executive) that allows it to
withhold information.
constitutional interpretation (including resort to precedent), where the right to
information is invoked.
(c) [Value] Enable the graduate to have a high regard for the citizens’ right to
information and to advocate them for the good of society.

advocate and enhance the right to information.

Section 7. 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.
Legaspi vs. Civil Service Commission, G. R. No. 72119 (May 29 1987)

Valmonte vs. Belmonte, G.R. No. 74930 (February 13, 1989)
12
Gonzales vs. Narvasa, GR. No. 140835. August 14, 2000
Chavez vs. PCGG GR No. 130716, December 09, 1998
Chavez vs. PEA-Amari Coastal Bay Development Corp. 384 SCRA 152
Rappler, Inc. vs. Bautista, G.R. No. 222702, 5 April 2016
E. Right of association
1987 Constitution. In particular, enhance comprehension of the rights of citizens to
associate and form unions, associations, or societies and related concepts:
 Freedom of association
 Limits to freedom of association
 Right of workers to form unions
 Limitations on public sector unions
 Right to political beliefs and dissent
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to invoke freedom of association and defend
themselves and others in specific situations.
restrict the exercise of this right such as anti-subversion and anti-terrorism laws.
constitutional interpretation (including resort to precedent), where freedom of
association is invoked.
(c) [Value] Enable the graduate to have a high regard for the freedom of association,
defend it when they are threatened and exercising them for the good of society.

protect and enhance freedom of association in our society, while ensuring public
safety and order.

Section 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.
MPSTA v. Laguio, Jr., 200 SCRA 323

Bayan v. Ermita, GR 169838, April 29, 2006
SSS Employees v. CA, 175 SCRA 686
Ang Ladlad vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 190582, April 7, 2010
United Pepsi Cola Union vs. Laguesma 288 SCRA 15
13
V. MODULE 4: RIGHTS TO PROPERTY
A. No unjust taking of private property
1987 Constitution. In particular, enhance comprehension of the power of eminent
domain, including the following concepts:
 Power of expropriation, requisite

 Takings vs police power
 Private vs public purpose
 Expropriation by private citizens and companies
 Just compensation
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to apply the requisites of eminent domain properly and
discern when resort to the power is inappropriate.
defend) the validity of expropriation exercised by government and private entities
constitutional interpretation (including resort to precedent), where eminent domain is
invoked.
(c) [Value] Enable the graduate to have a high regard for the rights to property,
defend it when they are threatened and exercising them for the good of society.

protect and enhance property rights in our society, while recognizing legitimate
societal objectives like social justice.

Section 9. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just
compensation.
Republic v. Castelvi, 58 SCRA 336

Didipio Earth Savers v. Gozun, 485 SCRA 586
De Knecht v. Bautista,100 SCRA 660
Manotoc v. NHA, 150 SCRA 89
Sumulong v. Guerrero, 154 SCRA 461
EPZA v. Dulay, 149 SCRA 305
Small Landowners vs. DAR Sec,, G.R. No. 78742, July 14, 1989
Hacienda Luista vs. PARC, GR No. 171101 (April 24, 2012)
B. Non-impairment of contracts
14
1987 Constitution. In particular, enhance comprehension of the rule on non-
impairment of constitution, including the following concepts:
 Sanctity of contracts
 Distinction between rights and priveleges
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to apply the non-impairment of contracts rules properly
and discern when the rule does not apply.
defend) whether the non-impairment of contacts clause has been properly applied
and invoked.
constitutional interpretation (including resort to precedent), where non-impairment of
contracts is invoked.
(c) [Value] Enable the graduate to have a high regard for rights vested by contacts,
defend them when they are threatened and exercising them for the good of society.
Enable the graduate as a lawyer, in private practice or as a government official, to

protect vested rights in contracts, while recognizing legitimate societal objectives
must be upheld.

Section 10. No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.
Rutter v. Esteban, 93 Phil. 68

Goldenway v. Equitable, GR No. 195540, March 13, 2013
Oposa vs Factoran G.R. NO. 101083. 224 SCRA 792 July 30, 1993
Republic vs. Rosemoor Mining 426 SCRA 517
VI. MODULE 5: Free access to courts, quasi-judicial bodies, adequate legal

assistance
 Access to justice
 Access to courts
 Adequate legal assistance
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to understand the rationale for the protection offered
under Article III, Section 11 and how this has been implemented.
15
passed, and procedural rules promulgated by the Supreme Court for their
compliance with, and implementation of, the standards set under this provision.
Enable the graduate to recognize the role of lawyers in advancing the rights under
this provision.

