Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Consti 2 Final Reviewer Protected
Consti 2 Final Reviewer Protected
Formal declaration or enumeration of the fundamental rights secured and B. Hierarchy of Rights: Primacy of Human Rights over Property Rights
guaranteed by the Constitution to individuals to protect them from (Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Org. v. PBM Co.)
arbitrary and despotic exercise of governmental powers
Restrictions are directed against the state and do not govern relations C. Procedural Due Process
between private persons. Need for notice and opportunity to be heard (not actual hearing)
Guarantee of procedural fairness
SECTION 1: NO PERSON SHALL BE DEPRIVED OF LIFE, LIBERTY OR Purpose of procedural due process: (a.) contribute to the accuracy and
PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW, NOR SHALL ANY PERSON thus minimize error in deprivation (b.) gives a sense of rational
BE DENIED EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW. participation in a decision than can affect his destiny and thus enhances
his dignity as a thinking person.
A. Three Great Powers of the Government: Violations may be cured by motion for reconsideration
Police Power
o Most essential, insistent and the least limitable of powers, a. Requirements of due process in a Judicial Proceedings (Banco Fil v.
extending to all the great public needs Palanca)C-J-O-J
o Inherent and plenary power in the State, which enables it to 1. Court or tribunal with judicial power to hear and determine
prohibit all hurtful to the comfort, safety, and welfare of society. cases.
o Rest upon public necessity and the right of state and public to 2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person or
self-protection. property
o Lodge in the legislature and may be delegated to the executive 3. Opportunity to be heard
o Requisites of valid exercise: lawful subject and lawful means 4. Judgment rendered upon a lawful hearing
Eminent Domain Quasi in rem- Property alone is responsible for claim in proceedings, but the
o Right of the state to acquire private property for public use upon individual is still named as defendant (unlike in rem)
payment of just compensation - Notice to the defendant in this case is NOT absolutely essential.
Taxation - Presumption of regularity. That upon notice to the property, there is notice
o Power of the state to raise revenues. Such must be for public to the individual.
purpose, equitable and uniform - Publication is already deemed sufficient for procedural due process.
Should be mere regulation not prohibition of a profession or calling that is Publicity and TV Coverage
legitimate. - Mere exposure to publicity does not affect impartiality in this case.
Presumption of constitutionality - Person alleging must have direct proof of influence, not just mere possibility.
Principal Yardstick against exercise of power - The public cannot be excluded, especially when the issue is of public interest.
Due process clause
Equal protection clause b. Requirements of due process in an Administrative Proceedings or
Life – not just the protection of the right to be alive or security of one’s Quasi-Judicial Proceedings (Ang Tibay v. CIR)H-C-S-S-B-I-R
limb against physical harm. It is right to a good life emphasizing on the 1. Right to hearing including right to present case and submit
quality of living evidence
Liberty – measure of freedom which may be enjoyed in a civilized 2. Tribunal must consider evidence presented
community. It is the right of the citizen to be free to use his faculties in all 3. Decision must have something to support itself
lawful ways. 4. Evidence must be substantial
Property – include vested rights, does not include public office, license or 5. Decision must be based on evidence presented or at least
mere privilege unless such has evolved into some form of property contained in the record
protected by the constitution. This is everything over which man may 6. Tribunal or body must act on its own independent consideration
have exclusive dominion or ownership. 7. Board or body must render its decision in a manner where
Profession- is a legitimate subject of Police Power. So long as professionals - Police Power, in the interest of General Welfare and Public Health, MAY
and other workers meet reasonably regulatory standards, no such deprivation impair contracts. (Beltran v. Sec. of Health)
of property exists. (JMM Promotion and Management v. CA) Easements- are like other contracts, subject to the overriding demands,
- No violation of property rights, the state can regulate entry into business as needs and interests of the greater number as the State may determine in the
long as it is reasonable. exercise of its police power. (UBFHAI v. City Mayor of Paranaque)
- The performance of legitimate and even essential duties by public officers Equal Pay for Equal Work- persons who work for equal qualifications, skill,
has never been an excuse to free a person validly in prison. Functions and effort and responsibility, under similar conditions, should be paid equally.
duties of the office are not substantial distinctions which lift the accused from Salaries should not be used as an enticement for foreign-hires, to the
the class of prisoners interrupted in their freedom and restricted in liberty of prejudice of local-hires. (IS v. Quisumbing)
movement. (People v. Jalosjos)
Death Penalty- The death penalty law applies to all persons and all classes of
- There are substantial differences between big investors who are lured to persons. No particular group or classes of persons are identified by the law
establish their industries in the “secured areas” compared to business against whom the death penalty shall be exclusively imposed. (People v.
operators outside the area. The first can give economic impact that is national Mercado)
in scope, the other, merely local (Tiu v. CA)
SECTION 2: THE RIGHT OF PEOPLE TO BE SECURED IN THEIR
Telecommunications- TV and radio are more pervasive and persuasive; PERSONS, HOUSES, PAPERS, AND EFFECT AGAINST UNREASONABLE
print media does not really reach the hard-to-reach places in the Philippines SEARCHES AND SEIZURE OR WHATEVER NATURE AND FOR ANY
while access to TV and radio content is practically simultaneous (TELEBAP v. PURPOSE SHALL BE INVIOLABLE, AND NO SEARCH WARRANT OR
COMELEC) WARRANT OF ARREST SHALL BE ISSUED EXCEPT UPON PROBABLE
- The payment of the civil liability is not made a condition precedent to CAUSE TO BE DETERMINED PERSONALLY BY THE JUDGE AFTER
probation. Petitioner’s application for probation had already been granted. EXAMINATION UNDER OATH OR AFFIRMATION OF THE COMPLAINT
Satisfaction of his civil liability was not made a requirement before he could AND THE WITNESSES HE MAY PRODUCE, AND PARTICULARLY
avail of probation, but was a condition for his continued enjoyment of the DESCRIBING THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED AND THE PERSONS OR
THINGS TO BE SEIZED.
Exception: If search is reasonable Search – an examination of a man’s house or other buildings or premises, or
I of his person or his vehicle with a view to the discovery of contraband, illicit
I I I I and stolen property or some evidence of guilt to be used in prosecution of a
criminal action for some crime or offense charged.
With a valid Without a valid Without Other nature or
warrant warrant Warrant (by a purpose When is a search a “search”?
Private A “Routine Checkpoint” does not intrude on a motorists right to “free passage
Requirements: 1) Incidental to Individual) 1) Subpoena without interruption,” but it involves only a brief detention of travelers during
1) Issued upon lawful arrest duces tecum which the vehicle’s occupants are required to answer a brief question or two.
probable cause (Sec 12, Rule 1) SOP (People 2) Administrative As long as the vehicle is neither searched, nor its occupants subjected to a
2) Personally 126 of Rules of vs. Marti) Inspection body search, and the inspection of the vehicle is limited to a visual search,
examined by the Court) 2) Security Check routine checks cannot be regarded as violative of an individuals’ right against
judge 2) Plain view (People vs unreasonable search. (Valmonte v. Gen. De Villa)
3) Examined 3) Moving vehicle Bongcarawan)
under oath and 4) Consented Random Drug Testing- The operative concepts in the mandatory drug
affirmation warrantless testing are "randomness" and "suspicionless." In the case of persons charged
4) Particularly search with a crime before the prosecutor's office, a mandatory drug testing can
describing the 5) Customs never be random or suspicionless.
place to be searches
searched and the 6) Stop and Frisk When persons suspected of committing a crime are charged, they are singled
persons or things 7) Exigent and out and are impleaded against their will. The persons thus charged, by the
to be seized Emergency bare fact of being haled before the prosecutor's office and peaceably
(Sec. 2 Art. III, circumstances submitting themselves to drug testing, if that be the case, do not necessarily
Uy v. BIR) 8) suspicionless consent to the procedure, let alone waive their right to privacy.
