Human Rights in the Philippine

Criminal Justice System:

Right to Due Process, Right Against Illegal Searches
and Seizures, Rights of Suspects Under Custodial
Investigation, and Right Against Unlawful Arrests
Lesson Objectives:
1. Discuss the rights to due process, right against
illegal searches and seizures, rights of suspects
under custodial investigation, and right against
unlawful arrests; and
2. Discuss the important principles, concepts, and
matters relevant to these rights.
Definition of Terms:
➢ Due Process – Guaranty against any arbitrariness on
the part of the government, whether committed by
the legislative, the executive, or the judiciary.
➢ Custodial Investigation – Any questioning initiated
by law enforcement officers after a person has been
taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his or
her freedom of action in any significant way.
➢ Arrest – Defined as the taking of a person into
custody in order that he or she may be bound to
answer for the commission of an offense.
I. Right to Due Process
❑ Guarantees protection against government
arbitrariness.
❑ Applicable to legislative, executive, and judicial
actions.
❑ Defined as "hears before it condemns, proceeds
upon inquiry, and renders judgment only after trial"
(Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheaton 518).
3 Human Rights Protected by the
Due Process Clause of the 1987
Constitution:
1. The right to life
2. The right to liberty
3. The right to property
Two (2) Aspects of Due Process
1. Substantive Due Process
2. Procedural Due Process
1. Substantive Due Process
❑ Restricts government's law and rule-
making powers.
❑ Demands that laws intrinsically respect
an individual's life, liberty, and property
rights (Cruz, 2014)."
2. Substantive Due Process
❑ Prescribes the proper procedure before
depriving someone of life, liberty, or
property rights.
Procedural due process in a judicial
proceeding entails the following:
1. There is an impartial court or tribunal clothed with
judicial power to her and determine the matters
before it;
2. Jurisdiction is properly acquired over the person of
the defendant and over property which is the
subject matter of the proceeding;
Procedural due process in a judicial
proceeding entails the following:
3. The defendant must be given an opportunity to be
heard; and
4. The judgment was rendered upon lawful hearing
and based on evidence adduced. (Banco Español
Filipino v. Palanca, G.R. No. L-11390, March 26 1918)
 Notably, the principle of due process
encompasses the operative fact doctrine.
Under this doctrine, the law is recognized
as unconstitutional. But the effects of the
unconstitutional law prior to the time it
was declared a nullity may be left
undisturbed as a matter of equity and fair
play.
 The doctrine is applicable when a
declaration of unconstitutionality will
impose undue burden on those who have
relied on the invalid law (Suarez, 2015).
II. Right Against Illegal Searches
and Seizures
❑ Origin and purpose: It restrains the actions of
government authorities, not private entities
(People v. Marti, G.R. No. 81561, January 18,
1991).
II. Right Against Illegal Searches
and Seizures
❑ Personal right: Can only be invoked by the
person whose right was violated. It can be
waived, but the waiver must come from the
person whose rights were violated and not from
an unauthorized individual (People v. Damaso,
G.R. No. 93516, August 12, 1992)."
II. Right Against Illegal Searches
and Seizures
❑ Unreasonable searches and seizures: Require
valid search warrants or warrants of arrest,
ensuring the protective authority of a
magistrate (Bernas, 2011)."
Search Warrants
For a valid search warrant to issue, the following
must be present:
(1) existence of probable cause;
(2) determination of probable cause was done
personally by the judge;
(3) personal examination under oath or
affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses
he may produce;
Search Warrants

(4) personal knowledge of the complainant or his

witnesses of the facts; and
(5) particular descriptions of the place to be
searched and the persons or things to be seized."
Warrantless Searches and Seizures;
Searches and seizures can only also
be conducted validly without a warrant.
Philippine jurisprudence states several
circumstances, to wit:
Warrantless Searches and Seizures;
1. Searches of moving vehicle
2. Body checks in airports
3. Stop and frisks
4. Inspection of buildings and other
premises
5. Consented warrantless searches
Warrantless Searches and Seizures;
6. Incident to lawful arrests
7. Visual search at checkpoints
8. “Aerial target zonings” or “saturation
drives”
9. Exigent circumstances doctrine
10. Plain view doctrine
III. Rights of Suspects Under
Custodial Investigation
Miranda v. Arizona (1966): Defines custodial
investigation as any questioning by law enforcement
officers after a person's freedom is significantly
restricted.
Republic Act No. 7438: Philippine law governing
human rights during custodial investigations,
encompassing the concept of custodial investigation.
III. Rights of Suspects Under
Custodial Investigation
When Do These Rights Apply?
Rights apply when the investigation shifts focus
to a particular suspect in custody.
This occurs when the police interrogate the
suspect for potentially incriminating statements.
(People v. Marra, 1994)
III. Rights of Suspects Under
Custodial Investigation
Police Lineup: Not part of custodial inquest, as it's an
investigatory stage.
During lineups, witnesses or complainants are
typically interrogated and provide statements.
However, after the start of custodial investigation, any
uncounseled accused's identification made in a lineup
is inadmissible. (People v. Macam, 1994)
Rights Under Custodial Investigation
1. Right to be informed of his right to remain silent
and to be counsel.
2. Right to be reminded that if he waives his right to
remain silent, anything he says can and will be used
against him.
3. Right to remain silent.
4. Right to have a competent and independent
counsel preferably of his own choice.
Rights Under Custodial Investigation
5. Right to be provided with counsel, if the person
cannot afford the service of one.
6. No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation or
any other means which vitiate the free will shall be
used against him.
7. Secret detention places, solitary and
incommunicado or other forms of detention are
prohibited.
8. Confessions or admissions obtained in violation of
these rights are inadmissible as evidence.
Sec. 2 of R.A. No. 7438 provides for the
requisites of an admissible extrajudicial
confession, to wit:
1. It was made by a person arrested, detained, or under
custodial investigation with assistance and in the presence
of his counsel or in the latter's absence, upon a valid
waiver, and in the presence of any of the parents, elder
brothers and sisters, his spouse, the municipal mayor, the
municipal judge, district school supervisor, or priest or
minister of the gospel as chosen by him; otherwise, such
extrajudicial confession shall be inadmissible as evidence
in any proceeding;
Sec. 2 of R.A. No. 7438 provides for the
requisites of an admissible extrajudicial
confession, to wit:
2. The confession must be in writing:
3. The confession must be voluntary; and
4. The confession must be express and must be
signed.
Miranda Doctrine/Rights
1.The person in custody must be informed at the outset
in clear and unequivocal terms that he has the right to
remain silent.
2.After being so informed, he must be told that
anything he says can and will be used against him in
court.
3.The right to consult with a lawyer and to have a
lawyer with him during interrogation.
Miranda Doctrine/Rights
4. If he is indigent, a lawyer will be appointed to
represent him.
5. Even if he consents to answer questions without the
assistance of counsel, the moment he asks for a
lawyer at any point in the investigation, the
interrogation must cease until an attorney is
present.
6. If the foregoing are not demonstrated, no evidence
obtained can be used against the person in custody.
(Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, June 13, 1966)
IV. Right Against Unlawful Arrests
Defining Arrests: Arrests involve taking a person into
custody to answer for an alleged offense.

Two Modes of Arrest:

Arrest by Virtue of a Valid Warrant: Carried out
with a proper judicial warrant.
Arrest Without a Warrant: Occurs under exceptional
circumstances as authorized by statute (Sec. 5, Rule
113, Rules of Court).
Issuance of a Warrant of Arrest;
Effecting an Arrest
Constitutional Standard:
❑ Sec. 2, Art. III of the 1987 Constitution
Warrant of arrest requires "probable cause" personally
determined by a judge after examining the complainant
and witnesses under oath.
❑ The warrant must particularly describe the
individuals to be seized.
Issuance of a Warrant of Arrest;
Effecting an Arrest
Probable Cause Defined:
❑ "Probable cause" is the standard that leads a
reasonable and prudent person to believe
that the person to be arrested has likely
committed an offense. (Ocampo v. Abando,
G.R. No. 176830, February 11, 2014)
In making a lawful arrest, no violence or unnecessary
force shall be used. The person arrested shall not be
subjected to greater restraint than is necessary for
detention. Upon arrest, the following items may be
confiscated:

