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 proceedings.
 
R.A. 4200 (Anti-Wiretapping Act)
The law does not distinguish between a party to the private communication or a third
person.  Hence, both a party and a third person could be held liable under R.A. 4200 if
they commit any of the prohibited acts under R.A. 4200 (Ramirez v. Ca)

The use of a telephone extension to overhear a private conversation is not a violation of

R.A. 4200 because it is not similar to any of the prohibited devices under the law.  Also,
a telephone extension is not purposely installed for the purpose of secretly intercepting
or recording private communication.  (Gaanan v. IAC, 145 SCRA 112)

Types of communication protected:

Letters, messages, telephone calls, telegrams and the like.

Exclusionary rule:
Any evidence obtained shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.  However, in the
absence of governmental interference, the protection against unreasonable search and seizure
cannot be extended to acts committed by private individuals. (People v. Martin)

Section 4.  No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the
press, or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for
redress of grievances.
 
What are considered protected speech:

Protected speech includes every form of expression, whether oral, written, tape or disc recorded. 
It includes motion pictures as well as what is known as symbolic speech such as the wearing of an
armband as a symbol of protest.  Peaceful picketing has also been included within the meaning of
speech.

Prohibitions under Section 4

1. Prohibition against PRIOR RESTRAINT

2. Prohibition against SUBSEQUENT PUNISHMENT
Prohibition against prior restraint
 1. Prior restraint means official governmental restrictions on the press or other forms of
expression in advance of actual publication or dissemination.
2. Examples/forms of prior restraint
1. movie censorship
2. judicial prior restraint = injunction against publication
3. license taxes based on gross receipts for the  privilege of engaging in
the business of advertising in any newspaper
4. Flat license fees for the privilege of selling religious books
When prohibition does not apply

1. During a war.  Ex.  Government can prevent publication about the number/locations of
its troops (Near v. Minnesota, 238 US 697)
2. Obscene publications.
Standards for allowable subsequent punishment

    TEST                                                  

1. Dangerous Tendency Test                        

There should be a RATIONAL CONNECTION between the speech and the evil apprehended.
2. Clear and Present Danger Test
There should be a clear and present danger that the words when used under such
circumstances are of such a nature as to create a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER that they
will bring about the substantive evils that the State has a right to prevent.
3. Balancing of Interests Test                       
The courts should BALANCE the PUBLIC INTEREST served by legislation on one hand and the
FREEDOM OF SPEECH (or any other constitutional right) on the other.  The courts will then
decide where the greater weight should be placed.

Freedom of Speech
The doctrine on freedom of speech was formulated primarily for the protection of “core”
speech, i.e. speech which communicates political, social or religious ideas.  These enjoy the
same degree of protection.  Commercial speech, however, does not.

Commercial Speech
1. A communication which no more than proposes a commercial transaction.
2. To enjoy protection:
 It must not be false or misleading; and
 It should not propose an illegal transaction.

3. Even truthful and lawful commercial speech may be regulated if:

a. Government has a substantial interest to protect;
b. The regulation directly advances that interest; and
 c. It is not more extensive than is necessary to protect that interest. 
(Central Hudson Gas and Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission of
NY, 447 US 557)
Unprotected Speech

1.      LIBEL
FAIR COMMENT (U.S. Rule).  These are statements of OPINION, not of fact, and are not
considered actionable, even if the words used are neither mild nor temperate.  What is
important is that the opinion is the true and honest opinion of the person.  The
statements are not used to attack personalities but to give one’s opinion on decisions
and actions.
OPINIONS.  With respect to public personalities (politicians, actors, anyone with a
connection to a newsworthy event), opinions can be aired regarding their public
actuations.  Comment on their private lives, if not germane to their public personae, are
not protected.

2.      OBSCENITY
Test for obscenity (Miller v. California)
 Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards would
find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest.
 Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual
conduct, specifically defined by law.
 Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or
scientific value.
Procedure for seizure of allegedly obscene publications
1. Authorities must apply for issuance of search warrant.
2. Court must be convinced that the materials are obscene.  Apply clear and present
danger test.
3. Judge will determine whether they are in fact “obscene”.
4. Judge will issue a search warrant.
5. Proper action should be filed under Art. 201 of the RPC.
6. Conviction is subject to appeal.

Right of Assembly and Petition

1. The standards for allowable impairment of speech and press also apply to the right of assembly
and petition.
2. Rules on assembly in public places:
3. Applicant should inform the licensing authority of the date, the public place where and the
time when the assembly will take place.
4. The application should be filed ahead of time to enable the public official concerned to
appraise whether there are valid objections to the grant of the permit or to its grant, but in
another public place.  The grant or refusal should be based on the application of the Clear and
Present Danger Test.
 5. If the public authority is of the view that there is an imminent and grave danger of a
substantive evil, the applicants must be heard on the matter.
6. The decision of the public authority, whether favorable or adverse, must be transmitted to the
applicants at the earliest opportunity so that they may, if they so desire, have recourse to the
proper judicial authority.

1. Rules on assembly in private properties:

Only the consent of the owner of the property or person entitled to possession thereof is required.

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.

