ran Veda College af L MEMORY/AID IN poUTICAL LAW) aS ee —___esvofyivp ns pouien. wt Es alates POLITICAL LAW. brancl of public iaw which deals with the orga govern.nental organs of the State anc defines | felations of the State with the Inhabitants of territory. (People v. Perfecto, 42 Phil 887, +922) CONSTITUTIONAL LAW ~ designates the taw embodied in the Constitution and tho togal Drinciples growing out of the interpretation and application of its provisions by the covris in specific casos, CONSTITUTION ~ the document which serves 8 “he fundamental law of the atate; thet wrilton instrument enacted ay the direct action of ii Perple by which the fundamontal powers cf th government are establishiad, limited and defined, and vy which thuso powors are distributed amon} the several dapariments for their safe tind useful exercise, for the benefit, of the borly politic (Malcolm, Phil, Ccnstitutenial Lav) Classification of Constitutions: 4. written v unweitten + 2 enacted — (conventional), (cumulative) ' 3. Migid v. flexible evolved + The Philippine Constitution ig writen, enacted tnd rigid (Art, XVII). * The 1887 Constitution took offoct on February 2, *967, he dale of its ratitication in the plebiscite held on that same dste and not ‘on the date its ratification was proctaimed (D0 Loon v, Eeguorra,: No,'L+76059, August 31, 1987 ). 7 Interpratation of the Conatitution 1. Verba legis, Le, whenever posible, tha words used in the Constitilion must be giver ‘E:CUTIVE COMMITTEE: nn Sareey amy XA eake a HUB R thelr ordinary meshing except where {echnical tezms are employed, 2. Where there is ambiguiy, ratio legis et anima. ‘fhe words of the Constitution should ba Interpreted In accordance vith the Intent of the framers. 3. Ut_magis valeat quam pereat, ie, the Constitution has {6 be interpeled as @ whole (Francisco v, HR, GR. No, 160261, Novembor 70, 2003), aL doubt. tho provisions should bo considered solfexccuting; manctatory rather than directory: and prospective rather than feteoactive (Nuchura, Roviowr in Potton! Law, 2008 od, 1.3), STATE + a community of persons; more of les Cumerous, permananiiy occupying a definite portion of ‘teritory, ‘Independent of external Conti, and possessing @ govarciment to ahich a Great body of the inhabitants render hablival Obedience; a pattcally arganiznd soveroign community indepandent of ouside control bound by ties afipall Tree CANIN ABUGAN overall chaly an ele aeactenics operations, NANDLO ADEL SANDS chub hetel operations, GRACE FATAL Trina hat or operations, RUAN CARIOS NUCSTRO vice choi for academies, MAE ANGELT ETANG vlenetlr for seennoe Esra PHINABELLEE1HPOS Me eho or once, EIREENE ONA ACOSTA len chal far ep, AL JELLO CONCERCION x cheirlocloeate Poumcat uv: BFRMADCTTE BATHAN aubjet eal, MARY CHRISTINE OADU ox FULIME Aublet chal, CYPHUNE MANEEL DALOG ada, ROX 1 tonal lw 3, JO¥CE SALLA consul ew 2, ROSE JENNIFER OF 10° elacion ina, MARLYN BACANY somotnnce Recaro ko ‘on public ofa, ERIE JOSIIIA VILENA In en publ corporation, DIQANIME MARAE WINAGA pubtatcocrer Ta semacns: ‘Scotia Cuan, Norsts Ann Dabato, Ante Moi i. Varese vie, Ane Rota ar, Ryan Mhrende, Love Mae Palmares ‘um Hanessce Res atin er Lnvense Pur ne Sari, Mare Maa St, A Shino St.M, Sr Nine Tordoneg ‘non Hae Tecson, Revie Taras tin HEEB feat eT2,}2009 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS ‘ines: t + & Legal = the powor to Issue cuunmanris; SENSES NS Roitual.+ the: sun total of all the + jnfluonces which tle betting the Izv. b, Intoral + te supreme. power over ‘everything within tts teritory: External: fregdom from external control Permanent; Exclusive; iM Indivisiola; | | Inaienabla; and | Imprascriptibie. Doctrine .of | Autoriimitation- | doctine ‘whorgin tho Philippines adhera 10 prnelples of |iniprnatlcnal law a> a + lrstation,. to/|) the exercise of | its sovare'gnty. Kiyneans that any stale msy, by lis consent express or Implied, suuent {0 2 restriction of tls sovereign rights. A state then, if f.chooses to, inay retrain from the exargise of what otherwise is ‘imitable competence, There may ‘hus ‘be ¥ curtallmant of what otherwise is power plenary, In character, (Roaaun ¥. Commissionur of intemal Revenue, G.R. No. L-26379, December 27, 196°) tho Stal ‘eupucty of the stale to govern” us} 12 own oF woquica inbvaced In the | property. (Lee Hon Hoori¢ent F| Hok v, Duvid, No. t- : sovervlgnty; Inolydas | 30280, Onc. nbor passing www | 27, 1972). govariing w saritory, frainteinlng peace wund order ovar i and defending It against foreign inveyion tte of Boliguant Oscuphton ~ no change in sovareignly, However, pollcal laws, except those’ of reason, ae, suspond funiefpal “lays remain. "in force nie ‘changed by tha balligarent occupant. Principle of Jug Postliminium ~ At he end of tne pccupaiion, when the occupant is ousted {rgd tho teritoty, the politial awe which had ‘been suspended during the’ occupation shall , automatically become effective again (Porotia 8), Bracor of Prisons, Ne 48, Novemoer 2, 1945). Effect of Change ‘of Soversignty-— potitizal laws of the former sovervign, wheltic: compallblé or not with thase ofthe naw sovereign, . ard auomatcally "ebrogat 1, ‘unioss thay ara expressly re-enacted by the affrmelive act'sof” the ew | soverehyn. Municipals laws remaln in -icutlve powers Is vosted Ins Prime MI isler who Is. chosen by, ‘and Accounta’ ie to, Parllement & Unitary v, Fedoral Governmiont Functions: iy 2 Consiitliant.. -ceompvloory because Constitutive ofthe socity; 6. Ministrant undertaken to edvance the General Interest of the Bociely (Bacan! v- NAGCOGO, No. L+9687, Noverbor 25, 1956); merely optional", , MEMORY AIDIN POLITICAL LAW) 3 Doctrine of Parans Putrina =the government fs guardian of tha ‘rights of people. my Initiate