1. Objects subject to the offense or used in the

commission of the crime.
2. Objects that are the fruits of the crime.
3. Items that the arrested person might use for
violence or escape.
4. Dangerous weapons and items that could be used
as evidence in the case.
5. Objects whose possession is illegal per se. (People v.
Veloso, G.R. No. L-23051, October 20, 1925)

It's important to note that the arrest must precede the

search.
Execution of Warrant of Arrest:
The judge issues a warrant of arrest in two
instances:
➢ Upon the Filing of Information by the Prosecutor:
In this scenario, the judge personally evaluates
the report, supporting documents, and other evidence
presented during the preliminary investigation by the
prosecutor. If probable cause is found, the judge issues
the warrant for the accused's arrest.
Execution of Warrant of Arrest:
The judge issues a warrant of arrest in two
instances:
➢ Upon Application of a Peace Officer:
In this case, the judge must personally examine
the applicant and any witnesses produced to determine
the existence of probable cause. The judge must
subject the complainant and the witnesses to searching
questions.
 Unlike a search warrant, which is
valid for 10 days and becomes void
thereafter, there is no time limit for the
validity of a warrant of arrest. As long as
the warrant has not been recalled, the
named person is not arrested, or has not
otherwise submitted to the court's
jurisdiction, the warrant remains valid
and can still be executed.
Warrantless Arrests
General Rule: No power or authority for warrantless
arrests, except in cases expressly authorized by law.
Lawful Warrantless Arrests: Occur in the following
instances:
➢Flagrante Delicto Arrests: Arrests during the
commission of a crime.
➢Doctrine of Hot Pursuit: Pursuing a suspect
immediately after a crime.
➢Evasion of Service Sentence: Arresting an
individual attempting to evade serving a sentence.
Warrantless Arrest: Flagrante Delicto
Definition: Warrantless arrests during the commission, attempted
commission, or right after committing an offense in the presence of the
arresting officer.
Requisites (Ambre v. People):
• The person to be arrested must perform an overt act indicating the
commission, attempted commission, or just-committed crime.
• This act must occur within the view of the arresting officer.
Buy-Bust Operations: Valid for apprehending drug law violators, as the idea
to commit the crime originates from the offender, and officers are duty-
bound to act (People v. Sales, G.R. No. 208169, October 8, 2014).
Legal Safeguards: When buy-bust operations follow constitutional and legal
safeguards, they receive judicial sanction (People v. Agulay, G.R. No. 181747,
September 26, 2008).
Warrantless Arrest: Doctrine of Hot Pursuit
Definition: Warrantless arrest when an offense has just been
committed. The arresting officer must have probable cause based on
personal knowledge.
Requisites:
1. Offense committed recently - A brief time interval between the
crime and the arrival of the arresting officer (In Re Petition for
Habeas Corpus of Umil v. Ramos, G.R. No. 81567, October 3, 1991).
2. Probable cause from personal knowledge - Mere intelligence
information is insufficient (People v. Doria, G.R. No. 125299, January
22, 1999).
Test of Immediacy: There must be a significant degree of immediacy
between the offense's commission and the arrest (Gov. CA, G.R. No.
101837, February 11, 1992).
Warrantless Arrest: Evasion of Service of
Sentence
Definition: Arrests made against a prisoner who:
(1) has escaped from a penal establishment or place
where he is serving a final judgment or is
temporarily confined while his case is pending, or
(2) has escaped while being transferred from one
confinement to another.
Principle: Escapees are considered to be continuously
committing a crime during their escape.
Group 7 Members:
Vallar, Maryed Danielle T.
Torres, Romel
Santos, Christian
Samaniego, Jamaica
Reyes, Jonalyn
Thank You ~