NAVA v. GATMAITAN G.R. No.

L-4855 | 11 October 1951

FACTS: On 22 October 1950, the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus was decreed by virtue of the following Proclamation No. 210 issued by
President Elpidio Quirino. The immediate cause for the issuance of Proclamation No.
210, was the apprehension and detention of lawless elements in whose possession
strong and convincing evidence was allegedly found showing that they are engaged
in rebellious, seditious and otherwise subversive acts.

ISSUE: Whether or not, a person covered by Proclamation No. 210 which has been
formally charged with rebellion with multiple murder, arson and robberies, may be
entitled to bail.

RULING: Yes. Under paragraph 16, Section 1, Article II of the 1935 Constitution, "all
persons shall before conviction he bailable by sufficient sureties, except those
charged with capital offenses when evidence of guilt is strong." The crime of
rebellion or insurrection is certainlv not a capital offense, because it is penalized only
by prision mayor and a fine not to exceed Php20,000.00. The privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus and the right to bail guaranteed under the Bill of Rights are separate
and co-equal. If the intention of the framers of the Constitution was that the
suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus carries or implies the
suspension of the right to bail, they would have very easily provided that all persons
shall before conviction be bailable by sufficient sureties, except those charged with
capital offenses when evidence of guilt is strong and except when the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus is suspended.