FACTS: HIZON et al.

were to present evidence to rebut this Princesa City from January 1,

charged with violating PD 704 for presumption. 1993 to January 1, 1998.
supposedly fishing without the use In this case, the only basis Subsequently the
of a poisonous substance (sodium for the charge of fishing with
cyanide). A report that some poisonous substance is the result
Sangguniang Panlalawigan,
fishing boats were fishing by "muro of the first NBI laboratory test on Provincial Government of
ami" led to the apprehension of the four fish specimens. The Palawan enacted a resolution
such boat (F/B Robinson), where apprehending officers who prohibiting the catching ,
Hizon et al were present. The boarded and searched the boat gathering, possessing,
police (PNP Maritime Command did not find any sodium cyanide buying, selling, and shipment
and the Task Force Bantay Dagat) nor any poisonous or obnoxious of a several species of live
directed the boat captain to get substance. Neither did they find
marine coral dwelling aquatic
random samples of the fish from any trace of the poison in the
the fish cage for testing. The initial possession of the fishermen or in organisms for 5 years, in and
results tested the fish positive for the fish cage itself. Under the coming from Palawan waters.
sodium cyanide and that was the circumstances of the case, Petitioners filed a special civil
basis of the information against however, this finding does not action for certiorari and
Hizon et al. However, a second set warrant the infallible conclusion prohibition, praying that the
of fish samples yielded a negative that the fishes in the F/B Robinson, ABUSE OF RIGHT
result on the sodium cyanide. or even the same four specimens, Elements ABUSE OF RIGHT
Notwithstanding this, the were caught with the use of Elements court declare the said
RTC found Hizon et al. guilty and sodium cyanide. ordinances and resolutions as
sentenced them to imprisonment Apparently, it was the unconstitutional on the
and forfeiture of the fishes. The CA police who were the ones engaged ground that the said
affirmed this decision. Hizon et al., in an illegal fishing expedition. ordinances deprived them of
together with the Solicitor general "Muro ami", as what was reported
now question the admissibility of the fishermen were doing, is made
the due process of law, their
the evidence against petitioners in with "the use of a big net with livelihood, and unduly
view of the warrantless search of sinkers to make the net submerge restricted them from the
the fishing boat and the in the water with the fishermen practice of their trade, in
subsequent arrest of petitioners. surround[ing] the net." This violation of Section 2, Article
method of fishing needs XII and Sections 2 and 7 of
ISSUE/S: approximately two hundred (200) Article XIII of the 1987
1. W/N fish samples seized fishermen to execute. What the
apprehending officers instead
Constitution.
by the NBI in the F/B
Robinson without a discovered were twenty eight (28)
search warrant are fishermen in their sampans fishing ISSUE:
admissible in evidence. – by hook and line. The authorities Are the challenged
YES. found nothing on the boat that ordinances unconstitutional?
2. W/N Hizon et al., are guilty would have indicated any form of
of illegal fishing with the illegal fishing. All the documents of
HELD:
the boat and the fishermen were in
use of poisonous No. The Supreme Court
substances. NO. order. It was only after the fish
found the petitioners
specimens were tested, albeit
RATIO: As a general rule, any
contentions baseless and held
under suspicious circumstances,
evidence obtained without a that the challenged
that petitioners were charged with
judicial warrant is inadmissible for ordinances did not suffer
illegal fishing with the use of
any purpose in any proceeding. poisonous substances. from any infirmity, both
The rule is, however, subject to under the Constitution and
certain exceptions. Search and Tano vs applicable laws. There is
seizure without search warrant of absolutely no showing that
vessels and aircrafts for violations Socrates
of customs laws have been the Natural and Environmental
any of the petitioners
traditional exception to the Laws; Constitutional Law; qualifies as a subsistence or
constitutional requirement of a marginal fisherman. Besides,
search warrant. The same
Regalian Doctrine Section 2 of Article XII aims
exception ought to apply to GR No. 110249; August 21, primarily not to bestow any
seizures of fishing vessels and 1997 right to subsistence
boats breaching our fishery laws. fishermen, but to lay stress
Hizon et al. were charged
on the duty of the State to
with illegal fishing penalized under FACTS:
sections 33 and 38 of P.D. 704. On Dec 15, 1992, the protect the nation’s marine
These provisions create a wealth. The so-called
Sangguniang Panglungsod ng “preferential right” of
presumption of guilt for
possession of explosives or Puerto Princesa enacted an subsistence or marginal
poisonous substances. However, ordinance banning the fishermen to the use of
this presumption is merely prima shipment of all live fish and marine resources is not at all
facie and the accused has the right lobster outside Puerto absolute.
In accordance with the
Regalian Doctrine, marine
resources belong to the state
and pursuant to the first
paragraph of Section 2,
Article XII of the
Constitution, their
“exploration, development
and utilization...shall be
under the full control and
supervision of the State.

In addition, one of the

devolved powers of the LCG
on devolution is the
enforcement of fishery laws
in municipal waters including
the conservation of
mangroves. This necessarily
includes the enactment of
ordinances to effectively
carry out such fishery laws
within the municipal waters.
In light of the principles of
decentralization and
devolution enshrined in the
LGC and the powers granted
therein to LGUs which
unquestionably involve the
exercise of police power, the
validity of the questioned
ordinances cannot be
doubted.
Mn m hvkjkkvhjvcjhcmh
Kjbaskjdbakdbask.bdaskbdkasbdk
asdb
kskhdkasjfksa

sjhbgsjkdgasjbdasljdbsajdvaslj
Mn m
hvkjkkvhjvcjnkkmslaknldnaskj;j
bkasbjhcmh
Kjbaskjdbakdbask.bdaskbdkasbdk
asdb
kskhdkasjfksa
Mn m hvkjkkvhjvcjhcmh
Kjbaskjdbakdbask.bdaskbdkasbdkasdb
kskhdkasjfksa
Mn m hvkjkkvhjvcjhcmh
Kjbaskjdbakdbask.bdaskbdkasbdkasdb
kskhdkasjfksa