1:00:00 – 1:32:43

Another aspect of protected life, though we limit it to mere physical existence. If

we say protected life, do we limit it to physical existence? Sapat na ba na buhay ka
lang? Humihinga ka, kumakain ka, natutulog ka, sapat na ba yon bilang buhay ng
tao? In Ilokano, masaya ka ba if mangmangan ka lang matmaturog ka lang,
tumaktaki? Will that be sufficient already, masasabi mo bang buhay ka? Kung
ganyan ang point of view mo sa buhay, anong pinagkaiba mo sa ibang hayop? Kasi
ung mga ibang hayop sufficient na sakanila ung kumakain, natutulog,
nagpapahinga. Eh ikaw buhay mo bilang tao? Will that be sufficient, if you will
define life that way? That you survive only into a day to day basis because of food,
because of rest. Hindi eh, we are more than that as human beings.
Protected life also include aspects of liberty. Kaya ung life tska liberty magkapatid
yan. Very close yan. Pag sinabi mong protected life, it will also cover aspects of
liberty. What do I mean? What completes you as a human being, aside from the
fact that you physically exist?
You have the liberty to choose.
You have the liberty of locomotion,
you have the liberty of mind or intellect.
You have the liberty of faith,
you have the liberty of love.
Yun ba ang nagpapasaya sayo? Kung meron ka niyan masasabi mo bang buhay ka?
May Kalayaan kang magmahal, may Kalayaan kang manalampataya. Liberty,
freedom of Religion, freedom of intellect, freedom of locomotion, love education,
these are all liberties associated with life. In short, kung di mo mamemorize ung
sinasabi ko, pag sinabi mong the right to life, it will also include aspects of libery
or freedom that will make you whole as a human being. Kalayaang magmahal,
Kalayaang maniwala, Kalayaang lumakbay, Kalayaang mamili ng education,
aspeto lahat ito ng pagiging tao, pagiging buhay na tao. Ang sinasabi ko, hindi
pwede na ililimit mo lang ung the right to life for being physically existing.
Physical existence will not be sufficient. You also need to connect it with other
aspects of life, liberty or freedom that makes you whole as a human being. The
aspects in life that gives meaning to your existence as a human being. Anything
that makes you happy as a human being, that is part of life. Alam niyo ung Section
1, Article III. Cinopy natin yan sa declaration of independence ng mga American.
Bilang Pilipino, we copied that from the Americans particularly from their
declaration of independence. Kung di ka maniwala sakin, basahin mo mamaya ung
declaration of independence. Actually in the declaration of independence ng mga
amerikano, apat ung core rights na importante sa tao. Life, Liberty, Property, and
the pursuit of happiness.
Bakit hindi natin nilagay ung pursuit of happiness eh napakaimportante nito? Hindi
po ba ang ginagawa natin sa buhay, in order to pursue things that makes us happy.
Nandito po kayo ngayon nag aaral ng batas dreaming or working to be a lawyer.
Because probably in your hearts, ito ang magpapaligaya sayo.
You endure the pain of reviewing or becoming a law student, because you know it
is worth it someday that if you will pass the bar, joy and happiness will over flow
in your hearts because this is what you want in life. Your dream to become a
lawyer will make you happy and complete. And that is what you are doing now.
Pursuing this profession in order to be happy someday. I hope you will succeed.
Pursuing Happiness, that is one aspect of life as well.
Im not being philosophical here, pag dating ng bar examination, pag tinanong kayo
“what is protected life” eh dapat complete ang sagot niyo. On one hand, protected
life meaning under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, from conception to birth
which suggest a policy against abortion. On the other hand, protected life also
means all aspects of life that makes you free and completes you as a human being,
anything in pursuit of happiness is part of protected life.
Na kompleto ba natin? I hope so. Pag pinagexplain kayo, what is protected life.
Baka sabihin niyo sa bar, that a person is alive that is protected life. Kulang yon.
Sagot ng taga UC or UB yon. Satin as lousians, konokompleto natin ang sagot.
Potential na bar question yon. What is protected life. Kaya dalawa ang aspeto
niyan. Ulitin natin.
Aspect 1: Protected life means conception to birth suggesting what? A policy that
support against abortion.
Aspect 2: Protected life will also include all other aspects of life. Liberty or
freedom that will complete the life of a human being in his pursuit for happiness.
Bahala ka ng mag expound.