tego! sctions for and in behall ey Particular’ Individual (Gewornmont oF ‘Paitppind Istonds. Et Mono do Plodad, ee 1.9960, Dacembar 13, 1915), INHERENT POWERS OF THE STATE: 1, Police power 2, Power ofeminent domain + 3. Power to tai Similarities: 1 Inherent in the State, exorcised even without need of exnress constitutional grant, 2, Necossary ans irdispenaa'ilo, State cannot be effective without them: 3. Mothods ‘sy which Siote interteres with private propery, . Presuppose equivaicnt compensation: 5. Exercised primarily by the Legisiature ml Regulates” ‘bath f Altec Bory Peal ‘Atiects any Properly ighis ‘Crerclane by tho Govornmant Pubic necosti ie blood theory “ary | say ant the right of the State snd of {he public to soir ; 6 Sci-protection Proper noxious the {pubic tor the use ot PriAlo property power: of galning and Sperty,4 12009 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS, Sin Beda College of Law Basle: pubtio necessity and the'right of the State 4nd of the: publla to/,solt-protection and selt- Prerervation, ‘f ‘Charactoitptice: tt Is the most pervasive, tio {east imitabia, ana the, most demanding of thu ‘threa powers.’ The justifcation Is found in the Latin maxlms::selus popit! sl suprema 1x and ‘0’ utora tuo ut alionum non iaodes. (Nachura, "2006 od: 9.43; Caielang v. Willams, No, 47800, Docunber 2, 1940) + Solus Popul ~ the wil of the people Ie the supreme law + Sle Utero -- use your property 89 as not 10 Injuce the property nights of others " Who may oxereise: Generally, the leglstatiro, but also, upon valid dolegauon, any of tie following: 4, Presidant; 2. Acministrativo bodies; wad 3, Lawemaking bodias of LGUs, + The power of eminent domain muy be used as ‘an iinplement of po'lce power (Association of ‘Smal Landownors iin the Philipvines v. Souroary of Agrariin . Roform, G.R. No, 78742, July 14, 1989), + The taxny: power may be ured 96 an Implement of pollca power (Lutz v, Avancta GAR. No;'t-7859, Oogombar 22, 1958). Requistes: EH 1, Lawl Subjoct = tia’ interesis of thy public in gene:a', as distingulshod from thore of @ pacular lass, rogutre the exercge of the power, 2, Lawful otoans'~ wie moana employes are reasonably. “necessary forthe accompishmont ‘ofthe. purpose, and nt Unduly oppressive on insu; riod bya ealogate ranean 2 fifi taroral inf ~ for LGUs. oxcop tion exert pee water sup ae a. tet nt bo cone Ye POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN’ = power of the Slate to forcibly take private propany tor pursic use upon paymert of ust compensation, Basie: néegssly of he property for pti use Who may uxerclve: Genurally, the legislature, but also upon valid’ delegallon, any of the following: J 1. President; 7 a 3 t Law-making bodies of LGUs; Public corporations; 4, Quasl-public corporatine: ana 5, Administrative Roquisitos: ’ Necessity ~ the necessity must be of public character if Wren exercised by: Congress ~ poliica! question; Delegate - jusiciable question. Srivate property — all private property capable of ownership ‘may Re expropriated, except money and chosesin actin: may include sarvices (Republic v. PLOT, No. l= 18641, January 27, 1989), + Privale property devoted for public use iiesBemetery) is also a proper subject of ‘oxptRpriation (City of Manila v. Chin3se Community af Manila, G.R. No. L+143¢6, Cciober 31, 1649) Taking ‘Thare ls (aking when: owner 8 actually deprived or o'spossessud of his property, . "here Js practical destruction or material impaifment ofthe value of the property: ©, owner Is deprived of the ordinary use of als property; ane owner Is daprived of Jurisdiction, suupeivislon arid control of his property. Ruquisites of taking! 4, expropriator mut entar a pri any mua nade for @ moma Froperty; ry poriod be under @ warrant or color ofa ae _ = 2a Meda College of Kay bul a'so those whieh redound to their indirnet Senet; that only a few would actualy bereft from the expropriation of the pronetty doos not necessarily diminish tha essence ani Sharnicter of pudtic use (Munose ¥. Cont of Appoois, G.R. No. 106440, Janvary 25, 1996). : * Once expropriated, change of piiblic use '3 of lo moment, it's well within the rights of the condamnor ws owner to alter and docide its use so long as It stil for public, uuse (Ropuolic v. CA, G.R. Ne. 146567, July 2, 2002), 5. Just. compensation ~ the full acd jai equivalent of the property: taken: the lair ‘market value of the property (NPC v. hong, GR. No, 12436, Augu's: 20, 2003) * Fair market vulua Is'the price that may be greed upon by parties wito are willing but ae not compellad to erter Into 9 coiitracL Of sale. Fteckoning polnt is dutermined as of the date of the fling of the corp aint for eminent domain or the sclual ‘aking. Whichever somes first, but where ‘ne filing of the complaint occurs AFTER the actual faking of the property and the owner would be given undue incre-nantal ‘advantages arising from the use to which the government devotes dhe property expropriated, just enmpensation ie Consequential danieges — * “consist of “injuries directly caused on the residue of the Private property taken by reason m i > Entitlement to interes: — when thera Is delay tn the payment of Just componsation, the ownor is entitod (0 payment of Interest if claimed: ‘otherwise, inteest is deemed” waived, ° (Uituin. Ropubille. No, L-22064, Saruory 31, 1968) a eet MEMGRY AID IN POLITICAL LAW] 5 + Just comeftsaten maans not only the correct amdenl to be paid to the ower of the land but also payment” wiinin a feseonabi no fom ts (Esl nbon it No, "746062, Juno 26, 6. Due prpeoss’ df law ~ the property owner must be alven in opportunity to be heard in {he determination of the fair market valve of ‘tha property.’ POWER OF TAXATION ~ power by which the Siote raltes rovenio to dotray the necessary oxpenses of the Govemnmont, Scopni ent prdons, arpa or occupation to be taxed within the tng Jurisdiction, ‘Sas's: power emanating trom necessity (ilablcod theory) Who may exorcive: Generally, the legislature, bul ols0. upon valid delegation, any of the {ollowing: ; 1. Lawemaking bodes of LGUs (Sec.5, Art. Xi and Q 2. The Prosident, under See, 26 (2), Art. VI of the Constitution or as an incident of emergency powers that Congress may grant to him under Sec, 23(2), Art. VI. Limtations:on the Féwar of Takdtion: ntrent limitations: i Public purpos ‘ 2. Non-delegability ef power; |! if 3, Torrtoraly or alt of taxation; 4, Exemption of government from taxation; £ Interatona! comity,i i i: i 6 12009 CENTRALIZLD BAR OPERATION ELZOQORCENTRALZED BAROPERATIONS 11, Tax exemption of revenues and assets of, lnuding grants, endawments, donaticns, of . sontrbutlons ta, educational Institulor & Double Taxation ~ adaltlonal taxes nf tine same ‘ ‘charuator aro laid: bc; taxing juriscetion; during the same taxing period; and {or the same purpose, Dosplte the lack of specific constitutions rohibition, double taxation wil not be ‘allowed if ine same will result In a volalion of the’ equal protection clause (Wachurn, Reviewer in Political Law, 2006 04, 1) 62) The power of taxation may be used ar an Implement of iolice power, particuary in discorraging businesses or unde. taking Sought 1 bo rpsiited by the gavernnant (Lute v. Arunite, No, L-7859,-Decomiver 24,1955), \ cor 1 It can also bo used as an implement for the exercise of the power of eminent domain (GIR ¥: Contral Luzon, G.R, No, 159647, Apri 18; 2005). ‘Tax Exomptions Requisite: No law granting any tax exemption shall be passed without the concurrence of a majority of all the Members of Congress (Sec. Amount 1s limited to teoat of: (2) issuing the y und” (v) | necessary Inspect'on’| ‘or police surveillance colacied 13. unlimited’ provided not Imposed property ‘on persons or | Paid for privilege of dolng something nut privilege is -evecable TERRITORY OF THE PHILIPPINES of the “Philippines | (Art, 1, 1987 Constitution), IMPORTANT GONCEPTS FOUND IN 19 San Beda College of Law TTDI the lan The national Yerrtory comprises Phillppine archipelago, with il the ‘and waters embraced thersin, and all other leritaries ‘over which’ the Philippines has sovereignty oF Jurisdiction, consisting of terrestrial, fuvial, and’ aerial domains ‘ncluaing ha terrtorlal sea, the seabed, the subsoll, the insular sheives, and other marine areas The waters around, A, and connecting tie Islands of the aretipelaco, regardiess of thelt breadth and dimensions, form part of the Intarnal wators INVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA Archipolago,.a group of Islands, Inciuding parts of Islands, Inlerconnecting waters ang other natural features which are closely Interrolated that puch, islands, wate.s and ‘ores natural features form an intrinsic ‘gecgraphical, economic und poitical.entiy, oF which “historically have been regarcet as such . Archipelagi¢ State - means a State constituted ‘wholly by one or more ‘archipelagos and may include ‘ther islands. Tertitorlal $be - consists of a marginal belt cof mariima wa:ers adjacent tothe bau lines extending twelve ‘nautical miles. outward ulalde the leritorial see are the high seas.than Bede Coltege of Haww a ARCHIPE!.AGIC DOCTRINE Integration ofa group of islands to tho sxa ant {heir oneress so that together thay ean constlivte fone unit, “one country, and one state An iningivary single basoline is drawn around tne Islands by joining appropriate points ct. the Oulermost istands of the, archipelago wih stiaight lines and ail istands and waters encinsi-d win te besoine form patt of the terrory. The mat Durpesa is to protect the terrtodal in-cresis of an archipelago (see last sentence, Article 1, 1987 Constitution) DEMOGRATIC AND REPUBLICAN STATE Tre Philppines 18 q demovralle and republican stole. Sovereignty resides in thy peuple and all government authority emanates fram them Sec. y Democratic Stato - rule of tha majority, Republican State- a stale whersin all governmant authority emar.ater from "ix. paola and is exeicised by representatives. chosen Uy the people i FOREIGN POLIGY °°? The Philppines renounces war a8 an instrument of national policy, aoonts *he. generailv acenptod principles of international lew 98 part of the low of the land and adheres to Jhe policy of peace, ccualiy, justice, freedom, cooperation, and emily wih all nations (See: 2). DOCTRINE Of INCORPORATION — By virtue of this doctrine, the Courts have upplied the rules of Internati¢nal law in @..number of cases even it Such rules had not previously been subject of slatutory enactments, because these generally Berepled principles “of Intemational law are automaticelly part of cur.own laws (Kuroda v, velendoni, G.R. No, 2662, March 26, 1949). CILIAN SUPREMAGY © Chl “med Forces of the Philippines Is {he protector of the peopio and the Slate, its goal 's to secure thr: sovetdlgnty of the Stete and the integrity ofthe national tanttory (See, 3). Ensured by: » 1. tho instaltstion of the Prosideni, the aichost elution authority, as the commonderinchiel « of all the armed forces of the Philippines { (See, 48, arti); and & MEMORY AION POLITICAL LAWL 2. the requirement that members of the AFP S094 to Uphold. and defend the Cenattuten, which'Is the fundamental taw of tha clei governmont (Ske, § (4), Act. XVI), COMPULSGRY MILITARY AND CIVIL SERVICE; PROTECTION OF PEOPLE AND STATE The prime duty of tha. Government Is to seve and frotect the penple, Tho Goverment tay call Lupan the people to\detensd thel State and. y fre {ulfitment thereot, il citizens may be required, under coriditions' provided by law, to. rendu Personal rillary, or civil service (Sec. 4) PEACE AND ORDER, GENERAL WELFARE ‘he maintenance of peace and order, the protection of If, liberty, and propity, and the Promotion of the general wellare are essential ior she enjoyment by al the people of the blessings of democraey:(S0c..