Constitutional Rights of the Accused
Not apply as long as there is some logical
Section 14, Article III
I. Criminal Due Process
1. Criminal Due Process
a. Ingredients (Mejia vs Pamaran)
i. Accused has been heard in a court
of competent jurisdiction
ii. Accused is proceeded against
under the ordinary processes of law
iii. Accused has been given notice and
opportunity to be heard
iv. Judgement rendered was within the
authority of a constitutional law
2. Unreasonable delay in resolving complaint
a. 6 years violates right to due process and
speedy trial
b. Not violated when despite 3 years, the case
had a continuing investigation and complex
issues
3. Impartial court or tribunal
a. Movant must prove bias of judge by clear
and convincing evidence or that she acted
with malice and bad faith in issuing the
assailed rulings
b. Cross-examination of the witnesses of the
accused by the trial court- violates due
process
i. but if merely clarificatory to clear up
dubious points and elicit relevant
evidence- valid
ii. even if 43 % of the questions to
elicit facts on the issues involved,
clarify ambiguous remarks by
witnesses and address points
overlooked by counsel
4. Right to a hearing
a. No dates set for the purpose of presenting
defense
b. Not when evidence is merely corroborative,
57 witnesses (People vs Hubert Webb)
5. Plea of guilt to a capital offense- MANDATORY
a. Trial court must conducy a searching inquiry
into the voluntariness of the plea and the full
comprehension of the consequences thereof
b. The prosecution shall be required to present
evidence to prove the guilt of the accused
and the precise degree of his culpability
c. The accused must be asked if he desires to
present evidence on his behalf and allow him
to do so if he so desires
6. The State and the offended party are entitled to due
process
II. Presumption of Innocence
1. Every circumstance favoring the innocence
of the accused must be taken into account
2. Proof must survive the test of reason, the
strongest suspicion not be permitted to sway
judgment
3. Capable of two or more explanations, one
consistent with innocnce and the other with
guilt, tilt to innocencet- not moral certainty
4. Presumption of regularity of duty cannot
prevail over presumption of iinocence unless
it is not the sole basis for conviction
5.
connection between the fact proved and the
ultimate fact presumed and the inference of
one fact from proof of another shall not be so
unreasonable as to be a purely arbitrary
mandate- burden shifteed to possessor to
explain absence of animus possidendi-
drugs
6. Dangerous drugs- prove the ff elements
a. Transaction/sale took place
b. That the corpus delicti or illicit drug
was presented as evidence
i. Integrity must be
preserved through the
chain of custody
ii. Non-compliance must be
attended by justifiable
grounds
iii. Eivdentiary value of the
seized items are properly
preserved
c. Buyer and seller are identified
7. May be overcome by contrary presumptions
based on human conduct i.e unexplained
flight, inability of accountable officer to
produce funds entrusted to him
8. Still rest on the prosecution’s own evidence
not on the weakness, deficiency or absence
of evidence for the defense
9. After prima facie case, burden shifted to
accused to prove not acquired illegaly
10. Circumstantial evidence
a. There is more than one
circumstance
b. Facts from which inferences are
derived are proven
c. Combination of all the
circumstances is such as to
produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt
11. Equipoise rule- applicable only where the
vidence adduced by the parties are evenly
balanced, in which case the constitutional
presumption of innocence should titl the
scales in favor fo the accused
12. Corporate entity has no right to this
presumption
III. Right to be heard by himself and counsel
a. Due process, must be heard before
condemned
b. Accused is accorded legal assistance
extended by a counsel who commits himself
to the cause of the defense and acts
accordingly
c. Efficient and truly decisive legal assistance
and not simply a perfunctory representation
i. PAO lawyer pwede
d. Right to counsel during trial is not subject to
waiver
e. Accused manifested that he lost confidence
in counsel de officio pero court still apointed
counsel de officio- denial of this guarantee
f. Accused could not understand english or
filipino
g. Client bound by the mistakes ofg his lawyer
i. Exc when negligence or
incompetence is so gross as to
prejudice the constitutional right of
the accused to be heard
IV. Right to be informed of the nature and cause of
the accusation against him
a. Reason:
i. To furnish the accused with such a
decription of the charge against him
as will enable him to prepare for his
defense
ii. To avail himself of his conviction or
acquittal for protection against a
further prosecution for the same
cause
iii. To inform the court of the facts
alleged so that it may decide
whether they are sufficient in law to
support a conviction
1. If deaf mute- sign
language interpreter