Property. Property simple lang. Anything within the commerce of men is protected
property. But ofcourse, to be protected, the property must be licit. Dahil ung mga
tinatago mong shabu or marijuana jan kung sakaling gumagamit ka, that is not
protected property ha. Kasuhan ka ng violation of our narcotics law, ipapadismiss
mo ung kaso, wag ka mag fifile ng replevin para mabawi mo ung MJ or shabu na
kinumpiska ng gobyerno because that is not protected property. Clear?
Public office is not considered as property. Kaya nga meron tayong consepto
against political dynasties precisely because we do not want public office being
treated as private property that can be inherited by one person or another but upto
now, we still not have a law, that will clearly define political dynasties. The
concept is their under the Constitution, Public office is a public trust and it cannot
be considered as property.
Now, right to property, you always connect it also with eminent domain for
instance. Because what did we learned when we reviewed the inherent powers of
the state, particularly eminent domain actually this one constitutional provision
under section 8 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. The concept is basic, private
property can only be taken for public use and upon payment of just compensation.
Do not forget that. Na explain na natin ano ung protected life, liberty or property.
Due process
Is there a standard definition of due process?
Meron ba? Sa pag babasa niyo ng text book, mga reviewers, meron bang standard
definition ang due process? There is no standard definition of due process. Due
process is always relative. What do I mean by that due process is relative. There
will be absence of absolute standards and universal application what is due process
all about. Why? Why is it that we do not define due process? In the Constitutional
sense even in the statutory sense. Wala tayong fixed definition kung anon ga ba
ang due process. Wala kang mahahanap diyan na fixed definition of due process.
Pero sa bar wag mo sabihin yon, there is no standard definition of due process.
Pero mamaya, meron tayong pwedeng gamitin if you are compelled to define what
is due process all about. Wala tayong standard definition of due process by reason
of versatility. What does this mean? – we do not want to limit the discretion of
courts and even administrative bodies in applying the concept of due process
because due process as a constitutional right will depend on the circumstances of
cases whether it is a judicial case or an administrative case. So due process as to
how it will be applied, it is a matter of discretion on the part of the courts, quasi-
judicial bodies or administrative agencies. Pero sir, sabi mo hindi naming pwede
iexplain yon na walang fixed definition ang due process, ano ang pwede naming
gamitin? Well it is a law which hears before it condemns. Maganda na ung
definition na yan as a starting point if ever you will be compelled to define what is
due process all about. And of course in reviewing what is due process, never forget
the aspects of due process. The aspects of due process which is also the requisites
for the proper exercise of the police power of the State. Parehas lang ung aspects of
due process at tsaka ung requisites ng Police Power of the State, Ano to?
1. Substantial due process; and
2. Procedural due process
Na inaadopt din natin na requisites ng police power of the state. If ever the state
will invoke its police power, there must be substantial and procedural requisites
that we connect with due process.
Ano nga ba ung substantial due process?
Substantial due process will be the essence of the law itself. Substantial due
process is basically a prohibition against arbitrary laws.
Requisites of Substantive due process:
1. The interest of the public generally as distinguished from a particular class
requires the interference by the government;
2. The means employed are necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose
and not unduly oppressive upon individuals;
These two standards or requisites will be your guide if ever you will encounter a
situation or a question in the bar that will require you whether or not a law or an
act complied with these first aspect of due process which is substantial due
process.
How about procedural due process?
What do we mean by procedural due process?
Procedural due process, it refers to the manner or the mode of procedure which
government agencies must follow in the enforcement and application of laws.
Ok class listen, pag procedural due process and pinag uusapan, I will only ask you
to remember and master two things. In connection with procedural due process.
Dahil ito ang palaging tinatanong sa bar examination.
1. Will be the requisites of procedural due process in a judicial proceeding; and
 2. Requisites of procedural due process in an administrative proceeding.
Iba ang requisites ng due process sa isang judicial proceeding, iba din ang
requisites ng procedural due process in an administrative proceeding. In the bar
examination, eto ung mga titignan mo. Pag Nakita mo na it’s a case before the
court, at tatanungin ka if ever procedural due process was followed, this will be
your guide, the requisites of procedural due process in judicial proceedings. Ganun
din in an administrative proceeding, tignan mo ung requisites, kaya lang in an
administrative proceeding, sigurado ako pinamemorize sainyo ito ni atty morales
or other law professors teaching consitutional law, mahirap imemorize tama? Kahit
ako aminado ako di ko memorize yan. Tutulungan kita. May shortcut jan, pag
administrative proceedings. Actually you only need to memorize one sentence
kung di mo kayang imemorize ung requisites.
Pag judicial proceedings, ano ung requisites ng procedural due process. You are
four important elements.