§): SEPARALION OF CHURCH AND STATE The separation of Church and State shalt be nvlolable (See, 6), ‘ Reinforced by: + 4. Froadom of rligbr clau 2. Hon-estabilshnientof religion clause; 3. No rligious tont lauso (Sec. 6 Art. i); % No sectors! représcntative from’ roliglous sector See, 8 (2), Art. Vij, 5 Peonibition ageinst appropriation for sectarian benefits (Dec. 29/2), Ar. Vi: and 5 Nun-regisfration of religious denominations, fand sects as pullizal parties (Sec. 2 (5) Art, 1x0), o i" dee i % “chur deg Res a ae A ana ef Wve MEARE ig, ch bees P49) safigs edi12009 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS an Beds College of ‘Law 8.2009 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS oe Mits Emplayaos Organization ¥. Phi, Blooming Mils Co. Ino, G.R, HO, L-31195, duro 6, 197'9) INPENDENT FOREIGN’ "" POLIGY AND FREEDOM FROM NUCLEAR WEAPONS ‘Thera Is a marked antipathy tr the Constitution towards foreign miltary pregence in the county, cf of foraign Infuenca th general (Lim v. xox, 1, Saorotury, G.R. No, 181448, Apa! 11, 2002) EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES AND AGUEGE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE, This “provision does not contain @ judicially enforceable constitutional right and merely specifies a guideline lor legislative action. Its not intended to compel the Stale te enact pestive measures that would accornmadate es many 03 possible Into public office. The privilege may 08 Subjected to limitations such as the 3rovision of the Omnibus Eleclon .Code on nuisance candidaies (Pamalong v., Camelsc, GR. No. 161872, Apel 13, 2004), Gareraliy, the provisions of Article I! of the 1987 Conalitution do not con'er righis as they are mercy dactaration of principles and poicles However, the right to a bolansed and nealthful ‘ecology snunciated in Article li, Section 10 gives fige to ¢ cause of action that may be enfevced by lany atizen (Opasa v. Factorun, G.R. No. 101039, uly 30, 1999). Set ef prescriptions setting forth the furvsanvintat ‘Avil and politcal rights of the indiviaual, ane Imposing. limitations on the poviers of the government as a means of secuing the ‘enjoyment af those rights. CLASSIFICATION OF RIGHTS: 1. Political rights ~ granted by aw to membury ot community Ia relation to their dinct o: “indirect partelpaion in the estovirhment or adminisiation othe government; 2. Civil rights + rights whish municipal lav wit ‘enforce at the Insiancé of private individuals for the purpose, of securing them the ‘enjoyment of thelr iaans of happiness, _ BECTION 4 piliaoy of natin sighte ‘vor yroperty eghts te Yecugnizad becatiea these freudom are colicate and vuinerabla, as Wai ae supremely precious in ‘ur soclaly and the threat of sanctions ray detor thelr exercise glimoat us potonty as tie uctual icutlon of wanélions, they need vrewthing pace Wd auWNO, poring goverment faguiaion only! wilh’ narrow specificity, Human Fights are Impreserpllle, (Phuippir Wlosnaing Duo Process of Law.» a lawihich hears 2ofore it condemns, wiich praceeds vpon Ingully and renders Judgment, only College, v. Woodwerd, 4 Wiealon 518). Aspects. of Due Process: ‘after tral (Dertmouth Subslartivesdce process ~ this serves a8 & restriction on the gavernmant’s law ar.d rule making powers, +) Must be @ guarantee against the exercise of.arbt even when the power Is exercisad:according to proper forms and procedure. Regulates: 2, the interests of the public In general, as iatinguished from those uf 2 pariculer lass, require the Intervention of the Stat b. the means employed are cesisonably necessary for the accomplishment of he purpose and aot unduly oppressive on individual, Void-fer-vagueness rule ~ accused is denied the rignt to be Informed of tha charge ageinst him, and to due process as well ‘here the slaiute itself is couched in such Indofinita language that A is not possibio for men of orcinary inteligence to determine therelom what acts or omisrlony oe punished and, hence shall be avoided (Poopio v. Nazario, G.R, No, 44143, August 31, 1968) + Publication of lows is part of substantive ¥ Tagado v. Tuvere, No,+ Right fo appeat is not # natural rignt or part of ue proces, It is a mere statutory righ" bot once given, denial constitules violation o doe process (Nactiire, Ruviewer in Pojiical Lave, 2006 wt, p. 91). Requisites of Adininistrative due process 1 Right to hearing ~ineludes right to procent ‘one's case and rubrait evidance to spon therecr 2 Trunal or boty or any of ts welgos smut act on its own indepenaent considsiation ot the taw and facts of the controversy +3 Tribunal “must consider the presented 4 Evidence must be substantial, whien ineans felevant evidenve 38 & reatonnbie night fccept as adequata to support a conclusion 5." Decision must tava, something te support itseir ovidenca 7 5 Decision musi be 'Lased on evidence t Presentoa during hearing or at least Conlained in the record und ditclosed by ihe : parties L 7 7 Decision mus: be rendered in a manner thot {he parties can know the various issues 5 involved and the reason for the decision fendered (Ang Tibay v. CIR, GR. No Ln 46496, February 27, 1940), Exiual Protection of Law « all perso%s or inings Sirilarly situated must be simiatly treated vere : is 10 tants conferred “and tesponsibillien : umposed. * The.guaranty of the equal protect’on clause is ot violated bya legislation based on - feasonable classification. (Poop v. No. 45987, May 6, 1939) * Equal