Section 11. Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal
assistance shall not be denied to any person by reason of poverty.
VII. MODULE 6: RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED FROM INVESTIGATION TO TRIAL
A. Rights under custodial investigation
 Custodial investigation
 Right to remain silent
 Right to counsel
 Competent and independent counsel
 Waiver of rights under custodial investigation
 Critical stages in pre-trial criminal process
 Inadmissible confession or admission
Enable the student to gain basic knowledge of related laws, such as Republic Act
No. 7438 (Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or Under Custodial Investigation)
and Republic Act No. 9745 (Anti-Torture Act of 2019).
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to understand the need to protect the individual
accused within the context of the State making use of its resources in the
prosecution of the accused, and develop framework of analysis, whether in relation
to advocacy or adjudication.
Enable the student to understand the significance of judicial intervention, by way of

adjudication, in order to protect and enhance the rights under custodial investigation
and the rights of the accused.
16
Enable the student to distinguish between related concepts (right to remain silent,
right against self-incrimination and right of privacy).

Section 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 or similar practices,
and their families.
People vs. Duero, 104 SCRA 379

Galman vs. Pamaran, 138 SCRA 294
People vs. Lara, G.R. No. 1999877, 13 August 2012.
People vs. Guillen, G.R. No. 191756, 25 November 2013.
US Jurisprudence
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)

Escobedo v. Illinois 378 U.S. 478 (1964)
Garner v. United States, 424 U.S. 648 (1976)
Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S 477 (1981)
Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 (2004)
Berghuis v. Thompkins, 560 U.S. 370 (2010)
Salinas v. Texas, no. 12-246, U.S. Supreme Court (June 17, 2013).
B. Right to bail
17
 Bail, when a matter of right

 Bail, when discretionary
 Bail and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
(b) [Skill] Enable the student to understand the rationale for the constitutional
protection under the right to bail, specifically being able to distinguish between bail
as a matter of right and when bail is discretionary upon the courts and develop
framework of ,analysis, whether in relation to advocacy or adjudication.

Section 13. 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.
Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan GR 213847 (August 18, 2015)

People vs. Donato, 198 SCRA 131
Yap vs. CA, 358 SCRA 564
C. Right to Criminal Due Process, Presumption of Innocence, Speedy, Impartial and

Public Trial, and to Confront Witnesses)
(a) [Knowledge] Understand the presumption of innocence

Master the rights of the accused, and fully define and understand the meaning and
significance of the following rights of the accused:
 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.
18
(b) [Skill] Connect and develop a cohesive argument involving the rights of the
accused and the more expansive and basic concept of due process
Develop the ability to advise the accused at any point of contact with the law and law
enforcement, from accusation to arrest and detention
(c) [Value] Observe due process
Respect the rights of the accused no matter the accusation and the strength of the
evidence against the accused
Section 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.
U.S. v. Pagaduan November 2 G.R. No. L-12616 (1917)

Conde vs. Rivera, 45 Phil 650
Mejia vs. Pamaran, No. L-56741, April 15, 1988
People vs. Crisologo, 150 SCRA 653
Yusop vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 138859-60, February 22, 2001
Martelino v Alejandro, 32 SCRA106 (March 25, 1970)
Galman vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 72670, 12 September 1986.
In Re: Request for the Live Radio and TV Coverage of the Trial of the Plunder Cases
Against Joseph Estrada, A.M. No. 00-1-4-03-SC, 13 September 2001.
In Re: Petition for Radio and TV Coverage of the Multiple Murder Cases Against
Zaldy Ampatuan, A.M. No. 10-11-5-SC, 14 June 2011
Arroyo vs Sandiganbayan April 18, 2017, G.R. No. 220598
Senator Leila M. De Lima Vs. Hon. Juanita Guerrero, et al. G.R. No. 229781.
October 10, 2017 (See also opinion of UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Detention/Opinions/Session82/A_HRC_WGAD_2
018_61.pdf)
D. Privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
(a) [Knowledge] Define habeas corpus and understand its nature
Identify the requirements for availing the remedy of the writ of habeas corpus
Know the limitations of habeas corpus as well as the exceptional instances when the
writ may be suspended
19
(b) [Skill]
Analyze facts and circumstances to be able to advise clients when the right is
violated and if the remedy if available
See patterns of violations and the slippery slope that could lead to the suspension of
the right
(c) [Value]
Exhibit an understanding of the significance of the protection and the gravity of the
situation when it is suspended
(d) Readings:
Section 15. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except
in cases of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it.
Roxas v. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 189155, September 7, 2010

Lansang v. Garcia, G.R. L-33964, December 11, 1971
Montenegro v. Castaneda, 91 Phil. Reports 882 (1949)
Garcia-Padilla v. Enrile, 121 SCRA 472 (1983)
Writ of Amparo
Secretary of National Defense v. Manalo, 563 SCRA 1