5) warrant must drug tests
not be for more To impose mandatory drug testing on the accused is a blatant attempt to
than one offense harness a medical test as a tool for criminal prosecution, contrary to the
(Revised ROC) stated objectives of RA 9165. Drug testing in this case would violate a
persons' right to privacy guaranteed under Sec. 2, Art. III of the Constitution.
Worse still, the accused persons are veritably forced to incriminate
themselves. (SJS v. DDB)
- When a judge issues almost exactly the same warrant as the old one, - If for some reason, a search was not completed on the first day it was
wherein only the municipality or number of the address is changed, the old undertaken, such as the voluptuousness of the material to be seized, the
warrant is deemed revoked by the new warrant, and it is presumed that the search on the 2nd day is deemed a continuation of the original search. The
new warrant is issued in order to correct some defect in the old warrant.
Requisites of a Valid Warrant The testimonies of the two witnesses, coupled with the object and
A search warrant must conform strictly to the requirements of the foregoing documentary evidence they presented, are sufficient to establish the existence
constitutional and statutory provisions. These requirements are: of probable cause. The determination of probable cause does not call for the
(1) the warrant must be issued upon probable cause; application of rules and standards of proof that a judgment of conviction
(2) the probable cause must be determined by the judge himself and not by requires after trial on the merits. (Microsoft v. Maxicorp)
the applicant or any other person;
(3) in the determination of probable cause, the judge must examine, under “Probable cause” is concerned with probability, not absolute or even moral
oath or affirmation, the complainant and such witnesses as the latter may certainty. The prosecution need not present at this stage proof beyond
produce; and reasonable doubt. The standards of judgment are that of reasonably prudent
(4) the warrant issued must particularly describe the place to be searched and man, not the exacting calibrations of a judge after a full-blown trial. (Microsoft
persons or things to be seized. (Uy v. BIR) v. Maxicorp)
1)Probable Cause – such reasons, supported by facts and circumstances, as For purposes of issuing a warrant, only a judge can determine probable cause.
will warrant a cautious man in the belief that his action and the means taken For purposes of filing an information, the prosecution determines probable
in prosecuting it, are legally just and proper. DETERMINED BY THE FACTS OF cause. Determination of probable cause during a preliminary investigation is
EACH CASE. an executive function. (People v. CA)
- It must be probable cause of something specific (Stonehill vs. Dlokno)
- It must be defined In relation to the action which It justifies Sufficiency of Affidavit
- Mere conclusions of law do not establish probable cause (Corro vs. Lising) When the Affidavit of the applicant of the complaint contains sufficient facts
(Burgos vs. Chief of Staff) within his personal and direct knowledge, it is sufficient if the judge is satisfied
Probable cause for an arrest – facts and circumstances which would that there exist probable cause; when the applicant's knowledge of the facts is
lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an mere hearsay, the affidavit of one or more witnesses having a personal
offense has been committed by the person sought to be arrested. knowledge of the fact is necessary. (Alvarez v. CFI)
Probable cause for a search – facts and circumstances which would Prosecutor’s Certification
lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an The judge may rely upon the fiscal's certification of the existence of probable
offense has been committed and that the objects sought in cause and, on the basis thereof, issue a warrant of arrest. But such
Requirements: The rules governing search and seizure of a moving vehicle have steadily
1) Prior valid intrusion based on the valid warrantless arrest in which the liberalized on the basis of practicality. This is so considering that before a
police are legally present in the pursuit of their official duty. warrant could be obtained, the place, things and persons to be searched must
2) The evidence was inadvertently discovered by the police who have the right be described to the satisfaction of the issuing judge—a requirement which
to be there. borders on the impossible in the case of smuggling effected by the use of a
3) The evidence must be immediately apparent moving vehicle that can transport contraband from one place to another with
4) Plain view justified mere seizure of evidence without further search (People impunity. (People v. Lo Ho Wing)
vs. Valdez) (See Roan vs. Gonzales)
It is quite true the RASAC received one such information several days or a
Aside from a search incident to a lawful arrest, a warrantless search had been week before the encounter; but the fact that its agents failed to obtain a
upheld in cases of moving vehicles and the seizure of evidence in plain view, warrant in spite of the time allowance is not a sign that they have been remiss
as well as the search conducted at police or military checkpoints which we in their duty. Because they lacked the necessary information (such as the
declared are not illegal per se, and stressed that the warrantless search is not exact time/place where the search should be made), RASAC could not have
violative of the Constitution for as long as the vehicle is neither searched nor possibly secured a valid warrant even if they had foreseen its compelling
its occupants subjected to a body search, and the inspection of the vehicle is necessity. (People v. CFI of Rizal)
merely limited to a visual search. (Aniag v. Comelec)
The prevalent circumstances of the case undoubtedly bear out the fact that
An extensive search without warrant could only be resorted to if the the search in question was made as regards a moving vehicle — petitioner's
officers conducting the search had reasonable or probable cause to believe vehicle was "flagged down" by the apprehending officers upon identification.
before the search that either the motorist was a law offender or that they Therefore, the police authorities were justified in searching the petitioner's
would find the instrumentality or evidence pertaining to the commission of a automobile without a warrant since the situation demanded immediate action.
crime in the vehicle to be searched. The existence of probable cause justifying (Asuncion v. CA)
the warrantless search is determined by the facts of each case. Absent such
justifying circumstances specifically pointing to the culpability of petitioner the First of all, even though the police authorities already identified the petitioner
search could not be valid. The action then of the policemen unreasonably as an alleged shabu dealer and confirmed the area where he allegedly was
intruded into petitioner's privacy and the security of his property. (Aniag v. plying his illegal trade, they were uncertain as to the time he would show up
Comelec) in the vicinity. Secondly, they were uncertain as to the type of vehicle
petitioner would be in, taking into account reports that petitioner used
3) Search of a moving vehicle different cars in going to and from the area. Finally, there was probable cause
-The important thing is that there was probable cause to conduct the as the same police officers had a previous encounter with the petitioner, who
warrantless search. (Caballes vs. CA) was then able to evade arrest.
- Or search is conducted in exceptional circumstances (i.e. checkpoints)
(Valmonte vs. de Villa) When the vehicle was pointed to them by their confidential informant, with the
- When a person gives his consent to be searched, he waives his right against The purpose of the rule:
warrantless searches and seizures. (People v. Lacerna) (a) the general interest of effective crime prevention and detection and
(b) the pressing interest of safety and self-preservation which permit the
The apprehending officers even sought the permission of petitioner to search officer to take steps to assure himself that the person is not armed that may
the car, to which the latter agreed. As such, since the shabu was discovered be used against him. (Malacat v. CA)
by virtue of a valid warrantless search and the petitioner himself freely gave
his consent to said search, the prohibited drugs found as a result were Terry Stop- The prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not
admissible in evidence. (Asuncion v. CA) violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and searches him
without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable
The right against warrantless searches and seizures is a purely personal right, suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit
as such, nobody else should be able to waive the right for the accused. a crime.