projection clause does not require efor uniformity of laws, Le, zoning atdinences, but thera Is a limit to allewable torrtorial leek of unitermity r Rowisiter of Valid Classification: (SNAG) 1. Such classification, rests upon aubstartal distinctions; ¢ itis not contined to existing conditions oniy; I" applies equally to all members of the seme class; 4-1 ls germane to the purposes of the law - (People v. Cayat, No, 45987, May §, 1939) Relative Constitutionality = under the concept of {elatlve constitutionally, tha constitutionally cf» piitute cannot, in every instance, be determined by 'a mere comparison of is provisions "wih apalicable provisions ef the Constitution since the statule may be constitutionally vai ax epplicd to 5 3 Bon Meda College of Laiw ; MEMORY AIO IN POLITICAL LAW 9 One Set of facts aiid Invalid in tte application to anolner ‘A statute valkd at one time may becomes old at “another time because of atone Gtcumstances. This, ia stalute In iy praction Cheration becomes arbitrary 6 confscatory. te valisity, even. though atfiried by a femes Alucication, is open to inquiry and investigaton in tne ligat of chenged condions, (Contra Bork Euplovoos Association v, BSP, G.R.No. 140308 Dowambar 18, 2004). SECTION 2 7 SEARCHES AND SEIZURES Scope: a popula right, Persons, (ocluclng aliens (Qua Chea Gan w Peporiatioh Board, No. L:10280, Saplomber 30, for ) and, 10 a liniled extent, inticial persone (Banta & Cow \tnc\ vy. Rule, No. L-92408, February 27, 1971).-1 hence, protects sit +. Available to ‘at’ persons, including liens whethar accusec of crime or not, * Aitfiict parsons vive ontitiod te the: guaranty but they may beraquired to oven ther books of accounts for:oxamination by the State th tho oxerelta of tre police power or the power of Laxation. The: premisos may be rot be Searched nor may tneir papers and etfects be veized except by virue of a valid worrant * The sight is persci:t may ba invoked onty by the person nities 10 it (Stonahi t Cirkno, No. L-19450, Juno 19, 1967). Such TQM sey be waived elther’ expressly or impliedly. + Whlver must be mide by the person whose. "ight is invaded, Fat by one "sho Ts not duly ‘ihorad waiver (opie “poy ny” “Annet tamer obable iB PTTof Madi Chita, a acts: sought In Ant foe otfense re In tho lace eolght tp be Reached (Burgos ¥,+m 2012009 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS Chiof of Stat, No. L-64281, December 26, 1984), + For 9 warrant of arrost ~ such fucte and . Creumstancus ! which would lead Fousonably discrete and prudent ran to believe that an offense has been committed by tha person vought to be arrested (Wadd v, Do Loon GR. No. 121234, August 23, 1996), 2. Determination of probable cause personally by the judgo; 3. After, parsonal exainination under eth or affirmation of the complainant and the ‘witnesses he may produce; i CEG Wis not necessary that ine judge shou's personally ‘oxamino tha cor plainant end his vitnosses (Solivan v, Mekusisr, GR. No. 02588, 14 Novmnbun 1996); he would “siuply personally taview tho {nial deterrninal an uf tne Prosecutor to see if iL Supported by substantia cvidenca; he mataly detorminos the Probabilly, 13 the certainty ofthe guit of the faccused and. in so dow, fhe need not conduct a oo rove liearing (hiv. 0 Leon, GA No 171294 August 23, 1635; The "judge must Porsonally examine in the form of searching uoslions and answare, In wating: ond under oath, the complainant and any Witnesses ho | may produce on tacts personaly known: to them (Sec. 4, Rule 126, Rules of Coury: The dutermination of probable cause dopends {fo @ larie extent: upon, tho findingfopinion of the Judge who conducted the Faqules oxamination of the applicant and tha(| witnessur (Kho v. Judge Mokainal GR. No. 4902-08, Apt 24, ‘aoieripton Property to be sgla eo ol ve (echnical accurate nor nogossarty praca, and its natu will necusseriy vary Eecording to whether the IWontty of tho property of iy charactor te a: crater ‘ubconeatny i reiqulred lo ve enaciic only In 80 far a8 the clroumelances af | “Gansrat™ Wait anis”” sve proscribed ang Unconstitutional (Norasco v. Puno, No. 1-69805, Octovor 8, 1985); but, a Jorn Doe Warrant (ware true name on tr pe fo bo ariowtot ip wuriknow) th onuihulionat ruauirrns W there 1s xome dusts zg parsonue which wit ‘wil alow (iho v. sudge | enable the uilcor “to Mokativ'al G.R.;. NO. | dantity the escused 94902-08, Apa’ 21, | (Pangundemar v. Caan, 1906), No, 74782, Al 14 1080 me +e perEonal examination” mal ol be merely routnary oF pro forme, bul rust bbe orobiny and exhaustive. The purpose of this rule is to-salisty the oxumming “i gan Beda College of Law $B Beda Colle iudge ua to the existence of probable cause. ‘ i Tost of Sufficiency of Cat ‘bsten draws in such a manner that perjury "whether it nad sould be charged thereon and affiant be hold able for damajes caused (Alvarez v, Court of First Instance, 64 Phil 33, 1937) ‘+4 On the basis of thelr personal knowledge of the facts they ara testifying to; and, 5. The warrant inust describe particularly the place to be searched and the persons of {things to be salzed, + Addascriofion cf the place to be searched {s sufficlent if the officer with Uw warrant can, with tearcnable effort, ascertain and ‘denny the place Intended. + Sutficiency of the description of the object Is closely ‘rolated with the suficiont paricularty of iho avermonte of the otterse, + Howover, it's not required that a teohiucal description be given (People v. Rubio, G.R. No. 118315, Juno 20, 1996) Genoral Rule; Only the judge has the power to issue a warrant after the proper procedure has been duly taken, Exceptions: 4. The Commissioner cf Immigration and ‘Deportation may issue werrants only for the purpone of carrying out a final decision