SP02 Manalo vs. PNP Chief , G.R. No. 178920, Oct. 15, 2007.
Burgos vs. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 183711, 22 June 2010.
Rodriguez vs. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 191805, 15 November 2011.
Boac vs. Cadapan, G.R. No. 184461, 31 May 2011
E. Speedy disposition of cases
(a) [Knowledge]
Identify factual scenarios in which the right may be violated

Distinguish between the right to speedy disposition of cases and the right to speedy
trial
(b) [Skill] Characterize a situation as amounting to a violation of the right, particularly

in cases where there are significant delays
(c) [Value] Understand the critical character of concluding proceedings in a speedy

manner and how delays impact the accused and his or her conditions
(d) Readings:
20
Section 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases
before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.
Tatad vs. Sandiganbayan 159 SCRA 70

Guiani vs. Sandiganbayan 386 SCRA 436
F. Right against self-incrimination
(a) [Knowledge] Define the right against self-incrimination and the instances in which
it may invoked
Identify the forms in which this right may be violated and when it is proper to contest
by invoking this right
(b) [Skill] Predict or sense when a seemingly neutral question or form may lead to a
violation of this right
Advise client not to answer when the question calls for an answer that may
incriminate him or her
(c) [Value]
Develop a sense of responsibility to the client and to the justice system
(d) Readings:
Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Bataan Shipyard vs. PCGG, 150 SCRA 181

Bagadiong vs. Gonzales, 94 SCRA 906
People vs. Yatar, 428 SCRA 504
People vs. Fieldad, GR No. 196005 (October 1, 2014)
People v. Ayson, G.R. No. 85215, July 7, 1989
Senate v. Ermita, G.R. No. 169777, April 20, 2006
De Castro vs. People, GR No. 171672 (February 2, 2015)
VIII. MODULE 7: LIMITATIONS ON PUNISHMENT AND CRIMINAL LIABILITY
A. Prohibition against detention for political beliefs and involuntary servitude
(a) [Knowledge] Define the concept of involuntary servitude
Identify the forms of punishment which could amount to involuntary servitude
Understand the limits of free speech and when it is not protected so that regulation,
through penal law, is allowable
(b) [Skill] Discuss the connection between the right not to be detained because of
your political beliefs and the fundamental right to freedom of expressed
21
Evaluate when penal laws carry penalties that amount to involuntary servitude
Advise clients if a certain punishment fleshed-out in prison regulations amount to

involuntary servitude
(c) [Value]
Appreciate the dynamics between and among the different rights
Understand the pernicious character of involuntary servitude and how that creeps
into penal laws
Display competence and practice skills in identifying punishments that violate this
right
(d) Readings:
Section 18. (1) No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs
and aspirations.
(2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a
crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.
Aclaracion v. Gatmaitan, 64 SCRA 131

U.S. v. Pompeya, 31 Phil. 245
B. Excessive fines, cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment
(a) [Knowledge] Demonstrate competency in characterizing a punishment as cruel,

degrading or inhuman
(b) [Skill] Correlate and connect this right to the broader rights of due process and
the rights to life and liberty
(c) [Value] Participate, meaningfully and in an informed manner, in the debate on

capital punishment
(d) Readings:
Section 19. (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or
inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for
compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it.
Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
(2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment against

any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities
under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law.
22
People v. Echegaray G.R. No. 117472, February 7, 1997
Corpuz vs. People, G.R. No. 180016, 24 April 2014.
People v. Mateo, July 7, 2004 GR No. 147678-87
People vs Parazo [G.R. No. 121176. July 8, 1999]

(See original decision in G.R. No. 121176. May 14, 1997)
People vs. Licayan GR. Nos. 140900 & 140911. February 17, 2004; See the
original decision in [G. R. Nos. 140900 & 140911. August 15, 2001]
MATERIALS ON THE DEATH PEMALTY
http://chr.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Denunciation-of-and-Withdrawal-from-
International-Treaties-to-Re-impose-the-Death-Penalty.pdf
https://futureofworking.com/10-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-the-death-penalty/
http://www.thesundayleader.lk/2016/09/19/pros-and-cons-of-the-death-penalty/
http://reporter.ph/death-penalty-pros-and-cons-in-the-philippines/
https://www.ethicalrights.com/articles/media/136-death-penalty-is-morally-
unacceptable
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/ff8f/c7b4d5e1801c91693bb48646bca356655541.pdf
C. Prohibition against Imprisonment for Debt and Non-payment of poll tax
(a) [Knowledge] Know when a situation can be categorized as imprisonment for a

debt
(b) [Skill] Identify a situation when it falls under this prohibition
(c) [Value] See the significance of why this is a constitutional right
(d) Readings:
Section 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax.
Lozano v. Martinez, 146 SCRA 323