**However in Lopez v. Commissioner of Customs where a woman identified For their own protection, the police may perform a quick surface search of the
herself as the wife of the occupant and gave consent to the search and person’s outer clothing for weapons if they have reasonable suspicion that the
voluntarily surrendered papers of the absent occupant but turned out to be a person stopped is armed. Reasonable suspicion must be based on “specific
7) Exigent and Emergency circumstances – urgency and exigency of the But in the erroneous hypothesis that the production and inspection of books
moment dispenses the need for warrants and documents of a company ordered by the Court is tantamount to a search
warrant, the procedure outlined by Rule 21 and followed by a judge place
8) *new* suspicionless drug test them outside the realm of the prohibited unreasonable searches.
Sec. 36 of RA 9165 and its implementing rules and regulations (IRR), as
couched, contain provisions specifically directed towards preventing a situation If a party in a case has interest in the books and documents in question, then
that would unduly embarrass the employees or place them under a humiliating it means that they are material and important to the issues of the case, and
experience. While every officer and employee in a private establishment is that justice will be better served if all the facts pertinent to the controversy
under the law deemed forewarned that he or she may be a possible subject of are placed before the trial court. (Material Distributors v. Natividad)
a drug test, nobody is really singled out in advance for drug testing. The
random drug testing shall be undertaken under conditions calculated to Subpoena Duces Tecum
protect as much as possible the employee's privacy and dignity. The intrusion The right against unreasonable searches and seizure guards against abuse
into the employees' privacy, under RA 9165, is accompanied by proper only by way of too much indefiniteness or breadth in the things required to be
safeguards, particularly against embarrassing leakages of test results, and is “particularly described;” if the inquiry is one the demanding agency
relatively minimal. (Congress/Admin. Body) is authorized by law to make and the materials
specified are relevant, the gist of the protection being the requirement that
**The probable-cause standard is peculiarly related to criminal investigations the disclosure sought shall not be unreasonable.
and may be unsuited to determining the reasonableness of administrative
searches where the Government seeks to prevent the development of The requirement of “probable cause supported by oath or affirmation,” literally
hazardous conditions. The American Court has held that a warrant and finding applicable in case of a warrant, is satisfied in case of an “Order for Production
of probable cause are unnecessary in the public school context because such (Subpoena Duces Tecum) by the Court’s determination that the investigation
requirements would unduly interfere with the maintenance of the swift and is authorized by Congress for a purpose it can order, and that the documents
- The rule is that the right to preliminary investigation is waived ONLY when Exceptions:
the accused fails to invoke it before or at the time of entering a plea at the 1. Lawful order of the Court
Privacy of Communication with regard to Telephone Conversations Illegal Possession of Firearms- The Constitutional Immunity from
Unauthorized tape recordings of telephone conversations are not admissible as unreasonable searches and seizures, being a personal one, cannot be waived
evidence. Absent a clear showing that both parties to the telephone by anyone except the person whose rights are invaded or one who is
conversation allowed the recordings of the same, the inadmissibility of the expressly authorized to do so in his or her behalf.
subject tapes is mandatory under RA 4200 (Anti-Wiretapping Law). Tape
recordings can only be made upon lawful order of the Court. Records show that the appellant was not at the house at the time his alleged
helper, allowed the authorities to enter it. We find no evidence that would
C. Prohibition establish the fact that Luz Morados was indeed the appellant’s helper, or if she
Not absolute. The state may infringe such by applying for a previous was the helper, that the appellant had given her authority to open his house in
judicial authorization in cases of national security or non-judicially when his absence. (People v. Damaso)
required by public safety, public order or otherwise prescribed by law.
The case does not fall within the exceptions to warrantless search.
Purpose: Protection against the State. “The Bill of Rights governs the The reason for searching the house of herein petitioners is that it was
- What mayor or authorities must do is to secure a warrant and convince the - Schools have the authority to censor if it could affect the education of
court or judge with jurisdiction that the materials sought to be seized are others. This case led that the censorship in the schools was only acceptable if
"obscene," and pose a clear and present danger of an evil substantive enough it were for "valid educational purpose." Stricter rules should be followed for
B. Free Exercise Clause - Exemption may be accorded to the Jehovah's Witnesses with regard to the
Embraces two concepts – freedom to believe and freedom to act. observance of the flag ceremony out of respect for their religious beliefs,
however "bizarre" those beliefs may seem to others. (Ebranilag v. Div.
a. Freedom to believe - compulsion by law of the acceptance of any creed or Superintendent of Schools in Cebu)
the practice of any form of worship
ABSOLUTE FREEDOM- The government cannot inquire into a person's religious The Air Force has drawn the line essentially between religious apparel that is
pretentions. Men may believe what they cannot prove, they may not be put to visible and that which is not. The AFRs reasonably and evenhandedly regulate
prove their religious doctrines or beliefs. dress in the interest of the military’s perceived need for uniformity. (Goldman
v. Weinberger)
- The absoluteness of the freedom to believe carries with it the corollary that
the government, while it may look into the good faith of a person, cannot Amish - Respondents have amply supported their claim that enforcement of
inquire into a person's religious pretensions. (US v. Ballard) the compulsory formal education requirement after the eighth grade would
gravely endanger if not destroy the free exercise of their religious beliefs. Only
b. Freedom to act on such belief- free exercise of the chosen religion the interest of the highest order and those not otherwise served can
NOT ABSOLUTE- The moment belief flows over into action, it becomes subject overbalance legitimate claims to the free exercise of religion. (Wisconsin v.
to government regulation Yoder)
- Act must pass the clear and present danger test or the balancing of interest
test – benevolent neutrality - Respondents assured petitioners that they have never and will never restrict
Involves compulsion or coercion on the part of the state. any person or persons from entering and worshipping at said chapel. They
maintain, however, that the intention was not really to perform an act of
- The free exercise of religious belief is superior to contract rights, in case of religious worship but to conduct an anti-government demonstration at a place
conflict, the latter must yield to the former. Religious freedom, although not close to the very residence and offices of the President. The reasonableness of
unlimited, is a fundamental personal right and liberty, and has a preferred the restriction of entry is is designed to protect the lives of the President and
position in the hierarchy of values. Contractual rights must yield to religious his family, as well as government officials transacting business in Malacanang.
freedom. (Victoriano v. Elizalde Rope Workers Union) (German v. Baranganan)
- Since the film series would not have been shown during school hours, nor - The freedom to act to one's belief is subject to regulation where the belief is
was it sponsored by the school, and would have been open to the public, there translated into external acts that affect the public welfare. Therefore, the
would be no realistic danger that the community would think that the District religious program is not beyond review by the Board (INC v. CA)
was endorsing religion or any creed. (Lambs Chapel v. School District)
A creed must meet 4 criteria to qualify as religion under the First
Prayer in School Commencement Ceremonies- It is beyond dispute that, Amendment: BG-MC-DS-AT
at a minimum, the Constitution guarantees that government may not coerce 1. There must be belief in God or some parallel belief that occupies a
anyone to support or participate in religion or its exercise, or otherwise act in central place in the believer’s life.
a way which "establishes a [state] religion or religious faith, or tends to do 2. The religion must involve a moral code transcending individual
so." (Lee v. Weisman) belief, i.e., it cannot be purely subjective.