of deportation (CIO v. Wudge De la Rosa, G.R. No. 96122-23 1991 and Qua’ CheeB an Meda College of Raw Wa rrantle: Searches for fishing expedition are prohibitad since the Constitution requires probable ca..se al the inception, Although the properties may have been selzed in violation of the Consttuion, i does ‘ot ‘ollow that ils Bwner shell be enliled to Fecover it immediately, if the said pioperty Is the subject of Iilgétion, tke @ prosecution for Wogel possession of firearms, It will remain in custodia logis untl the case is terminated, "the property Is prohibited by 9 Tike illegal ‘drugs, it shall be conf-scated a1 destroyed, Seizira fs limited to those items particulaty described in a valid searcn wanant, Searching officers are without direrotion fegarding what articles. thoy -shall soize, Evidence selzed on the occasior, of exch an oreasonable search anc selzute is tainted and ex:luded for being the proverbial "rut, of @ poisnous wee.” In the langunge of the fundamental tsw, i shall be inadmissibis in evidence for any purpose in ony proce ding (Oe Roserio v. Poople, G.R. No 112295 May 31, 2001). Arrest, V.hon Vati ‘when pergun to be arrested has comnilied, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense; when: 8. an offense has just been committed; and b. he has probable cause to beliave based en personal knowledgn of facts or circumstances" that tho person to be arteuted has committed It; and when a person to be arrostéd Is en escance OF detention prisoner. eo. &, Rulo 113, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure), * The tong-stanging rule In this juristiction, applied. with degree of consistency, it that! alone Is not sufficient te justify a warrantless sirest_under Section & (a), Rule 113, ‘The rule requires, in addition, that the accused perforn sumo overt act that would , Indicate" mat to "has * committed, 1$actuelly committing, or Is ‘atlempiing to commit an offense.” The officer arresting @ porson who has just committad, ‘ts committing, or Is about to commit an offense must have porsona! knowledge of thot fact. The offense must also be committed in his presence or within hls view." (Puople v. Nye! Tudtud MERAGRY AID IWiPOLITIEAL LAW} 13° MEMORY A And Dindt| Bowing. GR. NO, 144097, Scptombok 26, 2003). W Membership ih organizations ike NPA ts 6 continuing ottinne, this, a person can bo arrosted anytine, (Umit v. Rumas, GR. No. 79731, July, 1980) When'the sight 18 walveu by the person arrested, provided the. knew’of euch right and knowingly deckied not (GiHivoke I . + AN applicaién for oF isdmission to bal shall ot ber tha accused trom chaltenging the validity of his arrest, provided that he raises ther bafero entoring his plea (Soc, 26, Rule 144, Revised Rules of Grlminal Procedure): : rrentioss Sarchos, When Valid: when right has been voluntary wolved (Poople v. Melesugui, No, 44935, July $0, 1936); . 88 An incident to a lawtul arrest, Provided search Is conieyapornneous to arrest. and within pepmissile area of searc (see Sec 13, Rule’ 126, Revised Kules on ‘Crimina! Procoduro); 7 +A valid’ arrest’ must precede the search; the orocess cannot be reversed (Poop! ¥. Chua Ho Sen, G.R. Nu, 126222, dune 17; 1009): By +A warrantioss search “incidontal to a lawful arrest mdy be made only within the Permissible area of search, of the place ‘within “the ‘irimediate control of the Person being arrasted (Espano v.. Court ©! Appeals, «G.R, No., 120434 Apri’, 7998)..weling places. (Papa v. Maga, Na, L:27360, Fobruury 28, 1968 ); 5, Inspection of buildings and other promises for the enforcement of fre, sanitary and bulging Foguiatons; . viaual search at chockpoints (Vaimonts v, de , Vil, 3.8. No, 83938, Soptambor 28, 1963 Conduct of Magrlal targait zoning’ and ‘saluralion drive” In the exercise of miliary owara of the President (Guanzon v. da Vili, » S GRNo,., 80508, January 30, 1950): 4." when she is a genuine reason to “stop-and- “ask* in the light of the police offcur's experience ond surrounding. conditions to Warrant u belief that the person detained has weapons concealed (Malacel v, Cou’ of “Appaals, G.R. No.: 123898, December 1, 1997 cling Tamry vs. Ohio) 8, ore pitti dos ae in pat, vw (Citta . -Actg, Cctagtar of Customs, 6. No, 1.43810, Soptamber 26, 198: 10. doctrine of exigait: circumstances. undvr Such urjehey and exigency of the moment where @ search wirrant should be lawfully dispensed with (People v. De Gracia. G.? Nas. 102608-10, July 6,194) Knock and’ Announes Principle -nolice office: are obliged 10 give notice, show their authority ano demano that they be allowed entry. They ‘may only break open any outer or liner door oF Window of @ tiouse to execute the search weirant 4 alter such notice and centand, such ollicers are refused entry to the place of directed searh Exceptions: . Intrusion into tne premises is peimissibie when: 1." 3 paly whose premises of Is enlilled (2 the fossessicn thereot refuses, upon demano, to opens i "when seh person in the premises avady kKnww of tn ident of the oficers and of tha authori and persons; when the officers are justiied in the nonest “belle thot here is an imminent peri to ite or ib; ad “ 4 when those in te premises, aware of tno Presence uf someone outside’ (aecause, for @xampio, there has ‘been a Knock at tno oor) 2t@. then engugad in aciity which usted thé officers tq bebiave that an escape OF tie Hedtructon of evidence is berg attempies! (People v. Huong Zhen Ha a ogy too, 6, 2004) 2 No. 139901, Soptombar 26, Frain View Doctrine = tha objects within the sight of aa officer ‘tho has a right to be In Position to have that view are subject to selzur and may bo presented as eviderca (open to the eye and hand), + Tho..plain view doctrine Is. us applied where the police