Arceta vs. Mangrobang, 432 SCRA 136
Vergara vs. Gedorio, 402 SCRA 520
D. Double jeopardy
(a) [Knowledge] Define the concept of double jeopardy
Identify the conditions when the right against it may be invoked

23
(b) [Skill] Characterize a situation or a subsequent prosecution as a violation of the
right against double jeopardy
(c) [Value] Appreciate the importance of this prohibition and the impact of the
violation on the right to life and liberty of a person
(d) Readings:
Section 21. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same
offense. If an act is punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal
under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act.
People vs. Tan, GR No. 167526 (July 26, 2010)

Lejano vs. Philippines, GR No. 176389 (January 18, 2011)
Navallo vs. Sandiganbayan, 234 SCRA 175
Romualdez vs. Marcelo, 497 SCRA 89
Villareal vs. Aliga, GR No. 1666995 (January 13, 2014)
E. Ex post facto and bill of attainder
(a) [Knowledge] Define and distinguish an ex post fact law from a bill of attainder
(b) [Skill] Evaluate prospective or proposed laws for their ex post facto character or if
they qualify as bills of attainder
(c) [Value] Understand the situation in which this prohibition may be exhibited, and
the institutions who may cause a violation
(d) Readings
Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
In Re: Kay Villegas Kami 35 SCRA 429

People v. Ferrer, 48 SCRA 382
Wright v. CA, 235 SCRA 341
Lacson vs. Executive secretary 301 SCRA 29
People vs. Pacificador, 354 SCRA 310

24

Constitutional Law 2 Dean Tony La Vińa Review Guide

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Constitutional Law 2 Dean Tony La Vińa Review Guide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UST Faculty of Law

Course Outline for Constitutional Law II

Dean Antonio Gabriel La Viña

Course scope and objectives

Course requirements and weights

Group exercises (Class discussions, moot courts) 25 %

Suggested but not required textbooks:

Constitutional Law, Isagani and Carlo Cruz (2015)

Oedipus Rex http://classics.mit.edu/Sophocles/oedipus.html (Links to an external site.)

W. M. Reisman, Myth system and operational

Franz Kafka, Before the Law

A. Initial reflections on Bill of Rights jurisprudence

Aquino, Jr. vs. Enrile, 59 SCRA 18

B. Historical overview of Bill of Rights

*United States Constitution Bill of Rights (See amendments)

*French Declaration on the Rights of Man

*The Magna Carta

C. International human rights law

*Universal Declaration on Human Rights

*International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights

*International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

*United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

D. Reframing rights before new technologies and social media

 Vivares vs. STC, G.R. No. 202666 (September 29, 2014)

II. MODULE 1. DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION

 Hierarchy of rights under the Bill of Rights (Doctrine of Preferred

Enable the student to understand the requirements of due process in various

Enable the graduate to understand developments in the concepts and standards

(d) References and materials:

Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due

Carino vs. Insular Government 212 U.S. 449 (1909)

Cruz vs. NCIP, G.R. No. 135385. (December 6, 2000)

Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)

III. MODULE 2: PERSONAL SECURITY AND PRIVACY

A. Searches and Seizures

 Search (requirements in the issuance of search warrant)

Enable the student to provide advice in relation to rights in relation to the

Enable the graduate to understand developments in the concepts and standards

(d) References and materials:

Stonehill v. Diokno, 20 SCRA 383

B. Privacy of communication and correspondence

Enable the student to develop framework of analysis, whether in relation to advocacy

Enable the graduate to understand developments in the concepts and standards

(d) References and materials:

Ople v. Torres, 293 SCRA 141

IV. MODULE 3: THE GREAT FREEDOMS

A. Freedom of speech, of expression, of the press, or the right of the people

 Freedom of speech and expression

Enable the graduate to pursue a career on civil rights advocacy or as a government

Enable the graduate to understand developments in the concepts and standards

(d) References and materials:

Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression,

New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 US 713

B. Freedom of Religion clauses

 Free exercise of religion

Enable the graduate as a lawyer, in private practice or as a government official to

Enable the graduate to understand developments in the concepts and standards

(d) References and materials:

Section 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or

Estrada v. Escritor, AM No. P-02-1651, June 22, 2006

C. Liberty of abode and right to travel

Enable the graduate as a lawyer, in private practice or as a government official to

Enable the graduate to understand developments in the concepts and standards

(d) References and materials: