IX.

Bill of Rights

A. Concept of Bill of Rights

The Bill of Rights governs the relationship between the individual and the State.
Its concern is not the relation between individuals or between the private individual
and other individuals. What the Bill of Rights does is to declare some forbidden zones
in the private sphere inaccessible to any power holder. (Sponsorship Speech of
Commissioner Bernas)

1. Privacy and autonomy

Private Acts and the Bill of Rights

The principle that the Bill of Rights applies only to actions taken by state officials
does not necessarily mean that a private individual cannot violate the liberty of another.
Violation of the Bill of Rights precisely as a constitutional guarantee can be done only by
public officials. But almost all these liberties are also guaranteed by Article 32 of the
Civil Code, thus making private violations actionable even if the violation does not have
a constitutional consequence. (Bernas, commentary)

2. Relation to human rights

Even in the absence of implementing legislation, the guarantees in the Bill of Rights
are self-implementing, whereas the guarantees regarding social justice and human rights,
require implementing legislation.

Primacy of Human Rights

The primacy of human rights over property rights is recognized.

Because these freedoms are delicate and vulnerable, as well as supremely
precious in our society and the threat of sanctions may deter their exercise
almost as potently as the actual application of sanctions, they need
breathing space to survive, permitting government regulation only with
narrow specificity. Human rights are imprescriptible. (Phil. Blooming
Mills Employees Organization v Phil. Blooming Mills Co. Inc.)

Hierarchy of Rights

Freedom of expression ranks higher in the hierarchy of

constitutional rights than property rights. (Salonga v Paño)

The free exercise of religious profession or belief is superior to

contract rights. (Victoriano v Elizalde)

Even as the right to property may be subject to a greater degree of

regulation, when this right is joined by a liberty interest, the burden of
justification on the part of the government must be exceptionally
convincing and irrefutable. (Blo Umpar Adiong v COMELEC)
 B. Due process of law
Due Process of Law

Due process is a guaranty against any arbitrariness on the part of the government,
whether committed by the legislative, the executive or the judiciary.

It is a law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and
renders judgment only after trial. (Dartmouth v Woodward)

Essence of Due Process

It is the opportunity to be heard or an opportunity to explain one’s side or

an opportunity to seek a reconsideration of the action or ruling complained
of. (Phil. Phospate Fertilizer Corp. v Torres)

1. Concept of right to life, liberty and property

Right to Life – The Right to Life is not merely a right to the preservation of life but also
the security of the limbs and organs of the human body against any unlawful harm.

Right to Liberty – Liberty refers to something which is more than mere freedom from
physical restraint or the bounds of a prison. It means freedom to go where one may
choose, and to act in such manner, not inconsistent with the equal rights of others, as his
judgment may dictate for the promotion of his happiness; to pursue such callings and
advocacies as may be most suitable to develop his capacities, and give them their highest
enjoyment, within the bounds of law. (Munn v Illinois)

Right to Property – Right over property i.e., to enjoy its use and possession. Property
refers to things which are susceptible of appropriation and which are already possessed
and found in the possession of man.

2. Kinds of due process

a. Substantive

Requisites of Substantive Due Process

The must be a VALID LAW upon which it is based

The law must have been passed or approved to accomplish a valid governmental
objective
The objective must be pursued in a lawful manner
The law as well as the means to accomplish the objective must be valid and not
oppressive.

b. Procedural

i. Judicial

Procedural due process in courts in non-criminal cases (Tri-Ju-Op-Judgm)

 There must be a court or tribunal clothed with judicial power to hear and
determine the matter before it
Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant or over the
property which is the subject of the proceedings
The defendant must be given an opportunity to be heard
Judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing

Procedural due process in courts in criminal cases

The court or tribunal trying the case is clothed with judicial power to hear and
determine the matter before it
Jurisdiction is lawful acquired over the person of the accused
The accused is given opportunity to be heard and
Judgment is rendered only upon lawful hearing (Marquez v Sandiganbayan)

ii. Administrative

Right to HEARING
The tribunal must consider the Evidence presented
Evidence presented must be substantial, which means relevant evidence as a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion
The decision must have something to support itself
The decision must be based on evidence presented during hearing or at least
contained in the record and disclosed by the parties
The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its own independent
consideration of the law and facts of the controversy
The decision must be rendered in a manner that the parties know the various
issued involved and the reason for the decision rendered.

Administrative Due Process only Applicable in exercise of Quasi-Judicial powers

It may be stated as a general rule that notice and hearing are note essential to the
validity of administrative action where the administrative body acts in the exercise of
executive or administrative or legislative functions; but where a public administrative
body acts in a judicial or quasi-judicial matter, and its acts are particular and immediate
rather than general and prospective, the person whose rights or property may be affected
by the action entitled to notice and hearing. (Philippine Communications Satelite Corp. v
Cloribel)

c. Levels of scrutiny

C. Equal protection of laws

Rational Test Basis

 In the areas of social and economic policy, a statutory classification that neither
proceeds along suspect lines nor infringes constitutional rights must be upheld against
equal protection challenge if there is any reasonably conceivable state of facts that could
provide a rational basis for the classification. (British American Tobacco v Camacho)

Intermediate Scrutiny Test

The government must show that the challenged classification serves an important
state interestand that the classification is at least substantially related to serving that
interest. (Biraogo v Phil Truth Commission)

Strict Scrutiny Test

Strict scrutiny refers to the standard for determining the quality and the amount of
governmental interest brought to justify the regulation of fundamental freedoms. Strict
scrutiny is used today to test the validity of laws dealing with the regulation of speech,
gender, or race as well as other fundamental rights as expansion from its earlier
applications to equal protection. (Separate Opinion of Justice Leone; Spark v Quezon
City)

D. Right against unreasonable searches and seizures

E. Privacy of communications and correspondence
F. Freedom of speech and expression
G. Freedom of religion
H. Liberty of abode and freedom of movement
I. Eminent domain
J. Non-impairment of contracts
K. Adequate legal assistance and free access to courts
L. Right against self-incrimination
M. Rights of persons under custodial investigation
N. Rights of the accused
O. Right to speedy disposition of cases
P. Right against excessive fines and cruel, degrading, and inhuman punishments
Q. Non-imprisonment for debts
R. Right against double jeopardy
S. Right against involuntary servitude
T. Ex post facto laws and bill of attiander