CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
REVIEWER
Book: Constitutional Law (Cruz)
Definition of Constitution
 According to Justice Cooley, is that
body of rules or maxims in accordance
to which the powers of sovereignty are
habitually exercised.
 According to Justice Malcolm,
constitution is the written instrument
directly enacted by the people to which
the fundamental powers to the state is
established, limited and defined and to
which these powers are distributed to
several departments for their useful
and safe exercise for the benefit of the
body politic.
Purposes of Constitution
 Prescribe the permanent framework of
a system of government
 Assign to the several departments
their respective powers and duties
 Establish certain first fixed principles
on which government is founded.
Doctrine of Supremacy of the Constitution
The Constitution is the basic
and paramount law to which all other
laws must conform and to which all
persons, including the highest official
of the land must defer. No act shall be
valid, however noble its intention, if it
conflicts with the Constitution. The
Constitution must ever remain
Supreme. All must bow to the mandate
of this law. Expediency must not be
allowed to sap its strength nor greed
for power debase its rectitude. Right or
wrong the Constitution must be upheld
as long as it has not been changed by
the sovereign people, lest its disregard
result in the usurpation of the majesty
of law by the pretenders to illegitimate
power.
Classification of Constitution
a) Written – is one whose precepts are
embodied in one set of documents.
b) Unwritten – consists of rules which
have not been integrated into a single
concrete form but are scattered in
various sources.
c) Conventional – is an enacted
constitution, formally struck off at a
definite time and place following a
conscious or deliberate effort taken by
a constituent body or ruler.
d) Cumulative – is the result of political
evolution, not inaugurated at any
specific time but by changing by
accretion rather than by any
systematic method.
e) Rigid – is one that can be amended
only by a formal and usually difficult
process.
f) Flexible – is one that can be changed
by ordinary legislation.
Essential Qualities of the Written
Constitution
i. Broad – it provides for the organization
of the entire government and covers all
persons and things within the territory
of the state but more so because it is
supposed to embody the past, to
reflect the present and anticipate the
future.
ii. Brief – it confines itself to basic
principles to be implemented with
legislative details more adjustable to
change and easier to amend.
iii. Definite/Clear – lest ambiguity in its
provisions result in confusion and
divisiveness among people and
perhaps even physical conflict.
Essential Parts of the Written Constitution
i. Constitution of Liberty – prescriptions
setting forth the fundamental civil and
political rights if the citizens and
imposing limitations on the powers of
government as a means of securing
the enjoyment of those rights. (Articles
III, II,IV,V,XII)
 ii. Constitution of Government
provisions outlining the organization of
government, enumerating its powers,
laying down certain rules relative to its
administration and defining the
electorate. (Articles VI, VII, VII, VII,
IX,X,XI)
iii. Constitution of Sovereignty
provisions pointing out the mode or
procedure in accordance with which
formal changes in the fundamental law
may be brought about. (Article XVII)
Permanence of the Constitution
 An advantage of the written,
conventional and rigid constitution.
 “A Constitution must be firm and
immovable, like a mountain amidst the
strife of storms or a rock in the ocean
amidst the raging of the waves.”
 A disadvantage where the written
constitution is unable to adjust to the
need for change justified by new
conditions and circumstances.
Interpretation
 The Constitution should be interpreted
in such a way as to give effect to the
intendment of the framers.
 In case of doubt, the Constitution
should be considered self – executing
rather than non – self – executing;
mandatory rather that directory; and
prospective rather than retrospective.
1. Self – executing – is a rule that by
itself is directly applicable without
need of statutory implementation.
Examples are provisions found in
the Bill of Rights.
2. Non – self – executing – is one
that remains dormant unless it is
activated by legislative
implementation. Example is Article
II, section 4.
Amendment or Revision
 Amendment – isolated or piecemeal
change
 Revision – revamp or rewriting of the
whole instrument.
–
Procedure
1. Proposal
– - Usually made either directly
by the Congress or by a
constitutional convention.
- A special case is provided
for where the proposal may
be made directly by the
people through initiative.
- Through the method of
initiative, the people may
propose only amendments
not revision.
a) Constitutional
Convention
b) Constituent Assembly
c) People’s Initiative
2. Ratification
- Involves the people
themselves in the sovereign
act of drafting or altering the
fundamental law.
Judicial Review of Amendments
 The question of the validity of the
adoption of amendments to the
Constitution is regarded now as
subject to judicial review.
 Allows the court to inquire into whether
or not the prescribed procedure for
amendment has been observed.
The 1987 Constitution
- is the fourth fundamental law
to govern the Philippines
since it became independent
on July 4, 1946.
1. Commonwealth Constitution –
adopted in 1935
2. 1973 Marcos Constitution – which
was enforced during the Marcos
regime
3. Freedom Constitution – result of the
people power revolution and was
effective pending the adoption of a
permanent constitution.
 4. 1987 Constitution of the Philippines
The Constitution and the Courts
 Judiciary – occupies a vital and
indispensable part in our system of
government. It is the ultimate guardian
of the Constitution. It is expected to
rectify the wrong the affirm its “sacred
and solemn” duty to uphold the
Constitution and the laws of the land.
Requisites of a Judicial Inquiry
1. There must be an actual case or
controversy.
2. The question of constitutionality must
be raised by the proper party.
3. The constitutional question must be
raised at the earliest possible
opportunity.
4. The decision of the constitutional
question must be necessary for the
determination of the case itself.
Actual Case/Controversy
- Involves a conflict of legal
rights, an assertion of
opposite legal claims
susceptible of judicial
resolution.
- A controversy must be one
that is appropriate for judicial
determination.
- A judicial controversy is thus
distinguished from a repetition yet evading review.
difference or dispute of a
hypothetical or abstract
character or from one that is
academic or moot.
- The controversy must be
definite and concrete,
touching the legal relations
of parties having adverse
legal interests.
PHILCONSA v. Villareal
A petition to compel the Speaker of the
House of Representatives to produce
the books of accounts of that body in
which were recorded the amounts
appropriated by the legislator for their
allowances. Before the case could be
decided, however, the 1973
Constitution became effective and the
Congress of the Philippines was
abolished. The Supreme Court
thereupon dismissed the petition,
holding that it had already become
moot and academic.
- “Where there is no more live
subject of controversy, the
Court ceases to have a
reason to render any ruling
or make any
pronouncement. Courts
generally decline jurisdiction
on the ground of mootness”
(Madriaga v. China Banking
Corporation)
Courts will decide cases, otherwise
moot or academic:
a) There is grave violation of the
Constitution;
b) The exceptional character of the
situation and the paramount
public interest is involved;
c) When the constitutional issue
raised requires formulation of
controlling principles to guide
the bench, the bar and the
public;
d) The case is capable of
Proper Party
- Is one who has sustained or
is in immediate danger of
sustaining an injury as a
result of the act complained
of.
- Until and unless such actual
or potential injury is
established, the complainant
cannot have the legal
personality to raise the
constitutional question.
 - “The jurisdiction of a court of
law or equity may not be
invoked by or for an
individual whose rights have
not been breached”
(Stronghold Insurance
Company, Inc. v. Cuenca)
- “locus standi”
Dumlao v. Commission on Elections
Petitioner Dumlao, filed his certificate of
candidacy for said position of Governor. He
questions Sec. 4 of BP 52 as discriminatory
and contrary to equal protection and due
process guarantees of the constitution. The
Supreme Court held that the petitioner fell
short or the necessity that the case be an
actual controversy. Dumlao has not been
adversely affected by the application of that
provision. No petition seeking Dumlao’s
disqualification has been file before the
COMELEC. The question he poses is in the
abstract and a hypothetical issue.
Earliest Opportunity
 The rule is that the
constitutional question must
be raised in the earliest
possible opportunity, such
that if it is not raised in the
pleadings, it cannot be
considered at the trial and if
not considered at the trial, it
cannot be considered on
appeal.
Necessity of Deciding Constitutional
Question
 The reason why courts will
as much as possible avoid
the decision of a can
constitutional question can
be traced to the doctrine of
separation of powers which
enjoins upon each
department a proper respect
for the acts of the other
departments.
 “To doubt is to sustain”. This
presumption is based on the
doctrine of separation of
powers.
 The theory is that, as the
joint act of legislative and
executive authorities, a law
is supposed to have been
carefully studied and
determined to be
constitutional before it was
finally enacted.
Effects of a Declaration of
Unconstitutionality
2 Views
1. Orthodox View
- “an unconstitutional act is
not a law; it confers no
rights; it imposes no duties;
its affords no protection; it
creates no office; it is in
legal contemplation;
inoperative, as if it had not
been passed” (Norton v.
Shelby County)
2. Modern View
- the court in passing upon
the question of
constitutionality does not
annul or repeal the statute if
it finds in conflict with the
Constitution.
Partial Unconstitutionality
- valid under two conditions:
a) that the legislature is
willing to retain the
valid portions even if
the rest of the statute
is declared illegal
b) that the valid portions
stand
independently as a
separate statute.
The Fundamental Powers of the State
a) Police Power
- The power of the state to
regulate liberty and property
for the promotion of the
general welfare.
 b) Power of Eminent Domain 4. The compensation of the person
- Enables the state to forcibly subjected to the police power is the
acquire private property intangible altruistic feeling that he has
upon payment of just contributed to the general welfare. The
compensation, for some compensation involved in the other
intended public use. powers is more concrete, to wit, a full
c) Power of Taxation and fair equivalent of the property
- The State is able to demand expropriated or protection and public
from the members of society improvements for taxes paid.
their proportionate share or
contribution in the
maintenance of the
government.
Note: These powers are inherent and do not
need to be expressly conferred by Police Power v. Eminent Domain
constitutional provision on the State. Police Power Eminent Domain
Similarities  A property  Property
right is interests are
1. They are inherent in the state and may impaired by appropriated
be exercised by it without need of regulation, or and applied
express constitutional grant. the use of to some
2. They are not only necessary but property is public
indispensable. The state cannot merely purpose
prohibited, which
continue or be effective unless it is
regulated or necessitates
able to exercise them. restricted to the payment
3. They are methods by which the state promote of just
interferes with private rights. public compensation
4. They all presuppose an equivalent welfare. therefor.
compensation for the private rights  There is no  Normally the
interfered with. compensable title to and
5. They are exercised primarily by the taking; hence possession of
legislature. payment of the property
just are
Differences compensation transferred to
is not the
1. The police power regulates both liberty
required. expropriating
and property. The power of eminent
Example: Building authority.
domain and taxation affect only on the verge of Example:
property rights. collapse to be Acquisition of lands
2. The police power and the power of demolished for for the construction
taxation may be exercised only by the public safety of public highways.
government. The power of eminent
domain may be exercised by some
private entities. Power to Tax v. Police Power
3. The property taken in the exercise of Power to Tax Police Power
police power is destroyed because it is  Taxes are the  The power of
noxious or intended for a noxious lifeblood of the state to
purpose. The property taken under the the promote
power of eminent domain and the government public welfare
power of taxation is intended for a and their by restraining
public use or purpose and is therefore prompt and and
wholesome. certain regulating the
 availability is use of liberty their contribution to the upkeep of
an imperious and property. government.
need.  The  Police power regulates not only the
 The theory justification is property but, more importantly, the
behind the found in Latin liberty of private persons and virtually
exercise of maxims salus all the people.
the power to populi est
tax emanates suprema lex Characteristics
from (the welfare
necessity; of the people  Police power is the most pervasive,
without taxes, is the the least limitable and the most
government supreme law) demanding of the three powers.
cannot fulfill and sic utere  It is characterized as the most
its mandate tou ut essential, insistent and the least
of promoting alienum non limitable of powers, extending as it
the general laedas (use does to all the great public needs.
welfare and your property  It may be exercised as long as the
well – being not the injure activity or the property sought to be
of the people. the property regulated has some relevance to the
 Generation of of others).
public welfare.
revenue is  Regulation is
 It operates from womb to tomb,
the primary the primary
purpose and purpose and protecting the person even before he
regulation is generation of is born and prescribing strictures and
merely revenue is requirements as to the disposition of
incidental. incidental. his body and his estate, if any when he
dies.
 The police power is dynamic, not static
Limitations and must move with the moving
 The exercise of these fundamental society it is supposed to regulate.
powers is subject at all times to the  The police power may sometimes use
limitations and requirements of the the taxing power as an implement for
Constitution and may in proper cases the attainment of a legitimate police
be annulled by the courts of justice. objective.

Police Power Exercise of Police Power

 Professor Freund describes the  The police power is primarily lodged in

police powers as the power of
promoting the public welfare by
restraining and regulating the use of
liberty and property.
 The police power easily outpaces the
other two inherent powers as
instruments of the State in interfering
with private rights.
 The power of eminent domain affects
not all of the people directly but only
those whose property is needed for
conversion to public use.
 The power of taxation while imposed
on most of the people directly,
demands only part of their money as
the national legislature.
 By virtue of valid delegation of
legislative power, it may also be
exercised by the President and
administrative boards as well as
lawmaking bodies on all municipal
levels including barangay.
Jacobson v. Massachusetts
A Massachusetts law provided that the board
of health of a city or town may require and
enforce vaccination and revaccination of its
inhabitants. The state imposed a $5 fine for
people over 21 who violated this law,
although it provided an exception for children
with a doctor's certificate stating that they are
not fit for vaccination. The plaintiff in this case
was an individual over 21 who refused to
comply with the vaccination requirement and
then faced a criminal complaint. He was
found guilty and fined, and the court ordered
him held in custody until the fine was paid.
The Court held that the law was a legitimate
exercise of the state’s police power to protect
the public health and safety of its citizens.
The Court ruled that the vaccination law did
not violate the 14th Amendment because the
police power of the state may be allowed to
constrain individual liberties through
reasonable regulations when required to
protect public safety.
Tests to Determine the Validity of the
Police Power
1. The interest of the public, generally as
distinguished from those of a particular
class, require the exercise of police
power; and (LAWFUL SUBJECT)
2. The means employed are reasonably
necessary for the accomplishment of
the purpose and not unduly oppressive
upon individuals. (LAWFUL MEANS)
Lawful Subject
 The activity or property sought to be
regulated affects the public welfare.
 Salus populi est suprema lex (the
welfare of the people is the supreme
law)
 Police power protects the sanctity of
life and the inviolability of marriage.
 Billboards offensive to sight or
distracting the attention of motorists
may be prohibited.
Churchill and Tait v. Rafferty
Francis Churchill and Stewart Tait are
involved in billboard advertising business.
Collector of Internal Revenue, decided to
remove the billboards after due investigation
made upon the complaints of the British and
German Consuls. Act No. 2339 authorized
the then Collector of Internal Revenue to
remove after due investigation, any billboard
exposed to the public view if it decides that it
is offensive to the sight or is otherwise a
nuisance. The court ruled that things
offensive to the senses, such as sight, smell
or hearing, may be suppressed by the State
especially those situated in thickly populated
districts. Aesthetics may be regulated by the
police power of the state, as long as it is
justified by public interest and safety. Police
power is reasonable insofar as it considers
public health, safety and comfort.
 Police power is based upon the
concept of necessity of the state and
its corresponding right to protect itself
and its people.
 In the exercise of police power,
property rights of individuals may be
subjected to restraints and burdens in
order to fulfill the objectives of the
state.
 The government may enact legislation
that may interfere with personal liberty,
property, lawful business and
occupation to promote the general
welfare.
Calalang v. Williams
Maximo Calalang brought a petition of writ of
prohibition against the respondents and
alleged in the petition that the respondents
have caused and enforced the prohibition of
animal – drawn vehicles from passing along
specific roads at specific time for a period of
one year from the date of the opening of the
Colgante Bridge, to the detriment not only of
their owners but the ridding public as well.
The petitioner avers that the rules and
regulations to regulate and control the use of
and traffic on national roads, pursuant to
Commonwealth Act. 548, infringe upon the
constitutional precept regarding the
promotion of social justice to insure the well –
being and economic security of all the people.
The court ruled that CA No. 548, was passed
by the National Assembly in the exercise of
the paramount police power of the state. The
enactment of the said law was inspired by a
desire to relieve congestion of traffic, a
menace to public safety. Public welfare, then,
lies at the bottom of the enactment of the law,
and the state in order to promote the general
welfare may interfere with personal liberty,
with property, and with business and
occupations. Persons and property may be
subjected to all kinds of restraints and
burdens, in order to secure the general
comfort, health and prosperity of the state.
 There are entirely private matters in
which the public interest is not at all
involved and over which therefore the
police power cannot be validly
asserted.
Lawful Means
 Even if the purpose be within the
scope of the police power, the law will
still be annulled if the subject is sought
to be regulated in violation of the
second requirement.
 The end does not justify the means.
The lawful objective must be pursued
through a lawful method; that is, both
the end and the means must be
legitimate.
Ynot v. Intermediate Appellate Court
Petitioner transported six carabaos in a pump
boat from Masbate to Iloilo when the same
was confiscated by the police commander of
Barotac Nuevo, Iloilo for the violation of E.O
626-A. Said order decreed an absolute ban
on the inter-provincial transportation of
carabao (regardless of age, sex, physical
condition or purpose) and carabeef. The
carabao or carabeef transported in violation
of this shall be confiscated and forfeited in
favor of the government, to be distributed to
charitable institutions and other similar
institutions as the Chairman of the National
Meat Inspection Commission (NMIC) may
see fit, in the case of carabeef. A case was
filed by the petitioner questioning the
constitutionality of executive order and the
recovery of the carabaos. After considering
merits of the case, the confiscation was
sustained and the court declined to rule on
the constitutionality issue.
The Supreme Court found E.O.626 – A
unconstitutional. To warrant a valid exercise
of police power, the following must be
present: (a) that the interests of the public,
generally, as distinguished from those of a
particular class, require such interference,
and; (b) that the means are reasonably
necessary for the accomplishment of the
purpose. Notably, said EO imposes an
absolute ban not on the slaughter of the
carabaos but on their movement. The
executive act defined prohibition, convicted
the petitioner and immediately imposed
punishment, which was carried out forthright.
Due process was not properly observed. In
the instant case, the carabaos were arbitrarily
confiscated by the police station commander,
were returned to the petitioner only after he
filed a complaint for recovery and given a
supersedes bond of P12,000.00. The
measure struck at once and pounced upon
the petitioner without giving him a chance to
be heard, thus denying due process.
City Government of Quezon v. Ericta
An ordinance was promulgated in Quezon
city which approved the regulation of
establishment of private cemeteries in the
said city where it states that 6% of the total
area of the private memorial park shall be set
aside for charity burial of deceased persons
who are paupers and have been residents of
Quezon City. Himlayang Pilipino, a private
memorial park, contends that the taking or
confiscation of property restricts the use of
property such that it cannot be used for any
reasonable purpose and deprives the owner
of all beneficial use of his property. It also
contends that the taking is not a valid
exercise of police power, since the properties
taken in the exercise of police power are
destroyed and not for the benefit of the
public.
The court ruled that there is no reasonable
relation between the setting aside of at least
six (6) percent of the total area of an (sic)
private cemeteries for charity burial grounds
of deceased paupers and the promotion of
health, morals, good order, safety, or the
general welfare of the people. The ordinance
is actually a taking without compensation of a
certain area from a private cemetery to
benefit paupers who are charges of the
municipal corporation. Instead of building or
maintaining a public cemetery for this
purpose, the city passes the burden to private
cemeteries.
 The means employed for the
accomplishment of the police objective
must pass the test of reasonableness
and specifically, conform to the
safeguards embodied in the Bill of
Rights. Failing this, the law will be
annulled for violation of the second
requirement.
Eminent Domain
 Also called power of expropriation
 The right or power of the state or of
those to whom the power has been
lawfully delegated to take or
expropriate private property for public
use upon paying to the owner a just
compensation to be ascertained
according to law.
Voluntary Transaction
 If the owner is willing to sell and the
parties can agree on the price and the
other conditions of the sale, a
voluntary transaction can then be
concluded and be transfer effected
without the necessity of judicial action.
If Transaction is NOT Voluntary
 But if the owner of the private property
is unwilling to part with it or being
willing, cannot agree to the conditions
of the transfer, then it will be
necessary for the government to use
its coercive power.
Article III, Sec. 9
 Private property shall not be taken for
public use without just compensation.
 This provision is not a grant but indeed
a limitation of the power as its negative
and restrictive language clearly
suggests.
Who may exercise?
 The power of eminent domain is
lodged primarily in the national
legislature but its exercise may be
validly delegated to other
governmental entities and, in fact,
even to private corporations, like the
so called quasi – public corporations.
 The Congress
 The President of the Philippines
 The various local legislative bodies
 Certain public corporations like the
National Housing Authority and Water
Districts
 Quasi – public corporations like the
Philippine National Railways, and the
Philippine Long Distance Telephone
Co. and the Meralco.
Essential Requisites for the Exercise by a
LGU of the Power of Expropriation
1. Enactment of Ordinance not a
Resolution
2. Must be for public use, purpose or
welfare or for the benefit of the poor
and the landless
3. Payment of just compensation
4. Exercise must be preceded by a valid
and definite offer made to the owner
who rejects the same
Destruction from Necessity
 Does not come under the right of
eminent domain but under the right of
necessity of self – preservation.
 Arises under the laws of society or
society itself.
 It is the right of self – defense, of self –
preservation, whether applied to
persons or to property.
Necessity of Exercise
 Private property may be expropriated
for public use and upon payment of
just compensation
 Condemnation of property is justified
only if it is for the public good and
there is genuine necessity therefor of
a public character.
 The courts have the power to inquire
into the legality of the right of eminent
domain and to determine whether
there is a genuine necessity therefor.
City of Manila v. Chinese Community
The plaintiff sought to expropriate a portion of
a private cemetery for conversion into an
extension of Rizal Avenue. On the
defendants’ claim that the expropriation was
not necessary. Plaintiff herein assailed that
they have the right to exercise the power of
eminent domain and that the courts have no
right to inquire and determine the necessity of
the expropriation.
The courts have the power of restricting the
exercise of eminent domain to the actual
reasonable necessities of the case and for
the purposes designated by the law. The
moment the municipal corporation or entity
attempts to exercise the authority conferred.
It must comply with the conditions
accompanying the authority. The necessity
for conferring the authority upon a municipal
corporation to exercise the right of eminent
domain is admittedly within the power of the
legislature. But whether or not the municipal
corporation or entity is exercising the right in
a particular case under the conditions
imposed by the general authority, is a
question that the courts have the right to
inquire into.
2 Stages of Expropriation
1. Determination of the validity of
Expropriation
2. Determination of the validity of just
compensation
Private Property
 Anything that can come under the
dominion of man subject to
expropriation
 Includes real and personal property,
tangible and intangible properties.
 Churches and other religious
properties are likewise expropriable
notwithstanding the principle of
separation of church and state.
 Even cemeteries may when necessary
be taken under the power of eminent
domain.
Exception:
 Money – expropriation of money would
be futile act because of the
requirement for the payment of just
compensation
 Chose in Action – a personal right not
reduced into possession but
recoverable by a suit at law.
Additional Notes
 Property already devoted to public use
is still; subject to expropriation,
provided this is done directly by the
national legislature or under a specific
grant of authority to the delegate.
 It should be observed that the property
subject of expropriation must be by its
nature or condition wholesome, as it is
intended to be devoted to a public use.
Taking
 Imports a physical dispossession of
the owner as when he is ousted from
his land or relieved of his watch or his
car and is thus deprived of all
beneficial use and enjoyment of his
property.
 May include trespass without actual
eviction of the owner, material
impairment of the value of the property
or prevention of the ordinary uses for
which the property was intended.
US v. Causby
Government planes fly over private property
at such a low altitude as to practically touch
the tops of the trees thereon, there would be
such an intrusion into the superjacent rights
of the owner as to entitle him to payment of
just compensation although again there is no
divestiture of title.
People v. Fajardo
Municipal ordinance prohibiting construction
of any building that would destroy the view of
the plaza from the highway was considered a
taking under the power of eminent domain
that could not be allowed without payment of
just compensation to the owner affected.
Additional Notes
 Nevertheless, not every taking is
compensable, as it may be justified
under the police power.
  Example: Building on the verge of
collapse may be ordered demolished
in the interest of public safety and the
owner will not be entitled to payment
for the loss he has sustained even if
he has been completely deprived of
his property.
Requisites of Taking in Eminent Domain
(Republic v. Castellvi)
1. The expropriator must enter a private
property.
2. The entry must be for more than a
momentary period
3. The entry must be under warrant or
color of legal authority.
4. The property must be devoted to
public use or otherwise informally
appropriated or injuriously affected.
5. The utilization of the property for public
use must be in such a way as to oust
the owner and deprive him of
beneficial enjoyment of property.
Note:
Taking occurs when the landowner is
deprived of the use and benefit of his
property, such as when the title is transferred
to the Republic.
Public Use
 Any use directly available to the
general public as a matter of right and
not merely of forbearance or
accommodation.
 Res communes (common things)
 There will also be a public use
involved even if the expropriated
property is not actually acquired by the
government but is merely devoted to
public services administered by
privately – owned public utilities like
telephone or light companies.
 Slum clearance is therefore now
regarded as a valid object of
expropriation under the modern
expanded interpretation of public use.
 Agrarian reform has likewise been
acknowledged as compliant with the
public use requirement for
expropriation.
 Urban development and sum
clearance been considered for a public
purpose even if the developed area is
later sold to private homeowners.
Just Compensation
 The property’s fair market value at the
time of the filing of the complaint, or
that sum which a person desirous but
not compelled to buy and an owner
willing but not compelled to sell, would
agree on as price to be given and
received therefor.
 This is intended to indemnify the
owner fully for the loss he has
sustained as a result of the
expropriation.
 To ascertain just compensation, the
court should determine first the actual
or basic value of the property.
 Consequential damages are awarded
if as a result of the expropriation, the
remaining property of the owner
suffers from an impairment or
decrease in value
 Moreover, it must be stressed that just
compensation for the crops and
improvements are inseparable from
the valuation of raw lands as the
former are part and parcel of the latter.
 The determination of just
compensation is clearly a judicial
function
 It cannot be denied that the traditional
medium for the payment of just
compensation s money and no other.
 The property taken should be
assessed as of the time of the taking,
which usually coincides with the
commencement of the expropriation
proceedings.
 Criteria for determining just
compensation
1. Value of the land
2. Character of the land during the
time of taking
  The time of taking is the time when the
landowner was deprived of the use
and benefit of his property, such as
when title is transferred to the
Republic.
 Title of the property shall not be
transferred until after the actual
payment of just compensation.
 Non – payment of compensation does
not entitle the private landowner to
recover possessions of the
expropriated lots, however, in cases
where the government failed to pay the
compensation within five years from
the finality of judgment in the
expropriation proceedings, the owner
concerned shall have the right to
recover possession of their property.
This is in connection with the principle
that “the government cannot keep the
property and dishonor the judgement”.
 The value of the property should be
fixed as of the date when it has taken
and not the date of the filing of
proceedings.
Taxation
 Taxes are the enforced proportional
contributions from persons and
property, levied by the State by virtue
of its sovereignty, for the support of
government and for all public needs.
 The importance of taxation derives
from the unavoidable obligation of the
government to protect the people and
extend to them benefits in the form of
public projects and services.
 The obligation to pay taxes in not
based on contract. It is a duty imposed
upon the individual by the mere fact of
his membership in the body politic and
his enjoyment of the benefits available
from such membership.
 Hence, except only in the case of Poll
taxes, non – payment of a tax may be
subject of criminal prosecution and
punishment. The accused cannot
invoke the prohibition against
imprisonment for debt as taxes are not
considered debts.
 Taxes are the nation’s lifeblood
through which government agencies
continue to operate and with which the
State discharges its functions, for the
welfare of its constituents.
Taxes v. Licenses
Taxes Licenses
 Levied to  Imposed for
raise revenue regulatory
 All kinds of purposes
exactions of only.
monies which  Justified
become under police
public funds. power
Scope
 So pervasive is the power of taxation
that it reaches even the citizen abroad
and his income earned from sources
outside his state.
 Chief Justice John Marshall once
declared, “The power to tax includes
the power to destroy.” This means that
power to tax if used validly as an
implement of the police power in
discouraging and in effect ultimately
prohibiting certain things or enterprises
inimical to the public welfare.
 Justice Holmes said, “The power to tax
does not include the power to destroy
as long as this Court sits”.
 But where the power to tax is used
solely for the purpose of raising
revenues, the modern view is that it
cannot be allowed to confiscate or
destroy.
Exercise
 Primarily vested in the national
legislature, it may now also be
exercised by the local legislative
bodies, no longer by virtue of a valid
delegation as before but pursuant to a
direct authority conferred by Article X,
section 5 of the Constitution.
Due Process and Taxation
 Taxation is subject to the
requirements of due process.
  Taxes will not be allowed if they are
confiscatory, except where they are
intended precisely for destruction as
an instrument of the police power.
 From the procedural viewpoint, due
process done does not require
previous notice and hearing before a
law prescribing fixed or specific taxes
on certain articles may be enacted.
But where the tax be collected is to be
based on the value of the taxable
property, the taxpayer is entitled to be
notified of the assessment
proceedings and to be heard therein
on the correct valuation to be given
the property.
Equal Protection and Taxation
 Taxation is subject to the general
requirements of the equal protection
clause.
 Article VI, Sec. 28 provides that “the
rule of taxation shall be uniform and
equitable”.
 Uniformity in taxation means that
persons or things belonging to the
same class shall be taxed at the same
rate. Example: If cigarettes are
classified into local and imported, there
is observance of the uniformity rule if
all local cigarettes are taxed at 12.00
per carton, regardless of value and all
imported cigarettes are taxed at 20.00
per carton, also regardless of value.
 This should be distinguished from
equality in taxation, which simply
means that the tax shall be strictly
proportional to the relative value pf the
property.
 Taxes cannot be based on differences
in the color of one’s skin or ethnic
origin as these are not regarded as
substantial distinctions.
 Equitable taxation connotes the taxes
should be apportioned among the
people according to their capacity to
pay.
Double Taxation
 There is no provision in the
Constitution specifically prohibiting
double taxation
 There is double taxation when
additional taxes are laid on the same
subject by the same taxing jurisdiction
during the same taxing period and for
the same purpose.
Punzalan v. Municipal Board of Manila
The defendant levied an additional tax of
25.00 on professionals practicing in Manila,
who were already paying the 50.00
occupation tax required under the Revised
Internal Revenue Code. The petitioners
challenged the second tax as double taxation
and asked that it be annulled. The Supreme
Court held against them, observing that the
two taxes had been imposed by different
jurisdictions, one by the national government
and the other by the city government.
Additional Notes:
 Despite the lack of a specific
prohibition, however, double taxation
will not be allowed if it results in a
violation of the equal protection clause.
 Double taxation means taxing the
same property twice when it should be
taxed only once, that is, “taxing the
same person twice by the same
jurisdiction for the same thing”.
Public Purpose
 To sustain tax, it is necessary to show
that the proceeds are devoted to a
public purpose.
 Revenues derived from taxes cannot
be used for purely private purposes or
for exclusive benefit of private
persons.
 This includes:
Pensions paid to war
veterans
Unemployment relief
Support for the
handicapped
Care of the aged
 Scholarships
Clearance of Slums
Retirement or death
gratuities
Roads
Bridges
Establishment of schools
Musuems
Parks and playground
Public buildings
Maintenance of
government services
Tax Exemptions
 Tax exemptions are either
constitutional or statutory
 Article VI, Sec 28, “Charitable
institutions, churches and parsonages
or convents appurtenant thereto,
mosques, non-profit cemeteries, and
all lands, buildings, and improvements,
actually, directly, and exclusively used
for religious, charitable, or educational
purposes shall be exempt from
taxation.”
 Exemption is granted religious and
charitable institutions because they
give considerable assistance to the
state in the improvement of the
morality of the people and the care of
the indigent and the handicapped. The
added justification in the case of
religious institution is the principle of
separation of church and state.
Lladoc v. Commissioner of Internal
Revenue
A parish priest accepted a donation of
10,000.00 to be used for the construction of a
church. The money was spent for the
purpose specified. Later the Bureau of
Internal Revenue imposed a donee’s tax on
his successor, who objected, invoking the
constitutional exemption of church properties
from taxes. The Supreme Court rejected his
contention, holding that the tax exemption
referred only to property taxes imposed on
lands, buildings and improvements used for
religious purposes. The tax in this case was
not an ad valorem (assessment of the
property itself) tax on the church itself but an
excise tax imposed on the priest for his
exercise of the privilege to accept the
donation.
Additional Notes:
 It should be noted that Section 4 (3) of
Article XIV of the Constitution provided
that “all revenues and assets of non –
stock, non – profit educational
institutions used actually, directly, and
exclusively for educational purposes
shall be exempt from taxes and duties.
 Statutory exemptions are granted in
the discretion of the legislature.
Due Process of Law
 No man shall be taken or imprisoned
or disseized or outlawed, or in any
manner destroyed; nor shall we go
upon him, nor send upon him, but by
the lawful judgement of his peers of by
the law of the land.
 King Edward III’s Statute 28 declared,
“no man of hat state or condition
whoever be, shall be put out of his
lands, or tenements, nor taken, nor
imprisoned, nor indicted, nor put to
death, without he be brought in to
answer by due process of law.
 Daniel Webster was to declare that the
law of the land meant “the general law,
a law which hears before it condemns,
which proceeds upon inquiry and
renders judgment only after trial”.
Dual Aspect of Due Process
1. Substantive
2. Procedural
Meaning of Due Process
The constitutional safeguard of due process
is briefly worded thus: No person shall be
deprived of life, liberty and property without
due process of law.
 Due process therefore continues to be
dynamic and resilient, adaptable to
every situation calling for its
application.
  Justice Fernando would describe due
process merely as “responsiveness to
the supremacy of reason, obedience to
the dictates of justice.
 Justice Frankfurter of the U.S
Supreme Court, who would regard it
as nothing more and nothing less than
the “embodiment of the sporting idea
of fair play.”
 Due process is guaranty against any
arbitrariness on the part of the
government, whether committed by the
legislature, the executive or the
judiciary.
 If the law itself unreasonably deprives
a person of his life or his liberty or his
property, he is denied the protection of
due process.
Person
 The due process clause protects all
persons, natural as well as artificial
Liberty
(juridical)
 Natural persons include both the
citizen and the alien
 Artificial persons like corporations and
partnership are also covered by the
protection but only insofar as their
property is concerned.
Deprivation
 To deprive is to take away forcibly, to
prevent from possessing, enjoying or
using something.
 Deprivation connotes denial of the
right to life, liberty and property.
 What is prohibited is deprivation of life,
liberty or property without due process
of law
 There is no unlawful deprivation of
liberty where a person afflicted with a
communicable disease is confined in a
hospital or quarantined in his own
home, or where a criminal is punished
Property
with imprisonment.
 Conversely, it would be violative of due
process if a person is imprisoned
without trial
Life
 Understood under the due process
clause connotes in the first place the
integrity of the physical person.
 Life should embrace the enjoyment by
the individual of all the God – given
faculties that can be make his life
worth living.
 Life commences upon conception that
is upon fertilization.
 Equally protect the life of the mother
and the life of the unborn from
conception
 Prevent the legislature from enacting a
measure legalizing abortion.
 Article II, Sec. 12 The State recognizes
the sanctity of family life and shall
protect and strengthen the family as a
basic autonomous social institution. It
shall equally protect the life of the
mother and the life of the unborn from
conception
 According to Mabini, liberty is the
freedom to do right and never wrong; it
is ever guided by reason and the
upright and honorable conscience of
the individual.
 A person is free to act but he may
exercise his rights only in such manner
as not to injure the rights of others.
 An individual should be prepared to
surrender part of his freedom for the
benefit of the greater number in
recognition of the time – honored
principle of salus populi est suprema
lex.
 One’s freedom of expression cannot
be used to unfairly destroy another’s
reputation, or to incite rebellion or to
offend public morals.
 Do anything that does not offend
public welfare.
 Property is anything that come under
the right of ownership and be the
subject of contract.
 All things – real, personal, tangible and
intangible – that are within the
commerce of man, like lands, jewelry,
 automobiles, buildings, goodwill,
inheritance, intellectual creations,
future earnings, works of art, animals,
mortgages, insurance proceeds.
 One cannot have a vested right to a
public office.
Substantive Due Process
 Requires the intrinsic validity of the law
in interfering with the rights of the
person to his life, liberty or property
 The inquiry in this regard is not
whether or not the law is being
enforced in accordance with the
prescribed manner but whether or not,
to begin with, it is proper exercise of
legislative power.
Inchong v. Hernandez
The petitioners sought the annulment of the
Retail Trade Nationalization Law on the
ground among others that is denied due
process for depriving them of a legitimate
means of livelihood. The Supreme Court held
the law to be a valid exercise of the police
power.
Procedural Due Process
 Strike, but hear me first! –
Themistocles
 The justice that procedural due
process guarantees is the one which
hears before its condemns and
proceed upon inquiry and renders
judgment only after trial
 Requirements:
1. Notice
2. Hearing
Requirements of Procedural Due Process
in Judicial Proceedings
1. There must be an impartial court or
tribunal clothed with judicial power to
hear and determine the matter before
it.
2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired
over the person of the defendant and
over the property which is the subject
matter of the proceeding.
3. The defendant must be given an
opportunity to be heard
4. Judgement must be rendered upon
lawful hearing.
A. Impartial and Competent Court
 A judge being in constant scrutiny by
the public, his language, both written
and spoken, must be guarded and
measured lest the best of intentions be
misconstrued.
 A competent court is meant one
vested with jurisdiction over a case as
conferred upon it by law.
 Only the Supreme Court is competent
to review a decision of the COA, but
jurisdiction over ordinary appealed
cased involving only questions of fact
vested in the Court of Appeals.
B. Jurisdiction
 In personam, complaint for recovery
of loan, jurisdiction over the defendant
is acquired by the court by his
voluntary appearance or through
service of summons upon him
 In rem or quasi in rem, such as land
registration, proceedings or the
foreclosure of a real estate mortgage,
the jurisdiction of the court is derived
from the power it may exercise over
the property.
C. Hearing
 Notice to the party is essential to
enable it to adduce its own evidence
and to meet and refute the evidence
submitted by the other party
 A decision rendered without hearing is
null and void ab initio and may be
attacked directly or collaterally.
 It has further been ruled that any
defect in the observance of due
process requirement is cured by the
filing of a Motion for Reconsideration.
Appeal
 The right to appeal is not essential to
the right to a hearing.
 But as long as the law allows him to
appeal, denial of that remedy is a
denial of due process
  Minimum Appellate Jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court:
o Review, revise, reverse, modify,
or affirm on appeal or certiorari,
as the law or the Rules of Court
may provide, final judgments
and orders of lower courts in:
o
o (a) All cases in which the
constitutionality or validity of
any treaty, international or
executive agreement, law,
presidential decree,
proclamation, order, instruction,
ordinance, or regulation is in
question.
o of the threat it poses to the safety and
o (b) All cases involving the
legality of any tax, impost,
assessment, or toll, or any
penalty imposed in relation
thereto.
o and acceptable. It has been described
o (c) All cases in which the
jurisdiction of any lower court is
in issue.
o
o (d) All criminal cases in which
the penalty imposed is reclusion
perpetua or higher.
o
o (e) All cases in which only an
error or question of law is
involved.
Exceptions
Nevertheless, there are cases in which the
essential requisites of notice and hearing may
be omitted without violation of due process:
i. Cancellation of Passport of a person
sought for the commission of the crime
ii. Preventive suspension of a civil
servant facing administrative charges
iii. Distraint of properties for tax
delinquency
iv. Padlocking of restaurants found to be
insanitary or of theatres showing
obscene movies
Nuisances
 Nuisance per se, is objectionable
under any and all circumstances
because it presents an immediate
danger to the welfare of the
community. Example: mad dog
running loose which can be killed on
sight regardless of its value, because
lives of the people.
 Nuisance per accidens, is
objectionable only under some but not
all circumstances, there being
situations when it is perfectly legitimate
as the right thing in the wrong place.
Example: patis factory in a residential
area.
D. Judgment
 The right to hearing would be
meaningless if in the end the
judge could disregard the
evidence adduced by the
parties and decide the case on
the basis of his unsupported
conclusions.
 Due process requires that the
judgment be based upon the
lawful hearing previously
conducted.
Requirements of Procedural Due Process
in Administrative Proceedings
1. The right to a hearing, which includes
the right to present one’s 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. The evidence must be substantial.
5. The decision must be rendered 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 or his own
independent consideration of the law
and facts of the controversy and not
simple accept the views of a
subordinate in arriving at a decision
7. The board or body should in all
controversial questions, render its
decisions in such a manner that the
parties to the proceeding can know the
various issues involved, and the
reason for the decision rendered.
Note:
Finally, it should be mentioned that a
preliminary investigation is a component
part of due process in criminal justice.
The denial of one’s right to a preliminary
investigation, in the absence of waiver, is
therefore a denial of due process even if
the right to a preliminary investigation is
just a statutory right.
Equal Protection
 Is embraced in the concept of due
process, as ever unfair discrimination
offends the requirements of justice and
fair play
 Embodied in Article 3 Section 1 “nor
shall any person be denied equal
protection of laws”
 Simply requires that all persons or
things similarly situated be treated
alike, both as rights conferred and
responsibilities imposed (Inchong vs.
Hernandez)
 It does not require absolute equality,
but merely that all persons be treated
alike under like conditions both as
privileges conferred and liabilities
imposed.
Persons Protected
 Available to all persons: Natural and
Juridical
 Juridical or artificial persons are
entitled to the protection only insofar
as their property is concerned.
Classification
 The law, in other words, is not required
to provide for equality among all
persons if they are not similarly
situated.
 What the Constitution requires is
equality among equals.
 Classification in law is the grouping of
things in speculation or practice
because they agree with one another
in certain particulars
Requirements for a Reasonable
Classification
1. It must be based upon
substantial distinction
2. It must be germane to the
purpose of the law
3. It must not be limited to existing
conditions
4. It must apply equally to all
members of the class.
Substantial Distinction
 The law cannot validly distinguish on
the basis of the attire of women, or the
color of vehicles, or the source of
native products, or the emotions of
 persons, texture of complexion, or the
shape of their eyes or length of their
hair.
 The equal protection clause of the
constitution does not require the
universal application of the laws to all
persons or things without distinction,
what it requires is simply equality
among equals as determined
according to a valid classification.
Relevance to the Purpose of Law
 If classification is germane (relevant)
to the purpose of the law, concerns all
members of the class and applies
equally to present and future
conditions, the classification does not
violate the equal protection guarantee.
Duration
 Classification must be enforced not
only for the present but as long as the
problem sought to be corrected
continues to exist.
 A statute valid at one time may
become void at another time because
of altered circumstances.
Applicability to All
 The classification will be regarded as
invalid if all the members of the class
are not similarly situated, both as to
rights conferred and responsibilities
imposed.
Searches and Seizures
 Article III, Section 2 “The right of the
people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures
of whatever nature and for any
purpose shall be inviolable, and no
search warrant shall issue except upon
probable cause to be determined
personally by the judge after
examination under oath or affirmation
of the complainant and the witnesses
he may produce and particularly
describing the place to be searched,
and the persons or things to be seized.
Scope of Protection
 The rights against unreasonable
searches and seizures and to the
privacy of communication and
correspondence are available to all
persons including aliens, whether
accused of crime or not.
 The right against unreasonable
searches and seizures is personal and
may be invoked only by the person
entitled to it.
Requisites of a Valid Warrant
1. It must be based upon probable cause
2. The probable cause must be
determined personally by the judge
3. The determination must be made after
examination under oath or affirmation
of the complainant and witnesses he
may produce
4. It must particularly describe the place
to be searched and the persons or
things to be seized.
Existence of Probable Cause
 Probable cause has been defined as
referring to such facts and
circumstances antecedent to the issue
of the warrant that in themselves are
sufficient to induce a cautious man to
rely on them and act in pursuance
thereof.
 Justin Escolin spoke of probable cause
for a search as such facts and
circumstances which would lead a
reasonably discreet and prudent man
to believe that an offense has been
committed and that the objects sought
 in connection with the offense are in
the place sought to be searched.
 Probable cause implies probability of
guilt and requires more that bare
suspicion, but less than evidence
which would justify a conviction.
Determination of Probable Cause
 Determination of probable cause is to
be made personally by the judge.
 Once the information is filed with the
court and the judge proceeds with his
primordial task of evaluating the
evidence on record, he may either:
1. Issue a warrant of arrest if he
finds probable cause
2. Immediately dismiss the case, if
the evidence on record clearly
fails to establish probable cause
3. Order the prosecutor to submit
additional evidence, in case he
doubts the existence of
probable cause
 There is distinction between
preliminary inquiry, which determined
the probable cause for the issuance of
a warrant of arrest, and the preliminary
investigation proper, which ascertains
whether the offender should be held
for trial or be released.
 A preliminary inquiry made by a
prosecutor does not bind the judge. It
merely assists him in making the
determination of probable cause for
issuance of warrant of arrest.
 A judge may issue a warrant of arrest
against an accused if he fails to
appear before his court for
arraignment despite notice.
 Probable cause implies probability of
guilt and requires more than bare
suspicion but less than evidence which
would justify a conviction.
 In fact, the task of the presiding judge
when the information is filed with the
court is first and foremost to determine
the existence or non – existence of
probable cause for the arrest of the
accused.
 The determination of probable cause
may be either executive or judicial.
Execute when it is made by the public
prosecutor, during a preliminary
investigation, where he is given broad
discretion to determine whether
probable cause exists for the purpose
of filing a criminal information in court.
Judicial is one made by the judge to
ascertain whether a warrant of arrest
should be issued against the accused.
 A judge may issue a warrant of arrest
against an accused if he fails to
appear before his court or arraignment
despite notice.
Examination of Applicant
 Rule 126, section 4, of the Rules of
Court, the judge, before issuing the
search warrant, must personally
examine in the form of searching
questions and answers in writing and
under oath the complaint and any
witnesses he may produce on facts
personally known to them and attach
to the records their sworn statements
together with any affidavits submitted.
 The affidavits to be considered
sufficient, should be drawn in such
manner that the affiant could be
charged with perjury if the allegations
contained therein are found to be
untrue.
 A search warrant must issue in the
name of the State, namely, the People
of the Philippines.
Particularity of Description
 The Constitution requires that the
place to be searched or the persons or
things to be seized be described with
such particularity as to enable the
person serving the warrant to identify
them. Failure of this may result in
erroneous or worse, arbitrary
enforcement of the warrant.
 The search warrant issued must
particularly describe the place to be
searched and persons or things to be
seized in order for it to be valid;
otherwise, it is considered as a general
warrant which is proscribed by both
 jurisprudence and the 1987
Constitution.
 Ideally, the person sought to be seized
should be identified by name. If the
warrant is issued without a name or
with the name in blank such that it can
be enforced against any person, it is
unquestionably void.
 A general warrant is defined as a
search warrant that is not particular as
to the person to be arrested or the
property to be seized.
Properties Subject to Seizure
 Under Rule 126, section 2 of the Rules
Warrantless Searches and Seizures
of Court, the following are subject to
search and seizure:
1. Property subject of the
offense
2. Property stolen or
embezzled and other
proceeds or fruits of the
offense
3. Property used or
intended to be used as
the means of committing
an offense.
 If said seized property is used as
evidence, the order for its disposition
or return can be made only when the
case is finally terminated, unless it is
then subject to forfeiture or other
proceedings.
Admissibility of Illegally Seized Evidence
 Pursuant to the doctrine announced in
Shonehill v. Diokno, articles illegally
seized are not admissible as evidence.
 Article III, Section 3 (2), “shall be
inadmissible for any purpose in any
proceeding”
 Such evidence is the fruit of the
poisonous tree.
 If the said property is the subject of
litigation, like a prosecution for illegal
possession of firearms, it will remain in
custodia legis until the case is
terminated.
 Arrest is the taking of a person into
custody in order that he or she may be
bound to answer for the commission of
an offense.
 The legality of a seizure can be
contested only by the party whose
rights have been impaired thereby,
and the objection to an unlawful
search and seizure is purely personal
and cannot be availed of by third
parties.
 The right to be secure from
unreasonable searches and seizures,
like any other right, can be waived and
the waiver may be made either
expressly or impliedly.
 Among them are consented searches;
as an incident to a lawful arrest:
searches of vessels and aircraft for
violation of immigration, customs and
drug laws; searches of moving
vehicles; searches of automobiles at
borders or constructive borders; where
the prohibited articles are in “plain
view”, searches of buildings and
premises to enforce fire, sanitary and
building regulations; and “stop and
frisk” operations or the so – called
Terry search, customs searches; and
searches conducted under exigent and
emergency circumstances.
 Warrantless searches and seizures at
military checkpoints have also been
acknowledged as justified on the basis
of the right of the state to protect itself.
 Searches based on tipped information
in buy bust operations or cases
involving drugs in transit have likewise
been sustained.
 It is provided in the Rules of Court that
a peace officer or even a private
person may, without a warrant arrest a
person:
1. When such person has in fact
just committed, is actually
committing or is attempting to
commit an offense in his
presence;
2. When an offense has in fact just
been committed and he has
personal knowledge of facts
 indicating that the person to be
arrested has committed it;
3. When the person to be arrested
is a prisoner who as escaped
from a penal establishment or
place where he is serving final
judgement or temporarily
confined while his case is
pending, or has escaped while
being transferred from one
confinement to another.
 Warrantless search was sustained
having been done after the accused
was caught in flagrante delicto.
 In arrests in flagrante delicto, the
accused is apprehended at the very
moment he is committing or attempting
to commit or has just committed an
offense in the presence of the
arresting officer. To constitute a valid
in flagrante delicto arrest, two
requisites must concur:
1. The person to be arrested must
execute an overt act indicating that
he has just committed, is actually
committing or is attempting to
commit a crime; and
2. Such overt act is done in the
presence or within the view of the
arresting officer
 The Supreme Court likewise
considered as valid the warrantless
search and seizure of the unlicensed
gun, ammunition and shabu conducted
in connection with a lawful entrapment
operation, having been lawfully made
in plain view and as an incident to a
lawful arrest.
 Thus, whereas in seizures covered by
search warrants, the physical inventory
and photograph must be conducted in
the place of the search warrant, in
warrantless seizures such as a buy –
bust operation, the physical inventory
and photograph shall be conducted at
the nearest police station or office of
the apprehending officer/team,
whichever is practicable, consistent
with the chain of custody rule.
 When an accused is apprehended in
flagrante delicto, as a result of a buy
bust operation, the police officers are
not only authorized but duty – bound to
arrest him even without warrant.
 Warrantless arrests made on the basis
alone of tips or reliable information
have consistently been considered as
not sufficient for them to be considered
as lawful.
 The warrantless arrests of the accused
which were based solely on a report
from a civilian asset or mere
information were also declared as
unlawful by the Supreme Court.
 Accordingly, it has been ruled that
when a driver is arrested, it is only but
expected and legally so for the police
to search his car as he was driving it
when he was arrested.
 An arrest may also be made without
warrant where the right thereto is
waived by the person arrested,
provided he knew of such right and
knowingly decided not to invoke it.
 To reiterate, when the accused did not
raise any protest when they, together
with their bags containing marihuana,
were brought to the police station for
investigation and subsequent
prosecution, they were considered to
have consented to be searched.
 Prohibited articles within plain view,
open to eye and hand, of the law –
enforcement officer who comes upon
them inadvertently may also be seized
by him even without warrant.
Plain View: Requisites
1. The law enforcement officer in search
of the evidence has a prior justification
for an intrusion or is in a position from
which he can view a particular area;
2. The discovery of the evidence in plain
view is inadvertent
3. It is immediately apparent to the officer
that the item he observes may be
evidence of a crime, contraband or
otherwise subject to seizure.
 Illegal lumber in plain view may be
validly seized without a warrant.
  It is clear that an object is in plain view
if the object itself is plainly exposed to
sight.
 Where the object seized is inside a
closed package, the object itself is not
in plain view and therefore cannot be
seized without a warrant.
 Evidence procured on the occasion of
an unreasonable search and seizure is
deemed tainted for being the
proverbial fruit of a poisonous tree and
should be excluded.
Privacy of Communication and
Correspondence
 The right to privacy is the right to be
free from unwarranted exploitation of
one’s person or from intrusion into
one’s private activities in such a way
as to cause humiliation to a person’s
ordinary sensibilities.
 It is the right of an individual to be free
from unwarranted publicity, or to live
without unwarranted interference by
the public in matters in which the
public is not necessarily concerned
 Simply put, the right to privacy is the
right to be let alone.
 Justice Douglas emphasized that
liberty in the constitutional sense must
mean more than freedom from
unlawful governmental restraint; it
must include privacy as well, if it is to
be repository of freedom.
 The right to be left alone is indeed the
beginning of all freedom.
Reasonable Expectation of Privacy Tests:
Two Part Test
1. Whether, by his conduct, the individual
has exhibited an expectation of
privacy; and
2. This expectation is one that society
recognizes as reasonable.
Note:
 The right to privacy is not absolute
where there is an overriding
compelling state interest.
 Purpose
 Three strands of the right to privacy:
1. Locational or situational privacy
2. Informational privacy – refers to the
interest in avoiding disclosure of
personal matters. Has two aspects:
the right not to have private
information discharged, and the
right to live freely without
surveillance and intrusion.
3. Decisional privacy – involves the
right to independence in making
certain important decisions
Writ of Habeas Data
 The writ of habeas data was
conceptualized as a judicial remedy
enforcing the right to privacy, most
especially the right to informational
privacy of individuals.
 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 unlawful ends.
Liberty of Abode and Travel
 An employment agency, regardless of
the amount it may advance to
prospective employee, has absolutely
no power to curtail the freedom of said
employee.
 Fundamental freedoms are beyond the
province of commerce or any other
business enterprise.
 Section 3, Article III “The liberty of
abode and of changing the same
within the limits prescribed by law shall
not be impaired except upon lawful
order of the court. Neither shall the
right to travel be impaired except in the
interest of national security, public
safety or public health, as may be
provided by law.
 No resettlement of urban or rural
dwellers shall be undertaken without
adequate consultation with them and
the communities where they are to be
relocated.
  The purpose of the guaranty is to
further emphasize the individual’s
liberty as safeguarded in general
terms by the due process clause
 Liberty under the clause includes:
1. The right to choose one’s
residence
2. To leave it whenever he
pleases
3. To travel wherever he wills.
Limitations
 The liberty of abode can be limited
upon lawful order of the court and the
right to travel by the requirements of
national security, public safety or
public health as may be provided by
law (Section 6)
 Thus, a person facing criminal charges
may be restrained by the court from
leaving the country or, if abroad,
compelled to return.
 Ban on right to travel may be justified
on the ground of public safety.
 These rights are guaranteed to all
individuals, including the patriot and
the homesick and the prodigal son
returning and tyrants and charlatans
and scoundrels of every stripe.
 While the right to travel is a
constitutional right that may be
impaired only “in the interest of
national security, public security or
public health, as may be provided by
law, there are recognized exceptions
other than those created by law.
 Foremost is the restriction on persons
subpoenaed or ordered arrested by
the Senate or House of
Representatives pursuant to their
power of legislative inquiry.
 Office of the Court Administrator
Circular No. 49 – 2003 (B) requires
judges and court personnel “to secure
a travel authority from the office of the
Court Administrator” before they can
travel abroad even during their
approved leave of absence or free
time.
 The law restricts the right to travel of
an individual charged with the crime of
terrorism even though such person is
out on bail. (The Human Security Act
of 2010)
 The Secretary of Foreign affairs or his
authorized consular officer may refuse
the issuance of, restrict the use of or
withdraw, a passport of a Filipino
citizen (The Philippine Passport Act of
1996)
 The Bureau of Immigration allowing its
Travel Control and Enforcement Unit
to offload passengers with fraudulent
travel documents, doubtful purpose of
travel, including possible victims of
human trafficking from our ports. (Anti
– Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003)
 Philippine Overseas Employment
Administration (POEA) may refuse to
issue deployment permit to a specific
country that effectively prevents our
migrant workers to enter such country.
(The Migrant Workers and Overseas
Filipinos Act of 1995)
 The law restricts movement of an
individual against whom the protection
order is intended. (Act on Violence
Against Women and Children)
 The Inter – Country Adoption Board
may issue rules restrictive of an
adoptee’s right to travel to protect the
Filipino child from abuse, exploitation,
trafficking and/or sale or any other
practice in connection with adoption
which is harmful, detrimental or
prejudicial to the child. (Inter – Country
Adoption Act of 1995)
OCA Circular No. 49 – 20023
 Judges must submit the following
requirements:
1. Application or letter – request
addressed to the Court
Administrator stating the
purpose of the travel abroad;
2. Application for leave covering
the period of the travel abroad,
favorably recommended by the
Executive Judge; and
3. Certification from the Statistics
Division, court Management
 Office, OCA as to the condition
of the docket.
 This circular does not restrict but
merely regulates, by providing
guidelines to be complied by judges
and court personnel, before they can
go on leave to travel abroad.
Freedom of Religion
 The right to worship is one of the
basic liberties of man that has been
the subject of official repression and
punishment since the beginning of
Separation of Church and State
recorded government.
 Universal Declaration of Human
Rights affirmed that, “everyone has
the right to freedom of thought,
conscience and religion; this right
includes freedom to change his
relation or belief and freedom, either
alone or in community with others
and in public or private, to manifest
his religion or belief in teaching,
practice, worship and observance.
 Religion may be defined as “any
specific system of belief, worship,
conduct, etc., often involving a code
of ethics and a philosophy.
 Religion is a profession of faith to an
active power that binds and elevates
man to his Creator. (Aglipay v. Ruiz)
 In the context of the constitutional
provision, religion also includes a
rejection of religion, a refusal to
believe in a hereafter or in the
supremacy of a supernatural person
with powers over life and death.
 Religion embraces matters of faith
and dogma, as well as doubt,
agnosticism and atheism.
Religion in the Constitution
 “No law shall be made respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting
the free exercise thereof. The free
exercise and enjoyment of religious
profession and worship, without
discrimination or preference shall
forever be allowed. No religious test
shall be required for the exercise of
civil or political rights. (Article III, Sec.
5) (First part is the establishment
clause)
 The separation of Church and State
shall be inviolable. (Article II, Sec. 6)
 It is noteworthy also that the Preamble
of the Constitution begins with an
invocation for “the aid of Almighty
God”, under the notion that “in so far
as it is instills into the mind the purest
principles of morality, the influence of
religion is deeply felt and highly
appreciated.
 Article II, Section 6
 The rationale of the rule is summed up
in the familiar saying, “strong fences
make good neighbors”.
 The idea is to delineate the boundaries
between the two institutions and thus
avoid encroachments by one against
the other because of a
misunderstanding of the limits of their
respective exclusive jurisdictions.
 Render therefore unto Caesar the
things that are Caesar’s and unto God
the things that are God’s.
 It is not only the state that is prohibited
from interfering in purely ecclesiastical
affairs; the Church is likewise barred
from meddling in purely secular
matters.
 The wall of separation between
Church and State is not a wall of
hostility. The State in fact recognizes
the beneficent influence of religion in
the enrichment of the nation’s life.
 “In so far as it instils into the mind the
purest principles of morality”, so said
Justice Laurel, the influence of religion
is deeply felt and highly appreciated.
 The establishment clause principally
prohibits the State from sponsoring
any religion or favoring any religion as
against other religions. It mandates a
strict neutrality in affairs among
religious groups.
 Freedom of religion includes freedom
from religion; the right to worship
includes the right not to worship.
  In the Philippines, the doctrine of
separation of Church and State should
be read specifically with Article VI,
section 29 (2), prohibiting
appropriations of public funds for
sectarian purposes.
 It has also been held that “it does not Religious Profession and Worship
inhibit the use of public property for
religious purposes when the religious  The right to religious profession and
character of such use is merely worship has a twofold aspect:
incidental to a temporary use which is 1. Freedom to believe (absolute as
available indiscriminately to the public long as the belief is confined
in general. within the realm of thought)
2. Freedom to act on one’s beliefs
 Hence, a public street may be used for
(subject to regulation where the
a religious procession even as it is
belief is translated into external
available for a civic parade, in the
acts that affect the public
same way that a public plaza is not
welfare)
barred to a religious rally if it may also
be used for a political assemblage. Freedom to Believe
 The constitution itself also provides for
the exemption from property taxes or  The individual is free to believe or
religious institutions and all lands, disbelieve as he pleases concerning
buildings and improvements actually, the hereafter.
directly and exclusively devoted to  He may indulge his own theories about
religious purposes. life and death; worship any god he
chooses, or none at all; embrace or
Intramural Religious Disputes reject any religion; acknowledge the
divinity of God or of any being that
 It is clear that intramural disputes
appeals to his reverence; recognize or
regarding religious dogma and other
deny the immortality o his soul, cherish
matters of faith are outside the
any religious conviction as he and he
jurisdiction of the secular authorities.
alone sees fit.
 Thus while the Church may provide for
 Religion, after all, is a matter of faith.
the dissolution of marriage by its own
Men may believe what they cannot
courts, the ecclesiastical decree
prove. Everyone has a right to his
cannot prevail against the Civil Code
beliefs and he may not be called to
which prohibits divorce.
account because he cannot prove
 Verily, the principle of separation of
what he believes.
Church and state is based on mutual
respect. Freedom to Act on One’s Belief
 Moreover, it has declared that “matters
 But where the individual externalizes
dealing with faith, practice, doctrine,
his beliefs in acts or omissions that
form of worship, ecclesiastical law,
affect the public, his freedom to do so
custom and rule of a church… are
becomes subject to the authority of the
unquestionably ecclesiastical matters
State.
which are outside the province of the
civil courts.  Religious freedom, like all the other
rights enjoyed only with a proper
 Where the dispute involves the
regard for the rights of others.
property rights of the religious group,
or the relations of the members where  The inherent police power can be
property rights are involved, the civil exercised to prevent religious practices
courts may assume jurisdiction. inimical to society.
  Justice Frankfurter put it succinctly:
“The constitutional provision on
religious freedom terminated
disabilities, it did not create new
privileges. It gave religious liberty, not
civil immunity. It’s essence is freedom
from conformity to law because of
religious dogma.
 As long as it can be shown that the
exercise of the right does not impair
the public welfare, the attempt of the
State to regulate or prohibit such right
would be an unconstitutional
encroachment.
Religious Tests
 The constitutional prohibition against
religious test is aimed against
clandestine attempts on the part of the
government to prevent a person from
exercising his life or political rights
because of his religious beliefs.
Freedom of Expression
Freedom of Speech
 Has been defined by Wendell Philips
as “at once the instrument and the
guaranty and the bright consummate
flower of all liberty”.
 The definition covers freedom of
expression, freedom of speech,
freedom of the press, freedom of
religion, the right to association, the
right to access to information on
matters of public concern, and the right
not to be detained solely by reason of
one’s political beliefs and aspirations.
 Freedom of Expression is available
only insofar as it is exercised for the
discussion of matters affecting the
public interest.
 “Sovereignty resides in the people”,
this sovereignty would be negated if
they were denied the opportunity to
participate in the shaping of public
affairs through the arbitrary imposition
upon them of the ban of silence.
 As an individual “particle of
sovereignty”, every citizen has a right
to offer his views and suggestions in
the discussion of the common
problems of the community or the
nation.
 Justice Holmes in Abrams v. US,
eloquently stated the philosophical
basis of freedom – “the ultimate good
desired is better reached by a free
trade in ideas – that the best test of
truth is the power of the thought to get
itself accepted in the competition of the
market; and the truth is the only
ground upon which their wishes safely
can be carried out.
Theories that Strengthen the Need to
Protect the Basic Right to Freedom of
Expression
 1. Deliberative Democracy
- Include the right of the
people to participate in
public affairs, including the
right to criticize government
actions.
2. Free speech as being under the
concept of a market place of ideas
3. Free speech involves self –
expression that enhances human
dignity.
- Means of assuring individual
self – fulfillment among
others.
4. Free expression as a marker for
group identity
5. Free speech is supposed to protect
individuals and minorities against
majoritarian abuses perpetrated
through framework of democratic
governance.
6. Free speech must be protected
under the safety valve theory.
 Free speech must, thus be protected
as a peaceful means of achieving
one’s goal, considering the possibility
that repression of non – violent dissent
may spill over to violent means just to
drive a point.
Scope
 One of the functions of this freedom is
precisely, according to the US
Supreme Court, to invite dispute.
 Justice Holmes put it aptly when he
said that this right exists not so much
for the thought that agrees with us as
for the thought that we detest.
 The freedom to speak includes the
right to be silent.
 The Bill of Rights which guarantees to
the individual the liberty to utter what is
in his mind also guarantees to him the
liberty not to utter what is not in his
mind.
 This freedom also includes the right to
an audience, in the sense that the
State cannot prohibit the people from
hearing what a person has to say,
whatever be the quality of his
thoughts.
 The right to listen also includes the
right not to listen.
 As Socrates said, this freedom was
meant not only to protect the minority
who want to talk but also to benefit the
majority who refuse to listen.
Modes of Expression
 Freedom of expression is usually
exercised through language, oral and
written. Symbolisms may also be
included.
 Speech, according to the Supreme
Court in Diocese of Bacolod vs.
Commission on Elections, is not
limited to vocal communication. “The
form of expression is just as important
as the information conveyed that it
forms part of the expression”.
 “A more educated electorate will
increase the possibilities of both good
governance and accountability in our
government.
 Free expression can also come in the
forms of commercial speech, which
does no more than propose a
commercial transaction and also
political speech presented as satire.
Elements
 Article III, Section 4, reads, “No law
shall be passed abridging the freedom
of speech, of expression, or of the
press, or the right of the people
peaceably to assemble and petition
the Government for redress and
grievances.
 “No person shall be detained solely by
reason of his political beliefs and
aspirations
 Elements of Freedom of Expression:
1. Freedom from previous
restraint or censorship
2. Freedom from subsequent
punishment.
 Restraint upon these freedoms may be
either:
 1. Content – based  The press was protected so that it
2. Content – neutral could bare the secrets of government
 Content – based regulation or and inform the people. Only a free and
censorship unrestrained press can effectively
If the restriction is based expose deception in government.
on the subject matter of  In our country, regrettably, there does
the utterance or speech not appear to be the same vigilance in
Aimed at the contents or the protection of the right against
idea of the expression censorship.
 Only when the challenged act has
overcome the clear and present
danger rule will it pass constitutional
muster, with the government having
 Content – neutral regulation
the burden of overcoming the
if it is merely concerned
presumed unconstitutionality.
with the incidents of the
2. Freedom from Punishment
speech, or one that
 Freedom of speech includes the
merely controls the time,
freedom after the speech. Without this
place or manner and
assurance, the citizen would hesitate
under well – defined
to speak for fear he might be
standards.
provoking the vengeance of the
1. Freedom from Censorship
officials he has criticized.
 Censorship conditions the exercise of
 Freedom of expression is not absolute
freedom of expression upon the prior
notwithstanding that the language of
approval of the government. Only
the guaranty, unlike some of the
those ideas acceptable to it are
provisions in the Bill of Rights, in
allowed to be disseminated; all others
unqualified.
are restricted or suppressed.
 Like all rights, it is subject to the police
 The governmental regulation of the
power and may be properly regulated
content of speech is more likely to
in the interest of the public.
interfere with the free exchange of
 The lewd word, obscene word, the
ideas than to encourage it. The
seditious word, the slanderous word
interest in encouraging freedom of
cannot be considered a step of truth
expression in a democratic society
and therefore will not enjoy immunity
outweighs any theoretical but
from prohibition and punishment.
unproven benefit of censorship.
 To determine the liability of the
 It is not lawful to require the obtention
individuals for ideas expressed by him,
from then authorities of a speaker’s
three major criteria have been applied:
permit before a person may deliver a
1. The clear and present danger rule
speech.
2. The dangerous tendency doctrine
 A free press stands as one of the great
3. The balancing test
interpreters between the government
and the people, “Justice Sutherland
declared, “To allow it to be fettered is
The Clear and Present Danger Rule
to fetter ourselves”.
 The press was to serve the governed,  Justice Holmes, “the question in every
not the governors. case is whether the words used are
 The government’s power to censor the used in such circumstances and are of
press was abolished so that the press such a nature as to create a clear and
would remain forever free to censure present danger that they will bring
the government.
 about the substantive evils that the
state has a right to prevent.
 It is a question of proximity and
degree.
 The character of every act depends
upon the circumstances in which it is
done.
 The rule is that the danger created
must not only be clear and present but
also traceable to the ideas expressed.
 According to Justice Fernando, the
term clear seems to point to a causal
connection with the danger of the
substantive evil arising from the
utterance questioned. Present refers to
the time element. It is used to be
identified with imminent and immediate
danger. The danger must not only be
probable but every likely inevitable.
The Dangerous Tendency Doctrine
 If the words uttered create a
dangerous tendency which the State
has a right to prevent, then such words
are punishable.
 Under this test, a person could be
punished for his ideas even if they only
tended to create the evil sought to be
prevented.
The Balance of Interest Test
 When particular conduct is regulated in
the interest of public order, and the
regulation results in an indirect,
conditional, partial abridgment of
speech, the duty of the courts is to
determine which of the two conflicting
interests demands the greater
protection under the particular
circumstances presented.
 Thus, if in a given situation it should
appear that there is urgent necessity
for protecting the national security
against improvident exercise of
freedom of expression, the right must
be yield.
Criticism of Official Conduct
 The interest of society and the
maintenance of good government
demand a full discussion of public
affairs. Complete liberty to comment
on the conduct of public men is a
scalpel in the case of free speech.
 The official acts, and now even the
private life, of a public servant are
legitimate subjects of public comment.
The people have the right to scrutinize
and commend or condemn the
conduct of their chosen
representatives in the government.
And as long as their comments are
made in good faith and with justifiable
ends, they are insulated from
prosecution or damage suits for
defamation even if such views are
found to be inaccurate or erroneous.
 In fact, a private individual may still be
the subject of public comment even if
he is not a public official or at least a
public figure, as long as he is involved
in a public issue.
 The power to punish for contempt is
inherent in all courts as it is
indispensable to their right of self –
preservation, to the execution of their
powers, and to the maintenance of
their authority; and consequently to the
due administration of justice.
Art and Obscenity
 The trend toward realism in art and
literature, coupled with the growing
permissiveness of the times, has
created many problems in
Constitutional Law regarding the
powers of the State in the enforcement
of its obscenity laws.
 Obscenity which even we cannot
define with precision – is a
hodgepodge.
Assembly and Petition
 The right of assembly is important to
freedom of expression because public
issues are better resolved after an
exchange of views among citizens
meeting with each other for the
purposes.
  The public meeting is an effective
forum for the ventilation of ideas
affecting the common welfare.
 The right to assemble is not subject to
previous restraint or censorship.
 It should be noted, however, that if the
assembly is intended to be held in
public place, a permit for the use of
such place, and not for the assembly
itself, may be validly required.
 They cannot altogether bar the use of
public places for lawful assemblies; the
most they can do is indicate the time
and condition for their use.
 A permit for the holding of a public
assembly shall not be necessary
where the meeting is to be held in a
private place, in the campus of a
government – owned and operated
educational institution or in a freedom
park.
Right of Association
 The right of association is especially
meaningful in a free society because a
man is by nature gregarious.
 Article III, Section 8 “The right of the
people, including those employed in
the public and private sectors, to form
unions, associations or societies for
purposes not contrary to law shall not
be abridged.
 The phrase for purposes not contrary
to law is a built – in limitation of the
right.
 To this end, the constitution
guarantees to them the rights to “self –
organization, collective bargaining and
negotiations and peaceful concerted
actions including the right to strike in
accordance with law”.
Access to Information
 The right of access to public
documents has been recognized as a
self – executory constitutional right.
 The foregoing constitutional provisions
seek to promote transparency in policy
– making and in the operations of the
government, as well as provide the
people sufficient information to
exercise effectively other constitutional
rights.
 Armed with the right information,
citizens can participate in public
discussions leading to the formulation
of government policies and their
effective implementation.
 An informed citizenry is essential to
the existence and proper functioning of
any democracy.
 The Court directed the disclosure of
the information was subject to certain
recognized restrictions, among them:
i. National Security matters and
intelligence information
ii. Trade secrets and banking
transactions
iii. Criminal matters
iv. Other confidential information
The Impairment Clause
 No law impairing the obligation of
contracts shall be passed.
 The purpose of the impairment clause
is to safeguard the integrity of valid
contractual agreements against
unwarranted interference by the State.
 As a rule, they should be respected by
the legislature and not tampered with
by subsequent laws that will change
the intention of the parties or modify
their rights and obligations. The will of
the obligor and the oblige must be
observed; the obligation of their
contract must not be impaired.
Contract
 The term contract as used in the
impairment clause refers to any lawful
agreement or property or property
rights, whether real or personal,
tangible or intangible.
 The agreement may be executed or
executory. The parties may be private
persons only, natural or artificial, or
private persons on the one hand and
the government or its agencies on the
other hand.
  It does not cover licenses nor marriage
contract which is more than a mere
agreement between the spouses.
 A public office is not a property right
and therefore cannot be the subject of
a contract between the incumbent and
the government.
Law
 Includes statutes enacted by the
national legislature, executive
orders and administrative
regulations promulgated under a
valid delegation of power and
municipal ordinances passed by
the local legislative bodies.
 To impair, the law must retroact so
as to affect existing contracts
concluded before its enactment.
There will be no impairment if the
law is made to operate
prospectively only, to cover
contracts entered into after its
enactment.
Obligations
 The obligation of the contract is the
vinculum juris, i.e., the time that binds
the parties to each other.
 The obligation of a contract is the law
or duty which binds the parties to
perform their undertaking or
agreement according to its terms and
intent.
 In a contract of loan, for example, the
obligation is the duty of the lender to
extend the loan and of the borrower to
repay it, according to its stipulations.
Impairment
 Impairment is anything that diminishes
the efficacy of the contract. In the
above example of the contract of loan,
there will be an impairment of its
obligation if by subsequent law the
principal of the loan is reduced or
increased, or the period of payment is
shortened or lengthened, or conditions
are added or removed or the remedies
for the enforcement of the rights of the
parties are completely withdrawn.
Limitations
 If the law is a proper exercise of police
power, it will prevail over the contract.
 The freedom to contract is not
absolute; all contracts and all rights
are subject to the police power of the
State and not only may regulations
which affect them be established by
the state, but all regulations must be
change from time to time, as the
general well – being of the community
may require, or as the circumstances
may change, or as experience may
demonstrate the necessity.
 The police power is superior to the non
– impairment clause. The
constitutional guaranty of non –
impairment of contracts is limited by
the exercise of the police power of the
state, in the interest of public health,
safety morals and general welfare of
the community.
Ex Post Facto Laws
 No ex post facto law or bill of
attainder shall be enacted
 The equivalent of the impairment
clause in criminal matters is the
prohibition against the passage of
the ex post facto law.
 Ex post facto law, like the law
impairing the obligation of the
contract, operates retroactively to
affect antecedent acts.
 Basically, ex post facto law is one
that would make a previous act
criminal although it was not so at
the time it was committed.
Kinds
i. Every law that makes criminal an act
done before the passage of a law and
which was innocent when done, and
punishes such an act.
ii. Every law that aggravates a crime, or
makes it greater than it was when
committed.
iii. Every law that changes punishment
and inflicts a greater punishment than
 the law annexed to the crime when essence being the substitute of
committed. legislative fiat for a judicial
iv. Every law that alters the legal rules of determination of guilt.
evidence, and receives less or  Bill of attainder are an ancient
different testimony than the law instrument of tyranny.
required at the time of the commission
of the offense, in order to convict the
offender.
v. Every law which, assuming to regulate
civil rights and remedies only, in effect
imposes a penalty or the deprivation of
a right for something which when done
was lawful.
vi. Every law which deprives persons
accused of crime of some lawful
protection to which they have become
entitled, such as the protection of a
former conviction or acquittal, or of a
proclamation of amnesty.
Characteristics
 To be an ex post facto law, it must:
1. Refer to criminal matters
2. Be retroactive in its application
3. To the prejudiced of the Non Imprisonment for Debt
accused.
 No person shall be imprisoned for debt
Exceptions or non – payment of a poll tax.

 A law can never be considered ex post Debt

facto as long as it operates
 Refers to any civil obligation arising
prospectively since its strictures would
from contract, expressed or implied.
cover only offenses committed after
 It includes even debts obtained
and not before its enactment.
through fraud since no distinction is
 Remedial laws may be given
made in the constitution (Ganaway v.
retroactive effect and may be made to
Quillen)
apply to actions pending and
undetermined at the time of their Crime
passage, there being no vested rights
in the rules of procedure.  Although the debtor cannot be
imprisoned for his failure to pay his
 Even if the law be penal and
debt, he can be validly punished in a
retroactive, it will still not be ex post
criminal action if he contracted his debt
facto if it does not operate to the
through fraud.
disadvantage of the accused.
 In such a case, the act for which he is
Bill of Attainder penalized is the deception he
employed in securing the debt, not his
 If a statute is a bill of attainder, it is
default in paying it.
also and ex post factor law
Poll Tax
Characteristics
 Since tax is not a debt but arises from
 A bill of attainder is a legislative act
the obligation of the person to
that inflicts punishment without trial, its
 contribute his share in the refuse to do so if the position is
maintenance of the government, intended for the defense of the
failure to pay the same can be validly state.
punished with imprisonment.
 The only exception is failure to pay a
poll tax, which is defined as a specific
fixed sum levied upon every person
belonging to a certain class without
regard to his property or occupation.

Involuntary Servitude
 The condition of one who is compelled Writ of Habeas Corpus
by force, coercion, or imprisonment
and against his will to labor for  The writ of habeas corpus is a
another, whether he is paid or not. prerogative writ of liberty to test the
validity of a person’s detention. If he is
 The concept of slavery, which is
restrained of his liberty, he or someone
defined as “that civil relation in which
acting on his behalf may file a petition
one man has absolute power over the
for habeas corpus to secure his
life, fortune, and liberty of another.
release.
 Peonage, is the condition of enforced
 The ultimate purpose of the writ of
servitude by which the servitor is
habeas corpus is to relieve a person
restrained of his liberty and compelled
from unlawful restraint.
to labor in liquidation of some debt or
obligation, real or pretended, against  The writ exists as a speedy and
his will. effectual remedy to relieve persons
from unlawful restraint and as an
Exceptions effective defense of personal freedom.
 It is used only for the lone purpose of
 Chief among these exceptions is
obtaining relief from those illegally
the one expressly provided for in
confined or imprisoned without
the rule, to wit, “punishment for a
sufficient legal basis.
crime whereof the party shall have
been duly convicted”.  Accordingly, one who is lawfully
detained, as when he is detained by
 While a person may not as a rule
virtue of a final judgment of conviction
be compelled to accept a public
for a criminal offense, may not avail
appointive office, he may not
himself of this constitutional remedy.
  The object of the writ of habeas corpus
is to inquire into the legality of the
detention, and if the detention is found
to be illegal, to require to release the
detainee.
When Available
 The remedy of the writ of habeas
corpus is available not only in cases of
illegal confinement or detention by
which any person is deprived of his
liberty, but also in cases involving the
rightful custody over a minor.
 Habeas corpus may also be resorted
to in case of unlawful denial of bail.
Procedure
 It should be noted that it is not the writ
itself but only its privilege that may be
suspended.
 The privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus shall not be suspended except
in cases of invasion or rebellion, when
the public safety requires it.
Grounds for Suspension
 To the President is entrusted the
power to suspend the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus. However, this
power is not without limitations and
may be revoked by the Congress or
the Supreme Court in proper cases.
 The suspension of the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus shall apply only
to persons judicially charged for
rebellion or offenses inherent in or
directly connected with invasion.
 During the suspension of the privilege
of the writ, any person thus arrested or
detained shall be judicially charged
within three days, otherwise he shall
be released.
 The Supreme Court decidedly has the
power to annul the suspension of the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus if
the same is not based on either of the
two grounds enumerated in the
Constitution: “invasion or rebellion,
when the public safety requires it”
Authority of the Commander – in – Chief
1. He may call out the armed forces to
prevent or suppress lawless violence,
invasion or rebellion only.
2. The grounds for the suspension of the
privilege of the writ and the
proclamation of martial law are now
limited to invasion or rebellion when
the public safety requires it.
3. The duration of such suspension or
proclamation shall not exceed sixty
days, following which it shall be
automatically lifted.
4. Within 48 hours after such suspension
or proclamation, the President shall
personally or in writing report his
action to the Congress.
5. The Congress may, by a majority vote
of all its members voting jointly, revoke
his action. The revocation may not be
set aside by the President.
6. By the same vote and in the same
manner, the Congress may, upon the
initiative of the President, extend his
suspension or proclamation for a
period to be determined by the
Congress if the invasion or rebellion
shall continue and the public safety
requires the extension.
7. The action of the President and the
Congress shall be subject to review by
the Supreme Court, which shall have
the authority to determine the
sufficiency of the factual basis of such
action.
8. Martial law does not automatically
suspend the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus or the operation of the
Constitution.
Ilagan Case – Ilagan vs. Enrile
Atty. Ilagan was arrested by the
military on the basis of a mission order
allegedly issued by the Ministry of National
Defense. On the same day, Atty. Arellano,
while visiting his colleague at the detention
camp, was also arrested. On May 13, 1985,
upon hearing that he was also wanted, Atty.
Risonar went to the military camp to verify the
report and was also arrested, likewise on the
basis of a mission order signed by General
Echevarria. A petition for habeas corpus was
then filed on behalf of the three lawyers by
the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the Free
Legal Assistance Group (FLAG), and the
Movement of Attorneys for Brotherhood,
Integrity and Nationalism (MABINI). The writ
was issued on May 16, 1985, and in return
the respondents contended that the
detainees were covered by a preventive
detention action issued against them on
January 25, 1985; that the privilege of the writ
of habeas corpus was suspended as to them;
and that the courts lacked the authority to
inquire into the cause and validity of their
detention. For lack of evidence linking them
to such acts (subversive acts), the Supreme
Court ordered their temporary release on the
recognizance of their counsel. The detainees
were not released, however. On May 27,
1985, respondents filed an urgent motion for
reconsideration of the Court’s order,
reiterating its lack of jurisdiction because of
the suspension of the privilege and declaring
that, while there was an order of the Court for
the release of the detainees, there was also a
PDA directing their detention, which was
binding on the respondents. Respondents
claimed that petition should be dismissed for
having become moot and academic. The
Supreme court agreed with the military and
granted the motion declaring that the
detained attorney’s incarceration is by virtue
of a judicial order in relation to criminal cases
subsequently filed against them before the
Regional Trial Court of Davao City, the
remedy of habeas corpus no longer lies.
Justice Teehanke declared that petitioners
must be immediately freed. Petitioners must
be granted their constitutional right due to
process and the right to preliminary
investigation, as granted by statute and
expressly assured to them by respondents in
open court.
The Writs if Amparo and Habeas Data
 Two complementary writs have been
added by the Supreme Court to make
the writ of habeas corpus more
efficacious.
 Under the writ of Amparo, however,
the courts will be more diligent in the
protection of the life, liberty and
security of the desaparecido and can
order the respondents to exert more
and actual effort in locating the missing
person and showing that he is in good
condition and has not been maltreated
by the authorities.
 Amparo will provide more protection to
him than is available under the writ of
habeas corpus.
 The petition for a 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 of a public
official or employee or of a private
individual or entity.
 The writ of amparo shall cover
extralegal killings and enforced
disappearances or threats thereof.
 A writ of amparo is a special
proceeding. It is a remedy by which a
party seeks to establish a status, a
right or particularly fact. It is not a civil
nor a criminal action.
 For the protective writ of amparo to
issue in enforced disappearance
cases, allegation and proof that the
persons subject thereof are missing
are not enough. It must also be shown
by the required quantum of proof that
their disappearance was carried out
by.
 The phrase “extralegal killings and
enforced disappearances” refers to the
arrest, detention, abduction or any
other form of deprivation of liberty by
agents of the state or by persons or
groups of persons acting with the
authorization, support, or
acquiescence of the state, followed by
a refusal to acknowledge the
deprivation of liberty or by
concealment of the fate or
whereabouts of the disappeared
person, which place such a person
outside the protection of the law.
Elements of Enforced Disappearances
 1. That there be an arrest, detention,
abduction or any form of deprivation of
liberty;
2. That it be carried out by, or with the
authorization, support or
acquiescence, of the State or a
political organization;
3. That it be followed by the State or
political organization’s refusal to
acknowledge or give information on
the fate or whereabouts of the person
subject of the amparo petition; and
4. That the intention for such refusal is to
remove subject person from the
protection of the law for a prolonged
period of time.
Writ of Habeas Data
 The 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 may also be sought to secure
destruction of such secret information
gathered in violation of the person’s
right to privacy to justify summary
action against him by the government
or any private entity. Speedy Disposition of Cases
 The writ of habeas data was  Justice delayed is justice denied
conceptualized as a judicial remedy  In the Philippines, litigations have been
enforcing the right to privacy, most known to drag for years and even
especially the right to informational decades before they are at long last
privacy of individuals. terminated.
 The writ operates to protect a person’s  One reason for the delay in the
right to control information regarding decision of cases could be the number
himself, particularly in the instances of litigations filed, an indication
where such information is being perhaps of the litigious nature of our
collected through unlawful means in people, and in the case of criminal
order to achieve unlawful ends. actions, of their criminal propensities.
 Section 16 of the Bill of Rights, “all
persons shall have the right to a
speedy disposition of their cases
before all judicial, quasi judicial or
administrative bodies.
  Supreme court shall provide a
simplified and inexpensive procedure
for the speedy disposition of cases.
 As a general principle, rules
prescribing the time within which
certain acts must be done, or certain
proceedings taken, are considered
absolutely indispensable to the
prevention of needless delays and the
orderly and speedy discharge of
judicial business.
 The Supreme Court has consistently
pronounced that “the right to a speedy
disposition of cases and the accused’s
right to a speedy trial are distinct,
albeit kindred, guarantees, the most
obvious difference being that a speedy
disposition of cases, as provided in
Article III, Section 16 of the
Factors in the Determination of whether
Constitution, obtains regardless of the
the defendant has been denied his right to
nature of the case.
a speedy disposition of a case
 This constitutional right is not limited to
the accused in criminal proceedings
but extends to all parties in all cases,
be it civil or administrative in nature, as
well as all proceedings, either judicial
or quasi-judicial.
 Even the Ombudsman may be
compelled by mandamus to resolve
both administrative and criminal cases
expeditiously.
 The Supreme Court has more or less
consistently held that “dismissal of the
Rights of the Accused
case for violation of this right is the
general rule.
 There occurs a violation of the right to
speedy disposition of cases only when
the proceedings are attended by
vexatious, capricious, and oppressive
delays or when unjustified
postponements of the trial are sought
and secured or when, without cause or
Criminal Due Process
justifiable motive, a long period of time
is allowed to elapse without the party
having his case tried.
Rules in determining the existence of
delay in cases:
1. Fixed time period rule
 There is considered a delay if
proper resolution of a case is
not done within a specified time
period.
2. Demand – waiver Rule
 A defendant is considered to
have waived any consideration
of his right to a speedy trial for
any period to which he has not
demanded trial.
 Under this rigid approach, prior
demand is a necessary
condition to the consideration of
the speedy trial right.
3. Balancing Test
 For purposes of determining
whether or not there has been
inordinate delay, the conduct of
both the prosecution and
defendant are weighed.
1. The length of the delay
2. The reasons of the delay
3. The assertion or failure to assert such
right by the accused; and
4. The prejudice caused by the delay
 A defendant has no duty to
bring himself to trial; the State
has that duty as well as the duty
of insuring that the trial is
consistent with due process.
 The person suspected or
accused of a crime is entitled to
the specific safeguards
embodied in Sections 12,
13,14,17,19 and 21 of Article III
against arbitrary prosecution or
punishment.
 Sec. 14 – No person shall be
held to answer for a criminal
offense without due process of
law.
 Due process applies to all kinds
of proceedings, civil, criminal
and administrative.
 Criminal due process requires
that the accused be tried by an
impartial and competent court in
accordance with the procedure
prescribed by law and with
proper observance of all the
rights accorded him under the
Constitution and the applicable
statutes.
 Denial from him of the right to
preliminary investigation, will
constitute a denial of due
process.
 Denial of this right, in the
absence of a valid waiver will
violate due process.
 The Ombudsman has full
discretion to determine whether
a criminal case should be filed,
including whether a preliminary
investigation is warranted.
 The conduct of preliminary
investigation is subject to the
requirements of both
substantive and procedural due
process.
 A preliminary investigation is
considered as a judicial
proceeding wherein the
prosecutor or investigating
officer, by the nature of his
functions, acts as a quasi –
judicial officer.
 The prosecutor may either
dismiss the complaint if he does
not see sufficient reason to
proceed with the case, or file
the information if he finds
probable cause.
 Stressing the citizen’s right to
be free not only from arbitrary
arrest and punishment but also
from unwarranted and vexatious
prosecution.
 The integrity of a democratic
society is corrupted if a person
is carelessly included in the trial
of around forty persons when
on the face of the record no
evidence linking him to the
alleged conspiracy exists.
 Obviously, the basic ingredient
of criminal due process is a trial
conducted in accordance with
the rudiments of fair play.
Hence, the accused has a right
to complain if the judge has a
personal or pecuniary interest in
the outcome of the case, as
where he is allowed to share in
the fines he may impose or
where he is covered by the
disqualification enumerated in
the Rules of Court.
 A mistrial may be declared if it
is shown that the proceeding
were held under such
circumstances as would prevent
the accused from freely making
his defense or the judge from
freely arriving at his decision.
 Due process is also denied
where a person is impleaded for
violation of a law, administrative
regulation or municipal
ordinance not previously
published as he would not know
what acts he must do or avoid
to prevent prosecution.
Self – Incrimination
 Section 17 – No person shall be
compelled to be a witness against
himself.
 The right against self – incrimination
has its roots in the common law and is
based on humanitarian and practical
considerations. Humanitarian because
it is intended to prevent the State, with
all its coercive powers, from extracting
from the suspect testimony that mat
convict him. Practical because a
person subjected to such compulsion
is likely to perjure himself for his own
protection.
 The right is available not only in
criminal prosecutions but also in all
 other government proceedings, of knowing in advance the nature or
including civil actions and effect of the question to be put to him.
administrative or legislative  An accuse may altogether refuse to
investigations. take the witness stand and refuse to
 It may be claimed not only by the answer any and all questions.
person accused of an offense but by  The right against self – incrimination
any witness to whom an incriminating may be waived, either directly or by a
question is addressed. failure to invoke it, provided the waiver
 As long as the question will tend to is certain and unequivocal and
incriminate, the witness is entitled to intelligently, understanding and
the privilege. willingly made.
 In all other cases, he may not refuse to  Accordingly, when a person fails to
answer provided the question is invoke this right “at the appropriate
relevant and otherwise allowed even if time, or when for instance, he is asked
the answer may tend to embarrass him to provide samples of his signature, he
or subject to him to civil liability. is deemed to have waived the same.
 The right may not be invoked where
Custodial Investigation
the question asked related to a past
criminality for which the witness can no 
longer be prosecuted, as where the
crime has already prescribed or he has
already been acquitted or convicted
thereof. He may also not refuse to
answer where he has been previously
granted immunity under a validly
enacted statute.
 A person may be compelled to submit
to a physical examination of his body
to determine his involvement in an
offense of which he is accused.
 Justice Holmes in Holt v. United
States, “The prohibition of compelling
a man in a criminal court to be a
witness against himself is a prohibition
of the use of physical, or moral
compulsion to extort communications
from him, not an exclusion of his body
as evidence when it may be material.
 The prohibition applies to the
compulsion for the production of
documents, papers, and chattels that
may be used as evidence against the
witness, except where the state has a
right to inspect the same, such as the
books of accounts of corporations,
under the police power.
 As a rule, the privilege against self –
incrimination may be invoked only
when and as the incriminating question
is asked, since the witness has no way