 
Clauses under Section 5
1. Non-establishment clause
2. Free exercise of Religion
Distinction between the clauses (School District v. Schempp, 374 US 203)
1. The non-establishment clause does not depend upon any showing of direct
governmental compulsion.  It is violated by the enactment of laws which establish an
official religion whether those laws operate directly to coerce non-observing individuals
or not.  The test of compliance with the non-establishment clause can be stated as
follows: What are the purposes and primary effect of the enactment?  If either is the
advancement or inhibition of religion, the law violates the non-establishment clause. 
Thus, in order for a law to comply with the non-establishment clause, two requisites
must be met.  First, it has a secular legislative purpose.  Second, its primary effect
neither advances nor inhibits religion.
1. The free exercise of religion clause withdraws from legislative power the exertion of
any restraint on the free exercise of religion.  In order to show a violation of this clause,
the person affected must show the coercive effect of the legislation as it operates
against him in the practice of his religion.  While the freedom to believe (non-
establishment) is absolute, the moment such belief flows over into action, it becomes
subject to government regulation.
Requisites for government aid to be allowable:
1. It must have a secular legislative purpose;
2. It must have a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion;
3. It must not require excessive entanglement with recipient institutions.
4.
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.

 
Rights guaranteed under Section 6:
1. Freedom to choose and change one’s place of abode.
2. Freedom to travel within the country and outside.

Curtailment of rights:
RIGHT                                                                        MANNER OF CURTAILMENT

1.  Liberty of abode                            Lawful order of the court and within the limits prescribed
by law.

2.  Right to travel                                May be curtailed even by administrative officers (ex.

passport officers) in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may be
provided by law.

Note:  The right to travel and the liberty of abode are distinct from the right to return to one’s
country, as shown by the fact that the Declaration of Human Rights and the Covenant on Human
Rights have separate guarantees for these.  Hence, the right to return to one’s country is not
covered by the specific right to travel and liberty of abode.  (Marcos v. Manglapus)

Section 7.  The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be
recognized.

 
Rights guaranteed under Section 7
1. Right to information on matters of public concern
2. Right of access to official records and documents
Persons entitled to the above rights

Only Filipino citizens.

Discretion of government

The government has discretion with respect to the authority to determine what matters are of
public concern and the authority to determine the manner of access to them.
Recognized restrictions on the right of the people to information:
1. National security matters
2. Intelligence information
3. Trade secrets
4. Banking transactions
5. Diplomatic correspondence
6. Executive sessions
7. Closed door cabinet meetings
8. Supreme Court deliberations

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.

The right to form associations shall not be impaired without due process of law and is thus an
aspect of the right of liberty.  It is also an aspect of the freedom of contract.  In addition, insofar
as the associations may have for their object the advancement of beliefs and ideas, the freedom
of association is an aspect of the freedom of speech and expression, subject to the same
limitation.

The right also covers the right not to join an association.

Government employees have the right to form unions.  They also have the right to strike, unless
there is a statutory ban on them.

Section 9.  Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.
Who can exercise the power of eminent domain:

1)      The national government

1. Congress
2. Executive, pursuant to legislation enacted by Congress

2)      Local government units, pursuant to an ordinance enacted by their respective  legislative
bodies (under LGC)

3)      Public utilities, as may be delegated by law.

When is the exercise of the power of eminent domain necessary?

It is only necessary when the owner does not want or opposes the sale of his property.  Thus, if a
valid contract exists between the government and the owner, the government cannot exercise the
power of eminent domain as a substitute to the enforcement of the contract.

Elements of the power of eminent domain

1)      There is a TAKING of private property

2)      Taking is for PUBLIC USE

3)      Payment of JUST COMPENSATION

“TAKING”
 
A.  Elements:  CODE:  E P A P O
1. The expropriator enters the property
2. The entrance must not be for a momentary period, i.e., it must be permanent
3. Entry is made under warrant or color of legal authority
4. Property is devoted to public use
5. Utilization of the property must be in such a way as to oust the owner and deprive him
of the beneficial enjoyment of his property.

B.  Compensable taking does not need to involve all the property interests which form part of the
right of ownership.  When one or more of the property rights are appropriated and applied to a
public purpose, there is already a compensable taking, even if bare title still remains with the
owner.

“PUBLIC USE”
1. Public use, for purposes of expropriation, is synonymous with public welfare as the latter
term is used in the concept of police power.
1. Examples of public use include land reform and socialized housing.

“JUST COMPENSATION”
1. Compensation is just if the owner receives a sum equivalent to the market value of his
property.  Market value is generally defined as the fair value of the property as between
one who desires to purchase and one who desires to sell.
2. The point of reference use in determining fair value is the value at the time the
property was taken.  Thus, future potential use of the land is not considered in
computing just compensation.
Judicial review of the exercise of the power of eminent domain
1. To determine the adequacy of the compensation
2. To determine the necessity of the taking
 3. To determine the “public use” character of the taking.  However, if the expropriation is
pursuant to a specific law passed by Congress, the courts cannot question the public use
character of the taking.
When municipal property is taken by the State:

Compensation is required if the property is a patrimonial property, that is, property acquired by
the municipality with its private funds in its corporate or private capacity.  However, if it is any
other property such a public buildings or legua comunal held by the municipality for the State in
trust for the inhabitants, the State is free to dispose of it at will.

Point of reference for valuating a piece of property:

General rule:  The value must be that as of the time of the filing of the complaint for
expropriation.

Exception:  When the filing of the case comes later than the time of taking and meanwhile the
value of the property has increased because of the use to which the expropriator has put it, the
value is that of the time of the earlier taking.  BUT if the value increased independently of what
the expropriator did, then the value is that of the latter filing of the case.

Section 10.  No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.

When does a law impair the obligation of contracts:

1)      If it changes the terms and conditions of a legal contract either as to the time or mode of
performance

2)      If it imposes new conditions or dispenses with those expressed

3)      If it authorizes for its satisfaction something different from that provided in its terms.

A mere change in PROCEDURAL REMEDIES which does not change the substance of the contract,
and which still leaves an efficacious remedy for enforcement does NOT impair the obligation of
contracts.

A valid exercise of police power is superior to obligation of contracts.