2. If insane or an imbecile-
suspend proceedings and
commit to a proper place
of detention until he
recovers his faculties
3. Don’t arraign while insane
because it violates this
right
iv. 1. Info must state the name of the
accused, the designation given to
the offense by statute, statements
of the acts or omission complained
of as constituting the offense, name
of the offended party, approximate
time and date of the commission of
the offense and the place where the
offense had been committed
1. Facts and circ which have
a bearing on culpability
and liability
a. Cosnpiracy
b. Every element of
the offense
2. Acts and ommissions
constitutive of the offense
3. Description not
designation of the offense
controls
4. Cannot convict the
accused of the complex
crime constitutive of
various crimes in two
informations- ONLY THE
CRIME SLLEGED OR
NECESSARILY
INCLUDED IN THE
ALLEGATIONS IN THE
INFORMATION
5. Fundamental test- whether
the facts alleged, if
hypothetically admitted
would establish the
essential elements of the
crime
v. Void for Vagueness Rule- where
statute is couched in such indfeinite
language that It is not possible for
men of ordinary intelligence to
determine therefrom what acts or
ommissions are punished
vi. Waiver- not the right to be informed
but the right to enter a pleas and let
the court enter a plea of not guilty
1. Failure to object to multiple
offenses in the criminal
infor is deemed a waiver
2. Failure to object to
sufficiency of information
during trial and deficiency
cured by competent
evidence
vii. Political offense doctrine- common
crimes perpetrated in furtherance of
a political offense assume the
political complexion of the main
crime of which they are mere
ingredients (can’t be punished
separately from the principal
offense or complexed with the
same to justify the imposition of a
graver penalty.
1. Killing in furtherance of
rebellion is rebelkion
2. Burden of proving political
motivation must be
discharged by the defense
V. Right to speedy, impartial and public trial
a. Speedy trial- free from vexatious, capricious
and oppressive delays but justice and
fairness not speed are the objectives
b. One that can be had as soon after indictment
is filed as the prosecution can with
reasonable diligence, prepare for trial
c. Only when attended by vexatious, capricious
and oppressive delays or when unjustified
postponements of the trial are asked for and
secured or when without justificable motive,
a long period of time is allowed to ellapse
without the partty having his case tried
d. Protect 1. To prevent oppressive pre tiral
incarceration, 2 to minimize anxiety and
concern of the accused 3. To limit the
possibility that the defense will be impaired
e. Does not preclude right to public justice
f. RA. 8943 (Speedy Trial Act)- arraignment
within 30 days from filing of infor or from the
date the accused has appeared before the
justice or court in which the charge is
pending, whichever date last occurs
i. After that, 15 days to prepare for
trial
ii. Trial shall commence within 30
days from arraignment as fixed by
the court
iii. Trial shall not exceed 180 days
from the first day of trial except as
otherwise authorized by the Chief
Justice of the Sc
iv. MEANS OF ENFORCING THE
RIGHT OF THE ACCUSED TO A
SPEEDY TRIAL- accused must on
record have an attitude demanding
a trial or resisting delay
v. May be waived
g. Impartial trial- cold neutrality of an impartial
judge
i. Also to preserve the integrity of the
judiciary and to gain and maintain
 people’s faith in the institutions they
have erected when they adopted to
Consti
ii. Public Trial- to prevent possible
abuses which may be committed
against the accused- not absolute
1. Belongs to him more than
anyone else
2. Not synonymouw tih a
publicized trial
3. Only implies that the court
doors must be open to
those who wish to come sit
in the available seats,
conduct themselves with
decorum and observe the
trial process
VI. Right to meet witnesses face to face- right to
cross examine complainant and witnesses
a. This may be waived but generally if not cross
examined testimony is mere hearsay
VII. Right to compulsory process to secure the
attendance of witnesses and the production of
evidence
a. Subpoena- process directed to a person
requiring him to attend and testify at the
hearing or trial of an action or at any
investigation conudcted under the laws of
the Philippines or for the taking of his
deposition
b. Subpoena ad testificandum- to compel a
person to testify
c. Subpoena duces tecum- to compel the
production of books, records, things or
documents therein specified
i. The books, docs or other things
requested must appear prima facie
relevant to the issue subject of the
controversy (test of relevancy) and
ii. Such books must be reasonably
described by the parties to be
readily identified (test of
definiteness)
iii. People vs Chua
1. The evidence is really
material
2. Accused is not guilty of
neglect in previously
obtaining the production of
such evidence
3. The evidnece will be
