LEGAL ASSISTANCE AND FREE ACCESS TO COURT

Section 11: Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal assistance shall not
be denied to any person by reason of poverty.

This constitutional provision is the basis for the provision of Sec. 17 Rule 5 of the New Rules of Court
which provides that for litigation in forma pauperis in which paupers and indigents, who have only their
labor to support themselves, are given free legal services and access to courts.

The importance of the right to free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies and to adequate legal
assistance cannot be denied. A move to remove the provision on free access from the Constitution on
the ground that it was already covered by the equal protection clause was defeated by the desire to give
constitutional stature to such specific protection of the poor. ( Bernas, 1987 Philippine Constitution of the Republic of the
Philippines: A Commentary, 1996 Ed., p. 4064, citing the Journal of the 1935 Constitutional Convention 1275-1277)

Litigation in Forma Pauperis

In implementation of the right of free access under the Constitution, the Supreme Court promulgated
rules, specifically, Sec. 21, Rule 3, Rules of Court, and Sec. 19, Rule 141, Rules of Court, which
respectively state thus:

Sec. 21. Indigent party — A party may be authorized to litigate his action, claim or defense as an
indigent if the court, upon an ex parte application and hearing, is satisfied that the party is one who
has no money or property sufficient and available for food, shelter and basic necessities for himself
and his family.

Such authority shall include an exemption from payment of docket and other lawful fees, and of
transcripts of stenographic notes which the court may order to be furnished him. The amount of
the docket and other lawful fees which the indigent was exempted from paying shall be a lien on
any judgment rendered in the case favorable to the indigent, unless the court otherwise provides.

Any adverse party may contest the grant of such authority at any time before judgment is rendered
by the trial court. If the court should determine after hearing that the party declared as an indigent
is in fact a person with sufficient income or property, the proper docket and other lawful fees shall
be assessed and collected by the clerk of court. If payment is not made within the time fixed by the
court, execution shall issue for the payment thereof, without prejudice to such other sanctions as
the court may impose. (22a)

Sec. 19. Indigent litigants exempt from payment of legal fees – Indigent litigants (a) whose gross
income and that of their immediate family do not exceed an amount double the monthly
minimum wage of an employee and (b) who do not own real property with a fair market value as
stated in the current tax declaration of more than three hundred thousand (P300,000.00) pesos
shall be exempt from payment of legal fees.
RIGHTS OF PERSONS UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION
Section 12: Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be
informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of
his own choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with one.
These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel. No torture, force,
violence, threat, intimidation or any other means which vitiates the free will shall be used against
him. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are
prohibited. Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or section 17 hereof shall be
inadmissible in evidence against him. The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations
of this section as well as compensation to and rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices,
and their families.

Rights of a person under investigation (Miranda Rights): SCI

1. Right to remain silent;

2. Right to competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice; and
3. The right to be informed of such rights

RA 7438: Rights of Persons Under Custodial Investigation

Sec. 1. Statement of Policy - It is the policy of the State to value the dignity of every human being and
guarantee full respect for human rights.

Sec. 2. Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or Under Custodial Investigation; Duties of Public Officers–

(b) Any public officer or employee, or anyone acting under his order or his place, who arrests,
detains or investigates any person for the commission of an offense: shall inform the latter, in a
language known to and understood by him, of his rights to remain silent and to have competent
and independent counsel, preferably of his own choice, who shall at all times be allowed to confer
privately with the person arrested, detained or under custodial investigation. If such person
cannot afford the services of his own counsel, he must be provided with a competent and
independent counsel by the investigating officer.

Availability of the rights

These rights begin to be available where “the investigation is no longer a general inquiry into an
unsolved crime but has begun to focus on a particular suspect, the suspect has been taken into police
custody, the police carry out a process of interrogation that lends itself to eliciting incriminating
statements.” (Escobedo v. Illinois)

Available after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in
any significant way. (People v. Loveria)

Custodial investigation

Any questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or
otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.
It also extends to the practice of issuing an “invitation” to a person who is investigated in connection
with an offense he is suspected to have committed, without prejudice to the liability of the “inviting”
officer for any violation of law.

Circumstances not covered by the rights (PerPoVol VeISP “Purple Vase”)

a. Persons under preliminary investigations or those already charged in court for a crime for
these are already under the supervision of a court;
b. Police line-up;
c. Voluntary admission or surrender where one presents himself to the police to surrender;
d. Verbal confessions to a radio announcer or to media, private persons, public officials who are
not law enforcers;
e. Investigation by an administrative body—because such inquiries are conducted merely to
determine whether there are facts that merit disciplinary measure against the erring public
officers or employees, with the purpose of maintain the dignity of government service;
f. Spontaneous statements even when under police custody; and
g. Paraffin test.
Right to be informed of his rights

It must be presumed to contemplate the transmission of a meaningful information rather than just the
ceremonial and perfunctory recitation of an abstract constitutional principle. (People v. Ramos)

Right to Counsel attaches

Upon the start of an investigation, i.e. when the investigating officer starts to ask questions to elicit
information and/or confessions or admissions from the respondent/accused. (Gamboa v. Judge Cruz)

When the accused never raised any objection against the appointment during the course of the
investigation and the accused thereafter subscribes to the veracity of his statement before the swearing
officer. (People v. Jerez)

Lawyers who are not deemed independent counsel (SM Bany)

a. Special counsel, public or private prosecutor, municipal attorney or counsel of the police
whose interest is admittedly adverse to the accused;
b. Mayor;
c. Barangay Captain; and
d. Any other whose interest may be adverse to that of the accused.

Substantial compliance

When an extrajudicial confession is made, in the absence of a counsel, but where at the closing stage of
the interrogation, counsel arrives and has the opportunity to read the statement and discuss it with the
client who subsequently signs it.

Legal effect of the violation of these rights

Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 (provision against self-
incrimination) hereof shall be inadmissible in evidence against him.

Valid waiver of rights

 1. Must be made in writing; and
2. In the presence of a counsel.

Admission v. Confession

Admission of a party—the act, declaration or omission of party as to a relevant fact may be given in
evidence against him. Sec. 26 of Rule 130 of Rules of Court.

Confession—the declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt of the offense charged, or of any
offense necessarily included therein, may be given in evidence against him. Sec. 33 of Rule 130 of Rules
of Court

Wharton distinguishes a confession from an admission. A confession is an acknowledgment in express

terms, by a party in a criminal case, of his guilt of the crime charged, while an admission is a statement
by the accused, direct or implied, of facts pertinent to the issue and tending, in connection with proof of
other facts, to prove his guilt. In other words, an admission is something less than a confession. (People
v. Maqueda)

Requisites for an extrajudicial confession to be admissible in evidence (VACEWS)

1. The confession must be voluntary;

2. The confession must be made with the assistance of a competent and independent counsel,
preferably of the confessant’s choice;
3. The confession must be express;
4. The confession must be in writing; and
5. Signed, or if the confessant does not know how to read and write, thumb marked by him.

Reasons why torture, force, etc. are prohibited

1. Because they vitiate truth; and

2. Because they are an assault on the dignity of the person.