RULE 113 ARREST Section 1. Definition of arrest. — Arrest 1s the taking of a person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the commission of an offense. @ Sec. 2. Arrest; how made, — An arrest is made by ‘an actual restraint of a person to be arrested, or by his submission to the custody of the person making the arrest. No violence of unnecessary force shall be used in making an arrest. The person arrested shall not bbe subject to a greater restraint than is necessary for his detention. (2a) NOTES 1. Arrest may be made (a) with a warrant (Se. 9), of (b) without a warrant (Sec. 5) felony oF breach ofthe peace, 2. Bxcept for treason, felony tia seni nee ce ar ce ie hse Sete total Cin rey ees 4 yn, in Art. VID rt setae ay eee ha nd 0 attendance at its sessions, thereof, provided 388 returning rom the sme bt the National Aue {al surrender the Member intel ni ema of the lew within twenty-four soc gateey Sijournment for rca fori na ee Gtherwis such peivlee shall case ape ke ahs todovo- A Menon l wt Se guess shen any tbe place fr any toe ee the Assembly on any commie ea Aart, Vio the 1967 Constitution provides “Sec. 11. A Senator or Member ofthe Hout of Representatives shal nal ofoses pannus ng sore than ax years imprisonment bopeinogst fe trrst while the Congress nin tesan, No eet ‘hallbe questioned nor bbaldlbleinanjsatereey ferany speech or debate nthe Cones he commiice there" 2. Hada of state, diplomatic oes and thi duly sngnteed dames a Hhevteimmunc ana {soltin af hs munity il ener he eae stra we ahose wha poured hae cal linble (R.A. 75). " 4. Under the former rule, it was held that municipal iudges should comply strietly with the provisions of Sec. 87 of the Judiciary Act regarding the Issuance of warrants of arrest, Said Soc. 87 was amended by R.A. 9828 ‘in arder to discourage the practie of municipal judges of ‘imply relying on affidavits accompanying a criminal ‘omplaint as the basis for issuing a warrant of arrest Luna ‘8 Plaza, L-27511, Nov. 29, 1968; Pople ve. Bongo, el, 1-26909, Feb. 22, 1974). ‘The municipal judge issuing the varrant of arrast must personally examine the witnesses 4nd ther affidavits must be sworn to before him (Doce vs. CFL of Quezon, etal, L-26437, Mar. 13, 1968)However the requirement of See, 8716) ofthe Judiciary Nel is fulied where the museca ate sxamined under ath the wines by shin ae that were adopted from a previous Investigation ta ‘onsidered by him as aufcletly searching ond eet uations and the answer three were nrg Se tobefore him prortohaieunnce at hewurettat sees (Deitata aos Trstns AM: Ne TEM) Ne 50,1098 siting Tama vu. Pac,supr. Ite subd that thes Shctrines continue have binding effect under the pene Tevson, considering tat BP Bl 159 repeal ey te Provisions of the dudicary Act which ate Inconaltent therewith (Sec. 471 Purthermore, such provitons Sulstantalyropraduced in Se 0, ale 8 5. The guidelines established bythe Supreme Cou {or observance bythe Bench and Bat, onthe lsuance warrants of arrest under Sec. 2, Art TIT of the 1987 Constitution provide, ater alia, a follows: “1. The purpose of preliminary investigation only to determine probable cause. A stressed Hashim os. Boncan,71 Phil. 216, dan. 31,1981, {he investigating judg or prosecuting officer ats upon probate cause and reasonable bli, not upon proot beyond reasonable doubt. ‘The occasion is not for the full and exhaustive display of the partes’ evidence; it forthe presentation af uch eine on may wellgrounded bole that anfense hasbeen sommiiod and thatthe acused probably guy thereof. When all thisis flied, the accused will not be permitted tocast about for fancied reasons to delay the proceedings; the time to ask for more iat the trial 2, Both under the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions, the settled ruling of ou jurisprudence, which rulings tho drafters of the 1987 Constitation were certainly cognizant of and took into consideration, is thatthe 390 nue nis anmese aaa enn sitet epeeiadeenrera ete Ty investigation end thay robable cause exists (see Haskin 5 F Hashim vs. Boncan, ore End Placer o.Vilanaee, 126 SORA Ocampo, et, 18 Phil. 1 and Amana EES 98 Phil, 739). - 3. The insertion of the judges the existence of probable hu the Consitaton serves to undersea they ot personal reaponiity ofthe chat ha Rime of the existence of « probeti proscribed from delegating this task toany other person. He must do to 4. In satisfying him. probable eause forthe issuance the judge, following the procedure, may either: (a) Rely upon the Fisea’s certification of the ‘existence of probable cause whether or not the ‘ase is cognizable only by the Regional Trial Court ‘and on the basis thereof, seuea warrant of arrest fe cause. He i of investigation ersonally. of the existence of a ofa warrant of arrest, lished doctrine and (©) Ifon the face ofthe information he finds no probable cause, he may disregard the fiscas certification and require the submission of the ‘supporting affidavits of witneses to aid him arriving at a conclusion as to the existence of 3 probable cause. 5. The Supreme Court admonition should be heeded that while the Constitution dos confer upon the judge the power to conduct preliminary examination preparatory to issuing a warrant of arrest, sound policy reasons should curb the propensity to:make use of such competence, since judges of theCFI and CCC (now RTC) “should not encumber themselves with the preliminary examination and {investigation of eriminal complaints’ but should “concentrate on hearing and deciding criminal cases filed before their court’ (Collector of Custome vx Vilatue and five othor cases jointly decided, 11 SCRA 856 (1976)." (Cireular No. 12, June 90, 1987) 6. The addition of the word "personally" after the word “determined” in See. 2, Art. Il of the 1987 Constitution, on the requirements for the issuance of « search warrant oF warrant of arrest, does not meen hat the investigating judge must personally examine the complainant and his witnesses in his determination of probable cause forthe issuance of warrants of arrest. What the Constitution underscores isthe exclusive tnd personal responsibilty of the Issuing Judge in such termination, For that purpose thejude si ee to personally examine the camplainant and his witnesses, Following established doctrine and procedure, he shell (1) personally evaluate the report and the supporting Aocuments submitted by the seal regarding the existence ‘of probable cause and, on the basis thereof, issue the ‘warrant of arrest oF (2) ion the basis thereof he finds no existence of probable cause (Solver, etal os Makaviar te, ef al, GR. No. 82585, Now. 14, 1988; Abdula 8. Guian, ete, GR. No. 11821, Fe. 18, 2000) = or earacin nsbs es ne ade i otic nites gapesswerm ca maanirrenaeene Secateurs ieee aaa EEC a 302 nue 3 saast ex mn oi wep stair Sask mag rice he had nothing but a cerineation Bree on ontitutional requirements had not nog eatery the Seca eet a Atal Felis eo, Now 0507 Fa ages Se S Urmaret teaming np a On tam Sele ice oe Be i nt 0 how amie same Saran Serer ie P41 er oe Se rane n eed etal,, L-26177, Dec. 27, 1972). - 8, Formerly, any objection tothe warrant of acest o {he procedure forthe court's acquisition af jurisdiction er the person of the accused must be mae before he eaves hiplea, otherwise the objection is deemed waied eave 1, Romier, ete, etal, L3125 Sept 0, 19TH, and coors therein cited). it was also held that objection toay seh inreguarity shall be deemed waived where the soased ges bond, and such waiver extends to any irregularity is the faruance of process for arrest and inthe determination of the presence or lack of probable cause (US. vs Ocampo, tal, 18 Phil. 1; US. vs. Grant, eo 18 Phil 122) Te Accused, under such circumstances, also waved any ‘hjection on lack of jurisdiction over his person and such bjections cannot be raised for the frit time on appeal les, Bongo, etal, supra). These doctrines have beet ‘st aside by Sec. 26, Re 11, Sec. 8. Duty of arresting officer — It shall be the ‘uty Of the officer executing the warrant to arrest sas{the