available at the time
desired
4. No similar evidence can
be obtained
VIII. Trial in absentia- to spped up the disposition of
criminal cases (where accused jumped bail or
flee)
a. Sec. 6 , Rule 120, ROC authorizes this
b. Mandatory if accused has been arraigned,
notified of dates of hearing and his absence
is unjustified
c. Accused can still be ordered arrested by the
court for non-appearance upon summons to
appear for purposes of identification
d. Mandatory presence of the accused
i. Arraignment and plea
ii. During trial for identification
iii. During promulgation of sentence,
unless for a light offense wherein
the accused may appear by cousel
or a representative
iv. Accused who escapes from
confienment or jumps bail or flees
to a foreign country loses his right
to appeal and standing in court and
right to seek relief from the court
v. After trial in absentia, court can
render the judgement in the case
and promulgation can be made by
simply recording the judgment in
the criminal docket with a copy
thereof served upon his counsel
provided that notice requiring him to
be present at the promulgation of
judgment is served through his
bondmsen or warden and counsel
vi. Sec 6, rule 120, If the judgment is
for conviction and the failure of the
accused to appear was without
justifiable cause, he shall lose the
remedies available in these rules
against the judgment and the court
shall order his arrest. Within fifteen
(15) days from promulgation of
judgment, however, the accused
may surrender and file a motion for
leave of court to avail of these
remedies. He shall state the
reasons for his absence at the
scheduled promulgation and if he
proves that his absence was for a
justifiable cause, he shall be
allowed to avail of said remedies
within fifteen (15) days from notice.
(6a)
1. Cant seek relief
HABEAS CORPUS
Definition: A writ issued by a court directed to a person
detaining another, commanding him to produce the body of the
prisoner at a designated time and place, with the day and
cause of his caption and detention, to do, to submit to and to
receive whatever the court or judge awarding the write shall
consider in his behalf
Available
A. When subjected to physical restraint
B. As a consequence of a judicial proceeding, there has
been deprivation of a constituional right resulting in
the restraint of the person, the court had no
jurisdiction to impose the sentence or an excessive
penalty has been imposed since such sentence is
void as to the excess
C. Cases by which rightful custody of any person is
withheld from the person entitled thereto
a. Examples
 i. Moral restraint sa kasambahay
ii. Offense of political complexion
iii. Longer penalty than another convict
of the same offense
iv. Unlawful denial of bail
D. Not where the person alleged to be restrained of
liberty is in the custody of an officer under a process
issued by the courth which has jurisdiction to do so
E. Ultimate purpose is to relieve a person from unlawful
restraint
F. Essentially a writ of inquiry and granted to test the
right under which he has been detained
G. If illegal at the onset may be cured by supervening
events such as the issuance of a judicial processs
H. Not when already released
I. Neither can marital rights such as living in a conjugal
dwelling be enforced by the writ
J. If PI invalid and offense prescribed, motion to quash
warrant of arrest or to file a motion to quash
information based on prescription not habeas corpus
K. Not those under investigation
L. All courts of competent jurisdiction may entertain
petition for dangerous drugs provided they have
served max penalties
M. Violated conditional pardon- still serve prison term
N. Loss of judicial records- remedy is reconstitution of
judicial records
O. Procedure- disobedience to the writ constitutes
contempt of court
P. Grounds for suspension
a. Section 18. The President shall be the
Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of
the Philippines and whenever it becomes
necessary, he may call out such armed
forces to prevent or suppress lawless
violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of
invasion or rebellion, when the public safety
requires it, he may, for a period not
exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege
of the writ of habeas corpus or place the
Philippines or any part thereof under martial
law. Within forty-eight hours from the
proclamation of martial law or the
suspension of the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus, the President shall submit a
report in person or in writing to the
Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a
vote of at least a majority of all its Members
in regular or special session, may revoke
such proclamation or suspension, which
revocation shall not be set aside by the
President. Upon the initiative of the
President, the Congress may, in the same
manner, extend such proclamation or
suspension for a period to be determined by
the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion
shall persist and public safety requires it.