3. A demonstrable sincerity in belief is necessary, but the court must
- As where any member of a religious corporation is expelled from the not inquire into the truth or reasonableness of the belief.
membership for espousing doctrines and teachings contrary to that of his 4. There must be some associational ties, although there is also a
church, such an action is conclusive upon civil courts. (Loong v. Basa) view that religious beliefs held by a single person rather than being
part of the teachings of any kind of groups or sect are entitled to the
-case: fired for use of religious peyote, could not get unemployed protection of the Free Exercise Clause.
compensation. Valid because the religious clause does not relieve an individual
of the obligation to comply with a law that incidentally forbids (or requires) the The religious freedom doctrines one can derive from Gerona are:
performance of an act that his religious belief requires or forbids if the law is 1) It is incumbent upon the Court to determine whether a certain ritual is
not specifically directed to religious practice religious or not;
2) Religious freedom will not be upheld if it clashes with the established
C. No religious Test institutions of society and with the law such that when a law of general
No law shall be passed which would require a person to profess a religion applicability incidentally burdens the exercise of one’s religion, one’s right to
to qualify in the exercise of his civil and political rights. religious freedom cannot justify exemption from compliance with the law.
Purpose: to discredit the policy of probing into one’s religious beliefs by
test oaths or limiting public offices to persons who profess to a particular Benevolent neutrality recognizes the religious nature of the Filipino people
religion and the elevating influence of religion in society; at the same time, it
acknowledges that the government must pursue its secular goals. In pursuing
these goals, however, the government might adopt laws or actions of general
A. Liberty granted by the provision Petitioner has posted bail, which the Court has declared legally valid and
1. Freedom to choose and change one's place of abode -may be complete despite her absence at the time of filing. By virtue of which, she
impaired upon lawful order of the court and within the limits holds herself amenable at all times to the orders and processes of the court,
prescribed by law. thus she may legally be prohibited from leaving the country during the
pendency of the case. (Santiago v. Vasquez)
Liberty of Abode- One can search in vain for any law, order, or regulation,
which even hints at the right of the Mayor of the city of Manila or the chief of - Petitioner did not have an absolute right to leave the country and the
police of that city, to force citizens of the Philippine Islands — these women burden was on her to prove that because of danger to health if not to her
despite their being in a sense lepers of society are nevertheless not chattels life there was necessity to seek medical treatment in foreign countries.
but Philippine citizens protected by the same constitutional guaranties as any (Marcos v. Sandiganbayan)
other citizens — to change their domicile from Manila to another locality.
(Villavicencio v. Lukban) Tollways/ Highways- Prohibition on the use of motorcycles in tollways is not
an undue deprivation of petitioner’s right to travel. Toll way is not merely an
- The right to change abode and travel within the Philippines, being invoked by ordinary road and for public safety and interest, certain restrictions must be
petitioner, are not absolute rights. It can be regulated by a lawful order such imposed. Petitioner’s right to travel is not taken away since with the use of
as releasing a petitioner on bail. (Yap v. CA) other forms of transportation, they may still travel through toll ways or use
alternate routes if they are to use their motorcycles. (Mirasol v. DPWH)
2. Freedom to travel both within the country and outside- may be
impaired by administrative authorities, such as passport officers, in SECTION 7: THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC
the interest of national security or public health -also impaired by bail CONCERN SHALL BE RECOGNIZED. ACCESS TO OFFICIAL RECORDS
AND TO DOCUMENTS AND PAPERS PERTAINING TO OFFICIAL ACTS,
Right to travel- The right involved in this case at bar is the right to return to TRANSACTIONS OR DECISIONS AS WELL AS TO GOVERNMENT
one's country, a distinct right under international law, independent from, RESEARCH DATA USED AS BASIS FOR POLICY DEVELOPMENT SHAL BE
although related to the right to travel. Thus, the UNDHR and the IC-CPR treat AFFORDED TO CITIZENS SUBJECT TO SUCH LIMITATIONS AS MAY BE
the right to freedom of movement and abode within the territory of a state, PROVIDED BY LAW
the right to leave the country, and the right to enter one's country as separate
and distinct rights. A. Rights granted by the provision
- The right to return to one's country is not covered by the specific right to The right to information and right to access of records and documents is a
travel and liberty of abode provided for in the 1987 Constitution. Therefore, form of political right
- Zamora, in his official capacity as Executive Secretary, has a constitutional - It would be too presumptuous on the part of the Court to summarily
and statutory duty to answer petitioner’s letter dealing with matters which are compel public respondents to comply with pertinent provisions of law
unquestionably of public concern – that is, appointments made to public regarding procurement of government infrastructure projects without any
offices and the utilization of public property. With regard to petitioner’s factual basis or prior determination of very particular violations committed
request for copies of the appointment papers of certain officials, respondent by specific government officials of the executive branch. (Suplico v. NEDA)
Zamora is obliged to allow the inspection and copying of the same subject to
Diplomatic Negotiations - The Nature of diplomacy requires the Two, Republic Act No. 7160 or the Local Government Code of 1991 requires all
centralization of authority and expedition of decision, which are inherent in national offices to conduct consultations before any project or program critical
executive action. Delegates from other countries tell you their concerns in to the environment and human ecology including those that may call for the
confidence, and while the final text of the JPEPA may not be perpetually eviction of a particular group of people residing in such locality, is
confidential, the offers exchanged by the parties during the negotiations implemented therein. The MOA-AD is one peculiar program that unequivocally
continue to be privileged even after the JPEPA is published. It is reasonable to and unilaterally vests ownership of a vast territory to the Bangsamoro people,
assume that the Japanese delegates expect that “historic confidentiality” which could pervasively and drastically result to the diaspora or displacement
would govern the same. (Akbayan v. Aquino) of a great number of inhabitants from their total environment.
THE PROVINCE OF NORTH COTABATO VS. THE GOVERNMENT OF THE Three, Republic Act No. 8371 or the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES PEACE PANEL ON ANCESTRAL provides for clear-cut procedure for the recognition and delineation of
DOMAIN (GRP) ancestral domain, which entails, among other things, the observance of the
The people's right to information on matters of public concern under Sec. 7, free and prior informed consent of the Indigenous Cultural
Article III of the Constitution is in splendid symmetry with the state policy of Communities/Indigenous Peoples. Notably, the statute does not grant the
full public disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest under Sec. Executive Department or any government agency the power to delineate and
28, Article II of the Constitution. The right to information guarantees the right recognize an ancestral domain claim by mere agreement or compromise.
of the people to demand information, while Section 28 recognizes the duty of
officialdom to give information even if nobody demands. The complete and The invocation of the doctrine of executive privilege as a defense to the
effective exercise of the right to information necessitates that its general right to information or the specific right to consultation is untenable.
complementary provision on public disclosure derive the same self-executory The various explicit legal provisions fly in the face of executive secrecy. In any
nature, subject only to reasonable safeguards or limitations as may be event, respondents effectively waived such defense after it unconditionally
provided by law. disclosed the official copies of the final draft of the MOA-AD, for judicial
compliance and public scrutiny.