officer is not saarching for evidence againat “the —acuused, Dut fe inadvertently comes upon_an ing object (Pooplo v, Musa, G.R. No, 16177, January 27, 1982), Elements: 1. prior vulld Intusion based on a valid Warrartiess arrau\ in which the poice are legally present in tho pureut of their offal atlas; 42 the evidence wes ine dvertently discovered by the pollee who have the right to o@ where the 3. the evidence mustbe immediately epparein; 4. plain view justified mere seizure of evidense withcut further search (People v. Eciasa, Gh No, 125754, Dedtmber 22, 1999). The right againsti unreasonable soarch end Soizure Is a reatralnt Lpon the government It dovs:nct apply ‘so as to require exclusion cf evidence which came into tne possession of the Government thraugh @ search made by 3 buvate chizen (Pooplo v. Mart, No, L-32625, August 4, 1979). SEVTION 3 PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION AND. ‘CORRESPONDENCE oVided by ia Oe Lay saeSe ee ee ee San Beda College ‘ot Zar Anpaats, GR. Nov 407383 Fobnuay 20, 1996), : AnthWiro Tapping Act (R.A. 4200) - prohibits ‘any ‘person, not being: audiorized by ll tha parties to any private communication or spoken word to tap any wire or cable, or by using any other device or artaingement, to secretly overhear, intercept’ or record thu. samo, or to communicate whe content thereof to any cther person + Its illegal for any person not authorized by ail parties to any communication, to secretly record such communication by means o! tape fecorder, The lav: doas nol make any distinction, and as suet RA 4200 may be Violated ‘even by party to. the Communication. (RamMoz v. Ci, GR. No, 93633, September 28, 1995) ‘+ A telephone extension ‘ine 18 not among the doviees covered by RA 4200 (Guana 1 v, IAC, No, £-69809, Octobor 16, 1986). + The aw prohibits the overhearing, Intercopting, or rocording of private communications but :net thoso which are, Public in character (Navarro v. Coun of Annoals, GR. No, 121037, August 26, 199), +The authorities inay, upon a writan orde- of tha Court of Appeals, listen to, inlercopt ani record, with tha ure of eny modo, forms kind or type of electronic or other surveliaice equipment or intercepting anc tracking doviees, or with the use of any other suitabl ways end means tor that purocse, any commun cation, mestago, corversatien, discussion, of spokon of written words dotwoen members of terrorist grout. as ofined in the Human Socurity Act of 2007 Provided, That surveillance, Intercention and recording of ammunicalions between lawyers and eliente, doctors rnd patients, Journalists and their sourcas and confidential dusiness corresponderico shall not be authorized (See. 7, Human Security Act of 2007). eat US Supreme Court: Istiere end! seated packenes in the malis may be examined only ss to their external appearance and weight and may not be opened except in accordance wilh the constitutional requirements of search and ‘solzure, Exclusionary Rule =" Cvidenca obtained in violation of Geo. 2, Ar, Il, shall be inadmissitie for any purpose. in any’ proceeding (Fruit of ___ MEMORY. AtD IN POUTICAL LAW] 13 Pulxonous Troe Dosttina) (Stonehill v. Diokno, GAR. Vo, L- 19660, Juno 19, 1967). + Evidenco obtainéd In violation of the search, and seizure eleuna, whethor or not i is also solLineriminating: fortimonin| evidenco, Is inadmissible, |) ‘+ The illegally seized object must be veturned if Kis nota peotibited object (Bagatiion v, Farnendez, GR. No, 92270, June 27, 1991);but if cont.aband, it can be confiscated (Alt v. Castro, G.R, No, 18949897, June 26, 1987) Two-part test lo delermite iuersonebleness of person's expectation of privacy, , * 4. Whether by his conduct, the kdvidual has exhibltey an expectation of privacy 2. Whether-this expectation is one that society. recognizes os reasonable (plo v, Toros, “GR. No, 127685 July 23, 1998). "SECTION 4 All he rights mentioned under this section, while not Identical, are inseparable, In every case, therefore there is imitation. placed ‘on the ‘exercise of this right:tha judiciary fs called upon to @xamine thu alfects of the’ challenged gevernmental; actualion (Reyes v. Bagalsing, GR No, b-65306, Movember 9, 1983) FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION ‘+ Speech, expression and pross Include every form of expression, whether! oral, written, lape oridise recorded, It algo Inclides movies as well as symbolic speech’ such as the wearing. an gem bandas @ symbol of protest,.28 well \ceful picketing, + Sovergientty ait gif thay were jg See ition 2H) phopilt of roub the af whl reitie 2. Lan of sift PSHE coheuines eaGWateep the ged jlotwpvalblites onlyElamonts or Aspocts. of Froodom of very likely inevitable (Gonzulos Exprossion: Comotoe, No, L-27 , 1. freedom trom censorship or pric reswaint Pe eee «means freedom from official governmertal —-«2.--‘Dangerous tendency rule ~ words utered {estritions on the press ‘or other forms of eats a dangerous tundency of an evil wien expression in advance of | actval the State has a right to preven. (Cabansag 7. publication oF dissemination Femanciaz, No. L+8974, October 18, 1957). + Live TV coverage may be protitited since + Its sufficient ifthe natural tendency ard the right of the accused :aust prevall over probable effect of the unerance be 10 {he fight of the pudlic to information and bring about the substantive evil which te Head of te pre (A No: Oi 9- legislative bory seeks to pre ent wt «The doctrine of freadom of speech wes 9. Balancing of Iiterast rule ~. when a fermulated primary for the protection of particular conduct ia regulated in the Interest the ‘core speech", speech which Cf public order, and the regulation resuits In an communicates paiildal, social or religious