accused and to deliver him to the n station or jail without unneces within ten (10) days trot days after the expiration of the period, the stfieey to whom it was assigned for execution shall make g report to the judge who issued the warrant. In ease of his faiture to execute the warrant, he shall stats the reasons therefor. (4a) Nores 1, Unitke a search warrant, the ten-day period stated here is not the lifetime or period of enforceability ofthe warrant of arrest. Said warrant of arest doesnot become functus officio by the mere lapse of said period and Ia ‘enforceable indefinitely until stich time as the arrest of the person or persons named therein has not been effected. However, within said period of 10 days, the heat ofthe office to whom the warrant was issued must cause the execution thereof, filing whieh the officer nsslgned therefor must make the corresponding return tothe anng ‘udge within 10 days from the lapse ofthe original period, 2, Unless specifically provided in the warrant, the same remains enforceable until itis executed, recalled or ‘quashed, even if it is returned unserved by the arresting officer because the person named therein cannot be found. ‘Said warrant willeontinue to remain on file for subsequent service (see People us. Givera, OR, No, 133158. Jan. 18, 2001). 8. Only judicial officers or any person duly authorized by taw ean issue warrants of arrest. Such power is not possessed by the then fiscals oF state attorneys (Lino ve, Fugoso, etal, 77 Phil 938). Under the 1987 Constitution, wie annus mace no warrant of arrest shal issue except upon probabe cae determined personally by the judge after ramectne Sider oath or affirmation of the eomplanast ses ane persons tobe seized (Se, 2, Art. I). 4,No warrant of arrest can be issued by the Immigration Commissioner before a final order ot deportation is issued (Neria ve. Vivo, ee, L-26S11-12, ‘Sept. 20, 1969) and such warrant is confined only to what i necessary to carry out that deportation ceder (Contemprate vs. Acting Commissioner of Immigration, tt aly, 1-28604, Oct. 30, 1970; Collector of Customs vx Villaius, ee, et al, £34038, June 18, 1976), 5. For other officers authorized to effect arrest, see Sec. 6, CA. 613 (Immigration Act of 1940); See. 6, RA. 157 (Act Creating a Bureau of Investigation); Se. 37, RA. 409 (Charter of the City of Manila); Sec. 2208, BD. 1424 (Tariff and Customs Code) .0.292 Administra tive Code of 1987); and Sec. 15, BA. 8424 (Tax Reform Ac. of 1997) 6. Although the present Rules re silent on his point, itis submitted thatthe omission of the former rle on the power ofajudge, acting as such, o ies a verbal er wet der of arrestin the exerlse snd fr purpose ef hi Seal functions does not mean the elinnaion of the sme. This s similar oa =bench warrant” a common law ‘hich is issued by the cour elo tram the bench,” 0 In cass of dred contempt, orto bring na witness who fas to obey subpoena (Biek's Law Dictionary, 6th Bd. {4900p 10), an nent power vested i mates for the enforcement of judicial orders or fo mata Aignty of or ensure respect for the court. See, 8. Arrest without warrant when lawful — A eace officer or « private person may without Warrant, arrest a person:(a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, i actually committing, oF is attempting to commit an offense: (b) When an offense has just been committed and hhe has probable cause to belleve based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it; and (c) When the person to be arrested isn prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place ‘here he is serving final judgment or temporarily Confined while his ease is pending, or has escaped ‘being transferred from one confinement to ‘be forihwith delivered to the nearest for jail and he shall be proceeded against in ‘accordance with section 7 of Rule 112. (6a) NoTES 1. These are the instances where an arrest may lawful be made without a warrant andior by a private person, in which cago fs known asa “citizen's arrest.” 