Chapter 16 - Non-Imprisonment for Debt

 History
o In Roman Law, it allowed the brutal quartering of the body of the delinquent debtor by his creditors, in
proportion to their claims
o This barbaric treatment was refined somewhat in the Middle Ages, when the debtor was not killed for
his defaults but merely imprisoned until he was able to pay his just obligation
o A revolted public opinion inspired the enactment of legislation to discontinue the practice, and this was
later embodied in the constitutional provisions
o Bill of Rights – No person shall be imprisoned for DEBT or non-payment of a POLL TAX (maprisu pud ka
sa iba nga tax)
 Debts
o Debt – refers to any civil obligation arising from contract, express or implied
o Includes even debts obtained through fraud since no distinction is made in the Constitution
o If debt arises from contract – it is considered a private matter between the creditor and debtor and the
punitive arm of the State cannot be employed in a criminal action – remedy is a civil action only for the
recovery of the unpaid debt
o Phrase: violative of the prohibition against imprisonment for debt
 Crime
o Debtor can be validly punished in a criminal action if he contracted his debt through fraud
o Criminal act – the deception he employed in securing the debt, not his default in paying it
o Obligation arises out of delict or from the commission of crime
o Suspension of Civil servant – failure to pay a just and admitted debt – an administrative sanction and
does not violate the prohibition against imprisonment for debt
 Poll tax
o Tax is not a debt
o Failure to pay tax can be validly punished with imprisonment
o EXCEPTION: failure to pay POLL TAX
o Poll tax – defined as a specific fixed sum levied upon every person belonging to a certain class without
regard to his property or occupation
o This exception is pursuant to the social justice policy – law’s tender regard for the millions of our
impoverished masses who cannot afford the nominal cost of a poll tax like the sedula

Chapter 17 – INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE

 Section 18. Art 3.

o (1) No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.
o (2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party
shall have been duly convicted.
 American case: Involuntary servitude is the condition of one who is compelled by force, coercion, or
imprisonment, and against his will, to labor for another, whether he is paid or not
 This concept includes slavery – the civil relation in which one man has absolute power over the life, fortune and
liberty of another
 This concept includes peonage – a condition of enforced servitude by which the servitor is restrained of his
liberty and compelled to labor in liquidation of some debt or obligation, real or pretended, against his will
 Exceptions
o “except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.”
o Defense of the state embodied in art 2, sec 4
 o Naval enlistment where service of a merchant vesse may be compelled to remain in such service until
the voyage for which he contracted
o Striking worker in industries affected with public interest
o Unemancipated minors
 Application
o Revised penal code: penalties are imposed “upon any person who in order to require or enforce the
payment of a debt, shall compel the debtor to work for him, against his will, as household servant or
farm-laborer
o The notion of involuntary servitude connotes the presence of force, threats, intimidation or other similar
means of coercion and compulsion

Chapter 18 – THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

 The writ is a prerogative writ of liberty employed to test the validity of a person’s detention
 Who applies? The person restrained or someone acting on his behalf may file a petition for habeas corpus
 This action take precedence in the calendar of the court
 Writ is directed to the person detaining another, commanding him to produce the body of the prisoner at a
designated time and place, with the day and cause of his caption and detention, to do, to submit to, and receive
whatever the court or judge awarding the writ shall consider in is behalf
 Ultimate purpose – to relieve a person from unlawful restraint
 It is not issued when the person is in custody because of a judicial process or a valid judgement
 When available
o Liberty is subject to physical restraint, such as arbitrary detention, or mental restraint
o Restrictive custody – a nominal restraint which is beyond the ambit of habeas corpus
o Restrictive custody – when a police officer is placed under monitoring of movements or whereabouts
o Also available in cases involving the rightful custody of minor
 Procedure
o “The privilege of the writ of HC shall not be suspended except in cases of Invasion, or Rebellion, when
the public safety requires it”
o It is not the writ itself but only its privilege that may be suspended
 Grounds for suspension
o The President is entrusted the power to suspended
o The SC has the power to annul the suspension of the privilege if the same is not based on either of the
two grounds enumerated in the C
o Montenegro doctrine: The determination of the President of any grounds prescribed in the Constitution
for the suspension should be conclusive upon the courts
o Lansang decision – The SC declared that it had the power to inquire into the factual basis of the
suspension
o Final application: New Constitution
 The action of the President and the Congress shall be subject to review by the SC, which shall
have the authority to determine the sufficiency of the factual basis of such action; not a political
question and may be raised in an appropriate proceeding
 The Writs of Amparo and Habeas Data
o Writ of Amparo –
 is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or
threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission;
 shall cover extralegal killings and enforced disappearances and threats;
 mere substantial evidence is required;
  is a special proceeding. Thus, the revised rule on Summary Procedure would be inapplicable
 may be filed by any concerned citizen, organization, association, or institution only if there is no
known member of the immediate family or relative of the aggrieved party
 for the protective writ to issue in enforced disappearance cases, it must show the required
quantum of proof that their disappearance was carried out by or with the authorization, support
or acquiescence of the government or a political organization followed by a refusal to
acknowledge the same or give information on the fate or whereabouts of said persons
 Mere inclusion of persons’ names in an order or battle list would not warrant the issuance of a
writ
 The SC held that the President can be held liable or accountable for extrajudicial killings and
enforced disappearances in the context of amparo proceedings on the basis of the doctrine of
command responsibility
 The writ should be issued only upon showing of the existence of “substantial evidence that their
rights to life, liberty and security are being violated or threatened by an unlawful act or
omission; not allowed to address the fears of persons who anticipate the possibility of more
harassment cases, false accusations, and potential violence from respondents
o Writ of Habeas Data
 Is intended to insure the human right to privacy by requiring the respondent to produce the
necessary information to locate the missing person or such data about him that have been
gathered in secret to support the suspicion that he has been taken into custody in violation of
his constitutional rights or worse, has been salvaged without benefit of lawful trial
 The writ operates to protect a person’s right to control information regarding himself,
particularly in the instances where such information is being collected through unlawful means
in order to achieve unlaw ends
 Requirement: showing of atleast by substantial evidence of an actual or threatened violation of
the right to privacy in life, liberty and security of the victim