Indirect, conditional ard partial abridgment of ideas. ; speech, the uuty of tha court is to determine + Itdoes not apply to commsrcial speech ‘which of tha tW0 canfliting Interests deman cr the communication which no more the greater protecton under the particular then proposes ¢ commercial transaction. cicumstances "presented (Amertoun + For “commarciat | speech 12 enjoy Communications sation v, Dcuds, No, 10, Protection, it must not be talse or May 8, 1950). | Inisieading @nd.shouly not propose un llugal traneveton (Frlodman v. Royors, GAL No. 77-1103, Pobruary 21, 1979 is aie ‘and. Pilsburgh’ Press Co. v. Humen ASS ena eT Aen Relations Commission, G.R, No, 72-419, OY Tera Oma Mcgee rs sua 21, 1973) ui a + However, even truthful and tawaul commercial apeach may be repulated it degree of evii end | whose abject is riot (@) govaramont has substantat interes to proximity ofevi | the prevention of ev! protect, (2), the regulation direct" measurable in terms advarncos that interet, end (3) It Is Hot of “proximity and more oxtensive than’ Is nenessary {0 7 dogo protect that inlereat (Coniral Hudson Gas Eviivads Wa" he | Used for commercial nd Eloctis Comp v. Punifle Sowice context at | speech. Commissian of NY, No. 79-668, Junw 20, prosecuion for 1980; Seultous speech 2. treedoin (rom subs equent punishment + Allimitation on tha power of thy state to Impose a punishment after publication o dissernination, Tosts for Vutld Govornmont Interforonee to Froodom of Exprousiont 4. Cloar and. prosant danger rule ~ when ‘wards re used ln such circumstance and ol Sucl\ pure as to create a clear and pret sit anges that will bring about the substantive evi tial tho State hos a right to prevent (Bolionck v. US, No. 437, 436, March 1919) 7 a, cleer = cause! connéction with the danger of the subs'antive evi arising from the uttetance questioned; unc b. proscnt~ Wind clament, Identified with imminent ang: immediate denger, the danger must"hot énly Be probatie, bul person having ‘ Itcontains ineriminatery mater which witrout we Taoe mer Sid ete aban Heda College of Farw pivilege, (Lodi 1997), would be libelous and astionabie Mv. CA, GR, Na, 1132/6, Sentember 5, Requisites of Privitegod Communigation: 1. “Person who made the communication had a legal, moral or social diity to make the Cotaritunication, of at least had an interest (> protect, which may elther be his own or of the ‘ono fo Whom ft is made; ? Gomrnunication In addressed io an of‘icer cr 2 board, or superior having some interest or uty inthe matter, and who has the power to furnish the protection sought 3. Starements in the communication are made in good faith and without malice Kinds of Privileged Communication: 41. Absolutaly Privileged Communication (2 sentence of Sec. 41, Art Vi}; and 2, Qualiiedly Privileged Commcnication 8. 2 private communication made by any person to anather In the pertormarer ct (oF social duty: (Art, 354, oda) 2 fair and tue report, made is. grec faith, without any comments or remarks of any Judicial oF other official procercings. which 212 not of confidential nature, ar of any statement, report ot speach delivarce in said proceedings, or of any other act performed by public officers In ‘hu exe: sso of their functions, (Art. 354, Revised Pens! Code) ©. faic commentaries on mailers of public interest (Boral vs. Court of Apes, GR No, 126466, Januery 14, 1999) ‘As to criticism of an official condust: Fhe people have a right lo scrutinize and communt or condemn the conduct of their chosen tapresentatives in the goverment. As long as their comments are made In GOOD FAITH and WITH JUSTIFIABLE ENDS, they are insulated {from prosecution of dumene gulls for defemation even if such views are faund to be iacuurale of ‘erroneous A public offcer must tiot be too thin- skinned with reference to comment upon his office! wels (U.S.v. Bustos, GR, No. 112592, March 6, 1918), 7 "label of Pubily Officlats and Pubtie i‘Iguros ‘public official ‘is prohibited trom racovering damages for a dofamatory farschood tolating to hh's offtial conduct unless hd proves ‘hat the statement was made with actual malice. As to ponding iitigation: The Philippinas aroseribe public comment! oi pending litigation, on the ground that it would interfere. with the MEMORY AID IN POLITICAL LAW} 15 administration of justice. Publication tending to impede, obstruct, ambarcass or Inference the courts In-fgmninisforhg justice in a pending sult or proceeding constitulos criminal contempt which Is Purishable by the courts (sub jdico rv), As to prt and obscenity: It was observed thal rovies, compared fo other media of expression, have ‘greater czancity “tor evil and are consoquontly suliject to moro regulation. The turden of “proving the im is) unprotected ~2xpression must reat on CENSCR. Tost of obscenity (Milor v. California, No. 70-73, sore 21, 1973) Whether the! average porson applying contemporéry tommunity standards, would find thal the work, isken as a whole, appeels. to the prurtent interest 2. Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently oliencive way, ‘sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable law. 3, Whether the work, taken asa whole, lacks soriuus Merary, artistic pcilticat or sclentiic values. + Courts shoud apply the STANDARD OF THE COMMUNITY In which the maierla! is being tested, + Stricter ruled cculd ve folownd for le'evislon (Gonzales yan Kalighok GR Non L-69500," Sty. 22, 1908) Slrctar reg Have also barn allowed for radio,espectally because of ie pervasive qualily|and beeause of the interast in the protection of phildren (FCC v, Pacifica Fuundation, No. 77-526, July 3, 1978) Assembly and Fattion: The rght.to essemble is 1 subj Aah a a tbe ol subje st a may 4Ssstained (Phil Bs. Onantzetion v.