The contents of the MOA-AD is a matter of paramount public concern involving
public interest in the highest order. In declaring that the right to information SECTION 8: THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE, INCLUDING THOSE
contemplates steps and negotiations leading to the consummation of the EMPLOYED IN THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS, TO FORM UNIONS,
contract, jurisprudence finds no distinction as to the executory nature or ASSOCIATIONS, OR SOCIETIES FOR THE PURPOSES NOT CONTRARY
commercial character of the agreement. TO LAW SHALL NOT BE ABRIDGED
An essential element of these twin freedoms is to keep a continuing dialogue Government employees have the right to form unions but this does not
or process of communication between the government and the people. include the right to strike.
Corollary to these twin rights is the design for feedback mechanisms. The right
to public consultation was envisioned to be a species of these public rights. - Government employees are denied the same weapons/modes of petitioning
and negotiation that their private sector counterparts have for the betterment
At least three pertinent laws animate these constitutional imperatives and of the terms and conditions of their employment. (SSS Employees v. CA)
- Managerial employees are not allowed to join, assist, or form unions. Requisites for the valid exercise of the power of eminent domain:
- The Labor Code may prohibit managerial employees from a. The property taken must be private property;
joining/assisting/forming any labor organizations: b. There must be genuine necessity to take the private
o Sec. 8 says “The right of the people…to form unions, associations, or property;
societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged” c. The taking must be for public use;
o Labor code is law, union participation of managerial employees is d. There must be payment of just compensation; and
contrary to Law e. The taking must comply with due process of law.
“if these managerial employees would belong to or be affiliated with a Union,
the latter might not be assured of their loyalty to the Union in view of evident Requisites for the LGU to exercise eminent domain
conflict of interest. The Union can also become company-dominated with the 1. Valid and definite offer previously made to the owner but was not
presence of managerial employees in the Union membership.” (UPSCU v. accepted
Laguesma) 2. Ordinance enacted authorizing such exercise
- Although the Industrial Peace Act of 1953 affirmed the right of supervisors, 3. Power enacted for public use, welfare, purpose or for the benefit
or Front-line Managers to form their own organizations. of the poor and landless
4. Payment of just compensation
- The right to join associations includes the right NOT to join
- No one can be compelled to join an association without his consent. As understood from the common and usual meaning of the conjunction and,
- The by-laws or charters of corporation cannot bind or compel a person, not the provisions of PD 1517 apply only to areas declared to be located within
party to the creation of the charter/by-laws, to become a member of the both an Area for Priority Development (APD) and an Urban Land Reform Zone
corporation/association because he has not given his consent. (ULRZ). (Solanda v. CA)
(Sta. Clara Homeowners Association v. Gaston)
It is noted that the smaller the land, the bigger the payment in money,
-But a deed of sale, which provides that the buyer must automatically join an primarily because the small landowner will be needing it more than the big
association, is binding because his participation in the contract implies his landowners, who can afford a bigger balance in bonds and other things of
consent. He could have chosen to not purchase the property. value. (Santos v. Land Bank)
- Under the Torrens system of registration, claims and liens of whatever
character except those mentioned by law existing against the land binds the Despite the existence of this legislative grant in favor of local governments, it
holder of the title and the whole world. PADCOM could have avoided is still the duty of the courts to determine whether the power of eminent
membership by not buying the land. (PADCOM vs. Ortigas Center Association) domain is being exercised in accordance with the delegating law. The
requisites to be considered by the courts are:
1. An ordinance is enacted by the local legislative council
SECTION 9: PRIVATE PROPERTY SHALL NOT BE TAKEN FOR PUBLIC authorizing the local chief executive, in behalf of the local
USE WITHOUT JUST COMPENSATION government unit, to exercise the power of eminent domain or
pursue expropriation proceedings over a particular private
a) Expropriation in General property. x x x
Eminent Domain
Finality of Judgment- The judgment giving NHA the right to expropriate the b) Power to Undertake Expropriation Case
properties mentioned became final and executory. “It is arbitrary and Substitution - The real party in interest in expropriation cases is the Republic
capricious for a government agency to initiate expropriation proceedings, seize of the Philippines. Expropriation suits are brought in behalf of and for the
a person’s property, allow the judgment of the court to become final and benefit of the Republic of the Philippines. it follows that the Republic of the
executory and then refuse to pay on the ground that there are no Philippines is entitled to be substituted in the expropriation proceedings as
appropriations for the property earlier taken and profitably used.“ (NHA v. party-plaintiff in lieu of ISA, the statutory term of ISA having expired. Put a
Heirs of Isidro Guivelondo) little differently, the expiration of ISA's statutory term did not by itself require
or justify the dismissal of the eminent domain proceedings. (Iron and Steel
In the case of Republic v. PLDT, the Court held that although an easement of Authority v. CA)
a right of way transmits no rights except the easement itself, and respondent
retains full ownership of the property, the acquisition of such easement is, -Threshold requisites for lawful taking of private property for public use need
nevertheless, not gratis. Considering the nature and the effect of the to be examined here: one is the necessity for the taking; another is the legal
installation power lines, the limitations on the use of the land for an indefinite authority to effect the taking.A reasonable relationship between that power
period would deprive respondent of normal use of the property. For this and the enforcement and administration of election laws by Comelec must be
reason, the latter is entitled to payment of a just compensation, which must shown; it is not casually to be assumed. (Philippine Press Institute v.
be neither more nor less than the monetary equivalent of the land. COMELEC)
While Section 3(a) of R.A. No.6395, as amended, and the implementing rule Regulation of a Privilege is not Taking - In truth, radio and television
of R.A. No. 8974 indeed state that only 10% of the market value of the broadcasting companies, which are given franchises, do not own the airwaves
property is due to the owner of the property subject to an easement of right- and frequencies through which they transmit broadcast signals and images.
of-way, said rule is not binding on the Court. Well-settled is the rule that the They are merely given the temporary privilege of using them. Since a
determination of "just compensation" in eminent domain cases is a judicial franchise is a mere privilege, the exercise of the privilege may reasonably be
function. Any valuation for just compensation laid down in the statutes may burdened with the performance by the grantee of some form of public service.
serve only as guiding principle or one of the factors in determining just (Telebap v. COMELEC)
compensation but it may not substitute the court's own judgment as to what
amount should be awarded and how to arrive at such amount. (NPC v. Compliance with procedural due process is mandatory. Condemnation
Purefoods) must be a last resort - In the same vein, expropriation proceedings are to
be resorted to only after the other modes of acquisition have been exhausted.