2. The substantial revision of this section was fected ‘in paragraph (b) theroot, which now only requires that the person making the arrest has probable cause fo believe based on personal knowledge of facts or eireumstancs ‘i responsible for an offense which has Just been committed ‘orig rescued (Sec 1, Rule 118), (0) by the bandsmen for ‘the purpose of surrendering the accused (Sec. 23, Rule 114; People o. Coderao, «fel, £15699, April 22, 1963), and 396 (oy where the accused attempts to leave the country without (oomission ofthe court (Se. 28, Rule 114) 4 Arrest upon mere suspicion is invalid (U.S. o. Hochu 21 Phil. 5L4; Taruc bs Carlos, 78 Phil. 876) 92 Hocrcnvapicions must be engendered by good faith and ‘Sigsonable grounds (US. vs. Santos, 96 Phil. 859 ‘5, Even in the instances not allowed by law, a warrantless arrest is not a jurisdictional defect, and Mflection thereto is waived where the person arrested abjenits to arraignment without objection (22 C-JS. 420), sabmbacquent filing ofthe charges and the iasuance of he corresponding warrant of arrest against a person. Mogally detained will cure the defect of tention Mnanvey, eal vs, Santiago, ete, CLR. No, 82544, June 25, (Mye8; Oil etal vs. Ramos, eal, CR. No, 81567, July 9, 1990 and Oct. 3, 1991. 6. Time of making arrest. — An arrest may im any day and at any time of the day oF Sec. 7. Method of arrest by officer by virtue of warront, ~ When making an arrest by virtue of & ‘warrant, the officer shall inform the person to be rrreated of the cause of the arrest and the fact that ft warrant has been issued for is arrest, except when he flees or foretbly resists before the officer has opportunity to #0 inform him, or when the givin of ouch information will imperil the arrest. The Officer need not have the warrant in his possession ft the time of the arrest but after the arrest if ¢he person arrested so requires, the warrant shall be ‘Shown to him, as soon as practicable, (7a) See. 8. Method of arrest by officer without warrant. — When making an arrest without a warrant, the aoCommission, his escaped, flees, or forcibly resists before the officer has opportunity 0 s0 inform him, ‘or when the giving of such information will imperil ‘the arrest. (8a) See. 9. Method of arrest by private person. — When ‘making an arrest, a private person shall Inform the person to be arrested of the intention to arrest hia find the cause of the arrest, unless the latter iselther ‘engaged in the commission of an offense, is pursued immediately after its commission, or has escaped, {Mlces, or forcibly resists before the person making the arrest has opportunity toso inform him, or when the giving of such information will imperil the arrest. (Oa) Nore, 1, These sections provide forthe procedure in effecting arrest with or without a warrant, or in making 8“itizen’s frrest™ under the circumstances contemplated in Sec. 5 of this Rule See. 10. Officer may summon assistance. — An officer making a lawful arrest may orally summon ‘as many persons ashe deems necessary to assist him in effecting the arrest. Every person so summoned by an officer shal assist him in effecting the arrest when he can render such assistance without detriment to himelf. (10x) See. 11. Right of offcer to break into building or enclosure. — An officer, in order to make an arrest 08 either by virtue of a warrant, or without a warrant ‘provided in setion, my break ine arg baa, for enclosure where the person tobe anenen reasonably believed to be, ithe refused edt thereto, after announcing his authority and renga a Sec. 12, ight to breakout of building oenclnure =Nenerer afer at entered the lag enclosure in accordance mith the preceding seston, fhe may break out therefrom when necetsas ts Tiberate himself (126) Notes 1. These sections provide for the permissible means ‘and force which may be availed of for the purpose of ‘effecting the arvest under the stated tuations. 