The Congress, if not in session, shall, within twenty-four hours
following such proclamation or suspension, convene in
accordance with its rules without need of a call
The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding
filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the
proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of
the writ of habeas corpus or the extension thereof, and must
promulgate its decision thereon within thirty days from its filing.
A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the
Constitution, nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts or
legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of
jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where
civil courts are able to function, nor automatically suspend the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
shall apply only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or
offenses inherent in, or directly connected with, invasion.
During the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus, any person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially
charged within three days, otherwise he shall be released.
Q. Suspension of privilege does not suspend the right to
bail
SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF CASES
Right of the Accused to Speedy Trial
SECTION 15. (1) All cases or matters filed after the effectivity
of this Constitution must be decided or resolved within twenty-
four months from date of submission for the Supreme Court,
and, unless reduced by the Supreme Court, twelve months for
all lower collegiate courts, and three months for all other lower
courts.
(2) A case or matter shall be deemed submitted for decision or
resolution upon the filing of the last pending, brief, or
memorandum required by the Rules of Court or by the court
itself.
(3) Upon the expiration of the corresponding period, a
certification to this effect signed by the Chief Justice or the
presiding judge shall forthwith be issued and a copy thereof
attached to the record of the case or matter, and served upon
the parties. The certification shall state why a decision or
resolution has not been rendered or issued within said period.
(4) Despite the expiration of the applicable mandatory period,
the court, without prejudice to such responsibility as may have
been incurred in consequence thereof, shall decide or resolve
the case or matter submitted thereto for determination, without
further delay.
Section 7. Each Commission shall decide by a majority vote of
all its Members, any case or matter brought before it within
sixty days from the date of its submission for decision or
resolution. A case or matter is deemed submitted for decision
or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief, or
memorandum required by the rules of the Commission or by
the Commission itself. Unless otherwise provided by this
Constitution or by law, any decision, order, or ruling of each
Commission may be brought to the Supreme Court on
certiorari by the aggrieved party within thirty days from receipt
of a copy thereof.
 Not limited to criminal cases but to all parties in civil
and admin cases and in all proceeding inc judicial and
quasi judicial
 Violated only when the proceedings are attended by
vexatious, capricious and oppressive delays or when
unjustified postponements of trial are asked for and
secured or when without justifiable motive a long
period of time is allowed to elapse without the party
having his case tries
 If not attributable to prosecution, no violation
 Applies even when the case is already submitted for
decision
 Tilendo vs ombudsman
SELF INCRIMINATION
o Not a mere mathematical computation
o Length of the delay
o Reasons for the delay
o Assertion or failure to assert such right by
the accused
o Prejudice caused by the delay
 Roque vs ombudsman
o Roque- division head of decs in koronadal
o After resolution recommending filing of info,
6 years before info was filed from the filing of
counter –affidavits
o Held: Clearly, the delay of almost six years
disregarded the ombudsmans duty, as
mandated by the Constitution[12] and
Republic Act No. 6770,[13] to act promptly
on complaints before him. More important, it
violated the petitioners rights to due process
and to a speedy disposition of the cases filed
against them. Although respondents
attempted to justify the six months needed
by Ombudsman Desierto to review the
recommendation of Deputy Ombudsman
Gervasio, no explanation was given why it
took almost six years for the latter to resolve
the Complaints.