Compliance with these conditions is mandatory because these are the only
HOWEVER, a restriction on real property may constitute a "taking" if: In NPC v Gutierrez right of way easement resulting in restriction or
a. No public purpose limitation on property rights also falls within the ambit of “expropriation” as
b. Has an unduly harsh impact upon the owner's use of the there was loud buzzing and exploding sounds caused by the transmission
property lines, it affects the rights of the owner to use or sell such land. (NPC v. San
c. Has same effect as the complete destruction of rights of land Pedro)
owners(Penn Central Transport v. NYC)
- In the determination of [fair market] value, the court is not limited to the
Trade Secrets- Despite their intangible nature, trade secrets have many of assessed value of the property or to the schedule of market values determined
the characteristics of more traditional forms of property. Moreover, this Court by the provincial or city appraisal committee; these values consist but one
has found other kinds of intangible interests to be property for purposes of the factor in the judicial valuation of the property. The nature and character of the
Clause. The court also held that so long as the taking has a conceivable public land at the time of its taking is the principal criterion for determining how
character, the means by which it will be attained is for congress to determine. much just compensation should be given to the landowner. All the facts as to
In deciding whether a particular governmental action (short of the condition of the property and its surroundings, as well as its improvements
acquisition) has effected a taking, this Court focuses on: and capabilities, should be considered.
1) The character of the governmental action
2) The economic impact - If the easement is intended to perpetually or indefinitely deprive the owner
3) Whether the action interferes with reasonable investment-backed of his proprietary rights by imposing conditions that affect the ordinary use,
expectations free enjoyment and disposal of the property or through restrictions and
(Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto) limitations that are inconsistent with the exercise of the attributes of
ownership, or when the introduction of structures or objects which, by their
- An easement of a right of way transmits no rights except the easement nature, create or increase the probability of injury, death upon or destruction
itself; respondent retains full ownership of the property. The acquisition of of life and property found on the land is necessary, then the owner should be
such easement is, nevertheless, not gratis. Considering the nature and the compensated for the monetary equivalent of the land. (NPC v. Tiangco)
effect of the installation power lines, the limitations on the use of the land for
an indefinite period would deprive respondent of normal use of the property. - The taking of private lands under the agrarian reform program partakes
The latter is entitled to just compensation, which must be neither more nor of the nature of an expropriation proceeding.
less than the land’s monetary equivalent. - Since just compensation embraces not only the correct determination of the
amount to be paid to the owners of the land, but also its payment within a
- Just compensation is defined as the full and fair equivalent of the property reasonable time from the taking of the land, we think that the appellate court
taken from its owner by the expropriator. In eminent domain or expropriation correctly imposed an interest in the nature of damages for the delay. (LBP v.
- The nature of land bank bond fortifies the view that respondent may be The fair market valuation of land to be taken should not be based on the value
compelled to accept those bonds at their face value. Agrarian reform cannot of adjacent lots if the nature of the adjacent lots is different from the land
be fully realized without the intervention of the government particularly in the sought to be expropriated. (NPC v. Henson)
payment of just compensation it is only with the support of the government
that payment of just compensation to landowner may be realized. (Maddumba Administrative guidelines for determination of just compensation are
v. GSIS) not Unconstitutional unless it is conclusive upon the Judiciary,
depriving them of their prerogative - The objection that P.D. 27 is
- Among the factor to be considered in arriving at a fair market value of the unconstitutional as it sets limitations on the judicial prerogative of determining
property are the cost of acquisition, the current value of the properties, its just compensation is bereft of merit. The determination of just compensation
actual or potential uses and tax declarations. Commissioner's report although under P.D. No. 27, like in Section 16 (d) of R.A. 6657 or the CARP Law, is not
only advisory and persuasive and by no means final, therefore, may be used final or conclusive. Unless both the landowner and the tenant-farmer accept
as basis for determination of just compensation. (Berkentotter v. CA) the valuation of the property by the Barrio Committee on Land Production and
the DAR, the parties may bring the dispute to court in order to determine the
- A trial before the Commissioners is indispensable to allow the parties to appropriate amount of compensation, a task unmistakably within the
present evidence on the issue of just compensation therefore, the prerogative of the court. (Sigre v. CA)
appointment of commissioners is mandatory requirement In expropriation
cases for it is a substantial right that may not be done away without any An alleged unjust compensation is not enough to discontinue
reason (Meralco v. Pineda/NPC v. CA) expropriation that has already become final and executor - Petitioner
alleges that the intended public use was rendered nugatory by the
- Just compensation means not only the correct determination of the amount unreasonable just compensation fixed by the court, which is beyond the
to be paid to the owner of the land but also the payment of the land within means of the intended beneficiaries of the socialized housing project. The
reasonable time from its taking. (Land Bank v. CA) public purpose of the socialized housing project is not in any way
- In light of the declared unconstitutionality of P.D. No. 76, P.D. No.1533 and diminished by the amount of just compensation that the court has
P.D. No. 42 insofar as they sanction executive determination of just fixed. Petitioner cannot be permitted to institute condemnation proceedings
compensation in expropriation cases, it is imperative that any right to the against respondents only to abandon it later when it finds the amount of just
immediate possession of the subject property, accruing to respondent compensation unacceptable. (NHA v. Heirs of Isidro Guivelondo)
VISCA, must be firmly grounded on a valid compliance with Section 2
of Rule 67, i.e., there must be a deposit with the National or Provincial Tax Credits - The tax credit that is contemplated under the Senior Citizens
Treasurer of the value of the subject property as provisionally and promptly Act is a form of just compensation for private property taken by the State for
ascertained and fixed by the court having jurisdiction of the proceedings. public use, not a remedy for taxes that were erroneously or illegally
(Panes v. VISCA) assessed/collected. (CIR v. Central Luzon)
Original Jurisdiction of Special Agrarian Courts -Special Agrarian Courts,
which are Regional Trial Courts, are given original and exclusive jurisdiction
Endorsement billboards of an electoral candidate may be regulated/removed **Right to counsel is intended to preclude the slightest coercion as would lead
by COMELEC without violating the non-impairment clause as a valid exercise the accused to admit something false. The lawyer should never prevent the
of police power because the billboards assumed partisan political character accused from freely and voluntarily speaking the truth (People v. Layuso)
when he filed for candidacy. (Chavez v COMELEC)
The rules on custodial investigations do not apply when the confession is
A mortgage involving inalienable land is void ab initio and cannot be the made to a private individual because that situation would not be one of a
source of rights. The non-impairment clause may not be invoked, because the custodial investigation. (People v. Tawat)
state’s restraint on private individuals from holding ownership or vested rights
on the said land (Forest) is a valid exercise of police power. (Land Bank of the The presumption of regularity of official acts does not apply t “in-custody
Philippines v. Republic of the Philippines, represented by the Director of confessions.” In order for it to be admissible, the prosecution must show that
Lands) the constitutional safeguards were observed in obtaining the confession.