2. Secs. 11 and 12 now permit only an officer to break into a building to effect an arrst, hence such right ‘ot extended toa private porton even if the purpose of the latter is to make an arrest. Nevertheless, «private {individual is exempt fom criminal liability for trespas to welling whenever he has done so “forthe purpose of ‘endering some servic to humanity or justice” (Art. 280, third par, Revised Penal Code) See. 13. Arrest ater escape or rescue — Ifa person awfully arrested escapes oF is Feseued, any person may immediately pursue or retake hm without ‘warrant at any time and in any place within the Philippines. (13) NOTE 1. Tis section regulates the method andthe exereise ofthe right to effect are-arreat or recapture of an arrestee. 300‘the situation hero differs from that contemplated in Bee Bie at this Rule wherein the person areested bas SStaped from detention or confinement. Here, its Sathgiene thot the urrestes has oly been awfully arrested, effet an extension of the rae o8 See. 14, Right of attorney or reltive visit person arrested: — Any member of the Philippine Bar shall, ft the request of the person arrested oF of another ‘tetingin his behalf, have the right to visit and confer privately with mich porsom i the jall or any other Place of custody ‘hour of the day oF night. Bubject to reasomal fn, arrelative of the person arrested can also exercine the same right. (aay NoTEs 1. Under Sec. 20, Art, IV of the 1973 Constitution, ‘offense shall have the {tnd tobe informed of uch right. This right is maintained, ‘with further safeguards in Sec. 12(1, Art, IT of the 1987 Constitution. Under Art, 125, Revised Penal Code, a5 mended by R.A. 1089, the accused is entitled to confer Srith counsel, Seid right to confer with counsel at any stage Urthe detention is enforceable under the penal sanctions InRLA. 867 on whosoever should deny the sime, Such right tocounsel during the custodial investigation may, however, be waived provided the waiver is made intelligently and ‘oluntarly, with full understanding ofthe consequences (People vs. Caguioa, ee et al, L-88975, Jan. 17, 1980) (tnd auch waiver is made with the assistance of counsel (Morales, Jr eto. vx. Ponce Bnvile, etal, G.R. No, 61016, ‘April 26, 1984; People vs. Ramos, GR. No. 09518, May 16, 11583), which conditions are now embodied in the 1987 Constitution, 400 2, RA. 857 wa ater amended by Exeatve Or ‘No, 188 har 90, 964 to reads fellows Coo Aficeror employe or anyone seing under serie ‘Meplac, who hall obstruct prohbi or thence prevent Ea totney entitled to practi tthe oorte or Philipines om ving tnd conferring aie eit person arvested, at any hour ofthe day orn urgent cases, Sethe aight, said q and conference being requested by {he person arrested or by another ating inhi behalf of bby # national or international non-governmental toreantantion duly aceredited by the offic fhe President, ‘hall be punished by prision correctional" However, RA. 7438, effective April 27,1992, expressly repeated RA. 887 and defined certain rights of peroons trrested, detained or under custodial investigation, with ‘the penaities for violations theret (eee Append 8). 3. A custodial examination means questioning {initiated by Ine enforenment authorities after a pereon it taken into custody or otherwise deprived o his reedom in ‘any significant manner. It bepin when there is no longer ‘general inquiry ito an unsolved crimebut starts to focus fon a particular person as'a suspect. Among the rights ‘guaranteed to the suspect is that he must continuously Ihave a counsel aassting him from the very start of that {interrogation (People vs. Merial, etal, OR. No. 129295, ‘Aug. 15, 2001), 4. A municipal mayor cannot be an indopendent and competent counsel qualified to assist person under ‘custodial investigation, eepaiall if eanduced bythe police ‘suthorities his municipality. His powers clude the use ‘of the elements for the maintenance of peace and order, the arrest of offenders and the bringing of offenders to iuitice. "His duties are inconsistent with those of his esponaibilities to the ‘whom he socks to assist (People vs. Velarde, GR. No. 138893, July 18, 2002, and Suthorities cited therein), wor ll