HARVEY v.

DEFENSOR SANTIAGO
Facts:
2 American nationals, Andrew Harvey and John Sherman and a Dutch citizen, Adriaan Van Den
Elshout, who were residing in Laguna, were among the suspected alien pedophiles
apprehended after a close surveillance by CID agents in Laguna. The 3 aliens were detained at
the CID Detention Center facing deportation. Deportation proceedings were instituted against
the 3 for being undesirable aliens – they being pedophiles are inimical to public morals, public
health and public safety. Warrants of Arrest were issued by the CID against the 3 aliens and on
the same day, the Board of Special Inquiry III commenced trial against the said aliens. The latter
filed a Petition for Bail which, CID Commissioner Defensor Santiago denied considering that the
CID physician certified that the aliens are healthy. Harvey filed a manifestation agreeing to a
self-deportation and praying that he be provisionally released before he voluntarily departs the
country. The Board of Special Inquiry allowed the provisional release of 5 days only under
certain conditions. Harvey and the other 2 aliens also filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas
Corpus questioning the validity of their detention and alleging that the Commissioner has no
authority to arrest and detain them pending determination of the existence of a probable cause
leading to an administrative investigation.

Issue: Whether the denial of the aliens’ release on bail was in order. – YES.

Ruling:
In deportation proceedings, the right to bail is not a matter of right but a matter of discretion
on the part of the Commissioner of Immigration and Deportation. The use of the word “may” in
Sec. 37 (e) of the Phil. Immigration Act of 1940 indicates that the grant of bail is merely
permissive and not mandatory on the part of the Commissioner. As deportation proceedings do
not partake of the nature of a criminal action, the constitutional guarantee to bail may not be
invoked by aliens in said proceedings.