(People v. Tolentino)
SECTION 11: FREE ACCESS TO THE COURTS AND QUASI-JUDICIAL Miranda Rights:
BODIES AND ADEQUATE LEGAL ASSISTANCE SHALL NOT BE DENIED A. Must be recited:
TO ANY PERSON BY REASON OF POVERTY - You have a right to remain silent
- Anything you say or do will be used against you in court
Using the totality of circumstances test, the alleged irregularities cited by the General Rule: Extra-judicial statements, as a rule, are admissible against their
accused did not result in his misidentification nor was he denied due process. respective declarants pursuant to the rule that the act, declaration or omission
There is nothing wrong in Leino’s identification of the accused in an of a party as to a relevant fact may be given in evidence against him.
unoccupied house in Forbes Park. The records reveal that this mode was
resorted to by the authorities for security reasons. The Leinos refused to have However, the rule that an extra-judicial statement is evidence only against the
the identification at the NBI office as it was cramped with people and with high person making it, recognizes several exceptions:
security risk. Leino’s fear for his safety was not irrational. He and his Interlocking Confessions- When several people are charged with an
companions had been shot in cold blood in one of the exclusive, supposedly offense, and there could have been NO collusion between them regarding their
safe subdivisions in the metropolis. confessions, the fact that statements are in all material respects identical, is
confirmatory of the confession of the co-defendants, and is admissible
There is no hard and fast rule as to the place where suspects are identified by against other people implicated therein. They are also admissible as
witnesses. Identification may be done in open field. It is often done in circumstantial evidence against the persons implicated therein to show the
hospitals while the crime and the criminal are still fresh in the mind of the probability of the latter’s actual participation in the commission of the crime.
victim (People v. Teehankee)
Illegal Confessions/Admissions are inadmissible against the source of the
Other Exceptions: (1) investigation by an administrative body, (2) confession BUT they are admissible against the person violating the
spontaneous statements, (3) audit examination, (4) not in police custody, (5) constitutional prohibition.
marked money, (6) booking sheets, (7) taking of pictures, (8) incidental to a
lawful arrest, (9) body examination, (10) preliminary investigation It is but natural for one who surrenders to the police to give reason or
explanation for his act of surrendering. If he voluntarily admits the killing and
- The constitutional right extends only to testimonial compulsion and not when surrendered precisely because he wanted to admit to the killing, the
the body of the accused is proposed to be examined. constitutional rights to be informed of his right to silence and to counsel may
Ex: paraffin test not be invoked. (People v. Taylaran)
Mahinay Case: has right to communicate with lawyer and family, has right to Right to be informed of his rights
waive any rights provided it is voluntary, knowingly and intelligently The right to be informed must be presumed to contemplate the transmission
of a meaningful information rather than just the ceremonial and perfunctory
The 1987 Constitution covers both confessions and admissions recitation of an abstract constitutional principle. The officer is not only duty
bound to tell the person the right the latter is entitled, but also to explain their
Admission – acts, declarations or omissions of the party as to a relevant fact. effects in practical terms. (People v. Ramos, People v. Caguioa)
Confession – declaration of the accused acknowledging his guilt to the
offense charged, or any offense necessarily included therein. The right of a person to be informed implies a correlative obligation on the
part of the police investigator to explain, and contemplates an effective
To be admissible: communication that results in understanding what is conveyed. (People v.
1. Confession must be voluntary, Nicandro; People v. Pinlac)
2. Made with the assistance of competent and independent counsel,
3. The confession must be express, Right to Competent and Independent Counsel
4. It must be in writing, -A lawyer is deemed engaged by the accused when he(accused) never raised
Bail – mode short of confinement which would, with reasonable certainty, Extradition Cases-
insure the attendance of the accused at his trial; takes the form of a deposit of On December 10, 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal
money or its equivalent as a guarantee of attendance. Failure to appear would Declaration of Human Rights in which the right to life, liberty and all the other
forfeit the deposit. fundamental rights of every person were proclaimed. Thus, in Mejoff v.
Director of Prisons, the SC, in granting bail to a prospective deportee,
Purpose held that under the Constitution, the principles set forth in that
1. To honor the presumption of innocence until his guilt is prove beyond Declaration are part of the law of the land.
reasonable doubt
2. To enable him to prepare hi defenses without being subject to punishment If bail can be granted in deportation cases, we see no justification why it
prior to conviction. (Cortes v. Catral) should not also be allowed in extradition cases. Likewise, considering that the
UDHR applies to deportation cases, there is no reason why it cannot
Bail has neither punitive nor revenue raising purpose. (Almeda v. Villaluz) be invoked in extradition cases. After all, both are administrative
proceedings where the innocence or guilt of the person detained is not in
- Available to all persons detained, unless offense is punishable by Reclusion issue.
Perpetua or Death when the evidence against the accused is strong (Bail is a
matter of discretion of the courts, so even persons who are not entitled CAN Obviously, an extradition proceeding, while ostensibly administrative, bears all
be granted bail) earmarks of a criminal process. A potential extradite may be subjected to
arrest, to a prolonged restraint of liberty, and forced to transfer to the
As a necessary consequence of the nature of a bail bond, a person admitted to demanding state following the proceedings. “Temporary detention” may
bail may be prevented by the court from leaving the country. A bail bond is be a necessary step in the process of extradition, but the length of time of the
intended to make a person available anytime he is needed by the court. detention should be reasonable. Records show that Munoz had been
(Manotoc, Jr. v. CA) detained forover two (2) years without having been convicted of
anycrime.
Imposing bail in excessive amount could render meaningless the right to bail.
Setting the ball in the amount of the civil liability is excessive. (Yap v. CA) The time-honored principle of pacta sunt servanda demands that the
Philippines honor its obligations under the Extradition Treaty it entered into
with the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. However, it does not
Limitations on right to bail: necessarily mean that in keeping with its treaty obligations, the Philippines
(1) person claiming the right must be under actual detention; should diminish a potential extraditee’s rights to life, liberty, and due process.
(2) Generally, the right is available only to criminal cases More so, where these rights are guaranteed also by international conventions,
*** Bail does not grant the right to leave the country. to which the Philippines is a party. We should not deprive an extraditee of his
In the application of the constitutional guaranty of the right to speedy Documentary Evidence:
disposition of cases, particular regard must be taken of the facts and - Compulsory production of private books and documents of the owner is
circumstances peculiar to each case. Well-settled is the rule that the right to a compelling him to be a witness against himself.
speedy disposition of cases, like the right to a speedy trial, is deemed violated
only when the proceeding is attended by vexatious, capricious, and oppressive - The privilege which exists as to private papers, cannot be maintained in
delay. In the determination of whether or not that right has been violated, relation to records required by law to be kept in order that there may be
the factors that may be considered and balanced are: the length of delay, the suitable information of transactions which are the appropriate subjects of
reasons for such delay, the assertion or failure to assert such right by the governmental regulation and the enforcement of restrictions validly
accused, and the prejudice caused by the delay. established.
The concept of “speedy disposition of cases” is flexible and is consistent with Only natural persons are protected by this right; juridical entities, like
reasonable delay. (Caballero v. Alfonso, Jr.) corporations, are not.
The right to a speedy trial as well as other rights conferred by the Constitution Stage when right against self incrimination may be asserted: from the
or statute, except when otherwise expressly so provided by law, may be moment he is asked to testify.
The congress has the power to restore the death penalty which merely FIRST JEOPARDY ATTACHED 1. Good Indictment
requires that: 2. Before a competent Court
(1) the congress define or describe what is meant by heinous crimes; 3. After arraignment
(2) that congress specify and penalize by death only crimes that 4. After a valid plea
qualify as heinous in accordance with the definition or description set
in the death penalty bill Defective complaint did not pace
(3) the congress should be singularly motivated by compelling reason the accused in first jeopardy
involving heinous crimes. (People v. Echegaray) FIRST JEOPARDY TERMINATED 1. By Acquittal
2. Final Conviction
The punishment of death by itself is neither cruel nor unusual. It is only cruel 3. Dismissal without express
when it involves lingering death. (People v. Echegaray) consent of the accused
4. Dismissal on the merits
SECTION 20: NO PERSON SHALL BE IMPRISONED FOR DEBT OR Verbal dismissal is not final until
NONPAYMENT OF A POLL TAX written and signed by a judge
SECOND JEOPARDY ATTACHED Same Evidence Test- whether the
Debt – liability to pay money growing our of contract, express or implied evidence needed for one case will
support a conviction in the other.