1. A court or tribunal clothed with a judicial power to hear and determine the
matter before it;
2. Jurisdiction must lawfully be acquired over the person of the defendant or
over the property which is the subject of the proceedings;
3. The defendant must be given notice and an opportunity to be heard; and
4. Judgment must be rendered upon a lawful hearing.
Masmadaling imemorize yan because we are talking about jurisdiction and an
opportunity to be heard and that judgment will only be rendered upon a lawful
hearing or a trial.
Ang problema natin ung administrative proceedings ung aspect ng procedural due
process dahil pito na napakahaba ang requisites. Tignan natin
1. The right to a hearing which includes the right to present ones case and
submit evidence in support thereof;
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented;
3. The decision must have something to support itself;
4. Evidence supporting the conclusion must be substantial; Why substantial?
Because in an administrative case, the quantum of evidence will be
substantial evidence.
5. The decision must be based on the evidence presented at the hearing or at
least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected;
 6. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its own or his own
independent consideration of the law and the facts of the controversy and not
simply accept the views of a subordinate at arriving at a decision; and
7. The board of body should in all controversial question render its decision in
such a manner that a party to the proceeding can know the various issues
involved and the reasons for the decision rendered.
Napakahaba ano? Napakahirap imemorize. Very good kung kaya mong imemorize.
Very good kung kaya mong isimplify. But im betting if you’re a student of
professor Justino Morales, like myself, if ever tatanungin ka what is the essence of
procedural due process in an administrative proceeding, again very good if you can
memorize the seven, you can simplify, but if you are hard headed and do not want
to memorize the answer is this the essence of procedural due process in an
administrative proceeding will be simply the opportunity to be heard. Yun ang
shortcut dun class kung ayaw mo imemorize ung pito. Are you getting me? Yun
ung shortcut. Basta in an administrative proceeding, nag comply ka na ng
procedural due process if you gave the subject person an opportunity to be heard.
An opportunity to be heard, that is why in an administrative proceeding, like in a
labor termination case, or other administrative proceeding on that matter, do we
require a trial type of proceeding? Eto based na from jurisprudence ha. Do we
require a trial type proceeding? Or a decision can be rendered in an administrative
proceeding on the basis of affidavits or position papers alone? What is your
answer? In an administrative proceeding, we do not require a trial type proceeding.
Because if we say opportunity to be heard, affidavits, position papers, review of
the documents will be sufficient to render judgment.
Now, in a judicial proceeding particularly in a criminal case, cross examination is
part not only of procedural due process but also substantial due process. Importante
ang skill niyo sa cross examination. Cross examination is both part of procedural
and substantive due process because in cross examination we can approximate the
constitutional right of the accused to confront his accuser and the witnesses face to
face. But in an administrative proceeding, is cross examination part of procedural
due process? It’s not part of procedural due process. Cross examination is not
required in an administrative proceeding because again, judgment may be rendered
in an administrative proceeding, by relying on documents alone, like affidavits,
position papers and besides, ung cross examination sa trial yan eh. Sa
administrative proceeding, we do not require a trial type proceeding. So hindi
available ang cross examination. So tandaan po natin yan, judicial proceedings,
administrative proceedings. Administrative proceedings you can simplify, it only
requires an opportunity to be heard. Now, Hearings are required both in a judicial
proceeding and administrative proceeding because conducting hearings precisely
gives a party an opportunity to be heard whether if it is trial type in a judicial
proceeding or plain submission of documents in an administrative proceeding.
Hearing padin yon eh. Kung nag susubmit ka lang ng document. Hearing padin
yon. But there are instances both in a judicial and administrative proceeding,
wherein hearings will not be required or not necessary.
What are the instances wherein hearings will not be required both in a judicial or
administrative setup?
a. When administrative agencies are merely exercising their quasi-legislative
functions and not quasi-judicial functions, hearings are not required;
b. Abatement of nuisance per se;
c. Granting of courts of provisional remedies;
d. Cases of preventive suspension;
e. Removal of temporary employees in the government service;
f. Levy conducted by the Bureau of Internal Revenue;
g. Cancellation of the passport of a person charged with a crime;
h. Issuance of sequestration orders for ill gotten wealth;
i. Judicial order which prevents the accused from travelling abroad in order to
maintain the jurisdiction of that court;
j. Suspension of a bank’s operations by the monetary board upon a prima facie
finding of liquidity problems in such facts;
These are 10 examples wherein hearing will not be required both in judicial or
administrative proceeding.