A person may only be imprisoned for fraudulent debt if:
F. Applied to impeachment cases: A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without judicial
Estrada cannot claim that the impeachment proceeding was “terminated on its trial. Its essence is the substitution of a legislative for a judicial determination
merits” and that there was a “failure to prosecute” him. By resigning, he of guilt.
consented to the termination of the impeachment case against him. (Estrada v
Desierto) The EO is not a Bill of Attainder because it makes it perfectly clear that any
judgment of guilt in the amassing acquisition of 'ill-gotten wealth' is to be
handed down by a judicial tribunal, in this case the Sandiganbayan. (Virata v.
Sandiganbayan)
SECTION 22: NO EX POST FACTO LAW OR BILL OF ATTAINDER SHALL The retroactive application of RA 8249, which expands the jurisdiction of the
BE ENACTED Sandiganbayan, cannot be considered as an ex post facto law. It is not a penal
law but a substantive law on jurisdiction. Only the retroactive application of a
Ex Post Facto Law – penal law can be considered as an ex post facto law. (Lacson v. Executive
(a) one which makes an action done before the passing of the law and Secretary)
which was innocent when done criminal and punishes such action,
(b) which aggravates a crime or makes it greater than when it was
committed, ARTICLE IV: CITIZENSHIP
(c) which changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment,
(d) which alters the legal rules of evidence and receive less or different SECTION 1: THE FOLLOWING ARE CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES
testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the (1) THOSE WHO ARE CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES AT THE TIME
offense, OF THE ADOPTION OF THIS CONSTITUTION
(e) assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only but in effect (2) THOSE WHOSE FATHERS OR MOTHERS ARE CITIZEN OF THE
imposes a penalty or deprivation of a right which when done was lawful, PHILIPPINES
(f) deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful protection to (3) THOSE BORN BEFORE JANUARY 17, 1973 OR FILIPINO
which he has become entitled. MOTHER, WHO ELECT PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP UPON
REACHING THE AGE OF MAJORITY; AND
NOTE: It only prohibits retrospective penal laws (laws which impose a (4) THOSE WHO ARE NATURALIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW
penalty or prescribes a burden equivalent to a penalty)
- DOES NOT apply to substantive laws like the expansion of jurisdiction of Citizenship – personal and more or less permanent membership in a
The mere fact that a person is born in a territory that follows the rule of Jus
soli does not mean that he is no longer a Filipino citizen. At the most, it grants SECTION 2: NATURAL BORN CITIZENS ARE THOSE WHO ARE CITIZENS
him dual citizenship as long as one of his parents is a Filipino. (Valles v. OF THE PHILIPPINES FROM BIRTH WITHOUT HAVING TO PERFORM
Comelec) ANY ACT TO ACQUIRE OR PERFECT THEIR PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP.
THOSE WHO ELECT PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP IN ACCORDANCE WITH
Naturalization PARAGRAPH (3) , SECTION 1 SHALL BE DEEMED NATURAL BORN
Naturalization may be by a Legislative Act (Law bestowing citizenship to -A Child born before Jan 17, 1973 to an alien father and a Filipino mother does
an alien), Administrative Act (RA 9139), or by a Judicial Act not have to elect Philippine Citizenship if his father has become a naturalized
(Commonwealth Act 473) Filipino citizen before he could reach the age of majority. He cannot elect
An Applicant for naturalization Under CA 473 must the strict requirements another citizenship because his father was already a Filipino citizen.
of CA 473. He cannot be granted citizenship even if he would have been -He is deemed to be a natural born citizen by virtue of the curative nature
qualified under RA 9139 (So v. Republic) Section 2 because his mother is a Filipina, and he does not have to perform
any acts to perfect his Filipino citizenship.
ARTICLE V: SUFFRAGE Acquisition of a new domicile requires animus non revertendi and animus
manendi:
SECTION 1: SUFFRAGE MAY BE EXERCISED BY ALL CITIZENS OF THE 1. Residence, bodily presence in new locality
PHILIPPINES NOT OTHERWISE DISQUALIFIED BY LAW, WHO ARE AT 2. Intention to remain in the new locality
LEAST EIGTHEEN YEARS OF AGE, AND WHO SHALL HAVE RESIDED IN 3. Intention to abandon the old domicile
THE PHILIPPINES FOR AT LEAST ONE YEAR AND IN THE PLACE
WHEREIN THEY PROPOSETO VOTE FOR AT LEAST SIX MONTHS SECTION 2: THE CONGRESS SHALL PROVIDE A SYSTEM FOR SECURING
IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE ELECTION. NO LITERACY, PROPERTY, THE SECRECY AND SANCTITY OF THE BALLOT AS WELL AS A SYSTEM
OR OTHER SUBSTANTIVE REQUIREMENT SHALL BE IMPOSED ON THE FOR ABSENTEE VOTING BY QUALIFIED FILIPINOS ABROAD.THE
EXERCISE OF SUFFRAGE CONGRESS SHALL ALSO DESIGN A PROCEDURE FOR THE DISABLED
AND THE ILLITERATES TO VOTE WITHOUT THE ASSISTANCE OF OTHER
Suffrage – right to vote in election PERSONS. UNTIL THEN, THEY SHALL BE ALLOWED TO VOTE UNDER
To acquire new domicile: (1) residence or bodily presence in the new EXISTING LAWS AND SUCH RULES AS THE COMMISSION ON
locality, (2) an intention to remain there, (3) intention to abandon the old ELECTIONS MAY PROMULGATE TO PROTECT THE SECRECY OF THE
domicile BALLOT.
Not qualify to vote: those sentence by final judgment to suffer
imprisonment of not less than one year but shall automatically reacquire Absentee voting allowed under RA 9189
the right upon expiration of five years after service of sentence, any
person adjudged by final conviction of violating his allegiance, insane or Under RA 9189, a Filipino immigrant who has been absent for 3 years is
feeble-minded persons. presumed to have abandoned his residence. However, he may execute an
affidavit of his intention to return. This serves as implicit proof that he has not
To be sure, the right of suffrage is not at all absolute. Needless to say, the abandoned his domicile, and is therefore does not violate the residency
exercise of the right of suffrage, as in the enjoyment of all other rights, is requirement of Section 1. (Macalintal v. Comelec)
subject to existing substantive and procedural requirements embodied in our
Constitution, statute books and other repositories of law. As to the procedural Dual Citizens under RA 9225 are allowed to vote through the Overseas
limitation, the right of a citizen to vote is necessarily conditioned upon certain Absentee voter law, without the need for residency. Section 2 Authorizes
procedural requirements he must undergo: among others, the process of absentee voting and provides an exemption from the residency requirement.
registration. (Nicolas-Lewis v. Comelec)