 Guiani vs Sandiganbayan
complaint against regional officials of cotabato and
dpwh upon assesment of COA of bloating of
accomplishement reports in construction of a road in
violation of anti graft and corrput practices act
motion top quash with ombudsman, motion to defer
arraignment and defer issuance of warrants of arrests
delay of almost 6 years to resolve preliminary
investigation by ombudsman
HELD: not violated because they have acquiesced
and not really vexatious, 2 page report of coa needed
further studies
 Extends to all citizens including the military and
covers before, during and after the trial
 Failure to assert this may be deemed as waiver- right
to public justice
 Admin cases in civil service- failure to submit formal
offer of evidence within the given period- waiver
 Avilability-not only in criminal prosecutions but also in
all other government proceedings including civil
actions and administrative or lgeislative investigations
 Not only by the accused but also by any witness to
whom a question calling for an incriminating answer is
addressed
 Rule: may be invoked only when incriminating
question has been asked- in an ordinary witness
o Not the accused- he may not be compelled
to take the witness stand, also to respondent
in an admin proceeding where he may be
subject to penal sanctions such as
cancellation of license to practice medicine
o Scope:testimonial compulsion only-
extracting from the lips of the accused the
admission of guilt and not object evidence
 Not vomit
 Hair samples
 Dna
 Fingerprint
  Photos
 Paraffin testing
o Extends to the compulsion for the production
of documents, papers and chattels that may
be used as evidence against the witness,
except where the State has a right to inspect
the same such as the books of accounts of
corporations under police taxing power
o Also protects the accused to furnish
handwriting in a falsification case
o Immunity
 Transactional immunity- that which
may be granted by CHR to any
person whose testimony or whose
possession of docs or other
evidence is necessary or
convenient to determine the truth in
any investigation conducted by it or
under its authority, which makes the
witness immune from criminal
prosecution for an offense to which
his compelled testimont relates
 Use and fruit immunity- prohibits
the use of the witness’s compelled
testimony and its fruits in any
manner in connection with the
criminal prosecution of the witness
 Liberal interpretation
o Waiver- may be waived either by directly or
by a failure to invoke it provided the waiver is
certain and unequivocal and intelligently
made
 Taking witness stand – accused
NON- DETENTION BY REASON OF POLITICAL BELIEFS OR
ASPIRATIONS AND INVOLUNTARY SERVITURE
 REINFORCED BY ART 272 OF RPC
Art. 272. Slavery. — The penalty of prision mayor and a
fine of not exceeding 10,000 pesos shall be imposed upon
anyone who shall purchase, sell, kidnap or detain a
human being for the purpose of enslaving him.chanrobles
virtual law library
If the crime be committed for the purpose of assigning the
offended party to some immoral traffic, the penalty shall be
imposed in its maximum period.chanrobles virtual law libr
 EXCEPTIONS
o Punishment for a crime whereof one has
been duly convicted
o Service iin defense of the state
o Naval (merchant marine) enlistment
o Posse comitatus
o Return to work order in industries affected
with public interest
o Patria potestas
PROHIBITED PUNISHMENTS
 Mere severity does not constitute cruel or unusual
punishment
 Penalty must be flagrantly and plainly oppressive ,
wholly disproportionate to the nature of the offense as
to shock the moral sense of the community
 Death penalty is not a cruel or unusal punishement. It
is an exercise of the State’s police power to secure
society against the threatened and actual evil
 Di gumana electric chair- not cruel and unusual, no
intent to inflict unnecessary pain
 Pleaa of guilt in capital offense- see stringent
requirements
 Automatic review in death penalty cases shall
proceed even in the absence of the accused
considering that nothing less than life is at stake and
any court decision must be error free as possible
o Includes an appeal of the less serious crime
not punished by death but arising out of the
same occurrence or committed by the
accused on the same occasion
NON IMPRISONEMENT FOR DEBT
 He can be validly punished ina criminal action if he
contracted his debt through fraud
 Not an offense against prop but against public order-
trust receipts law and estafa
 Bp 22 – faith in financial system
DOUBLE JEOPARDY
REQUISITES
A. Valid complaint or information- not in preliminary
investigation
B. Filed before a competent court- if accused already
arraigned but wrong court double jeopardy does not
attach
C. To which the defendant had pleased- accused not yet
arraigned no DJ
a. Grant of a motion to quash before the
accused makes his plea may be appealed by
the prosecution because not yet placed in DJ
D. Defendant was previously acquitted or convicted or
the case dismissed or otherwise terminated without
his express consent
a. NOT when sentenced on plea bargaining
without the approval of the fiscal but
approved by the court
b. Mistakenly dimissed by the court
c. Retaking bec transcript incomplete
d. Promulgation of only one part of the decision
is not a bar to the promulgation of the other
part
e. A judgement of acquittal is final,
unappealable and immediately executory
f. Dismissal of the action may be
i. Permanent- termination of the case
on the merits resulting to either
acquittal or conviction; to the
dismissal of the case because of
the prosecution’s failure to
prosecute; or the dismissal due to
unreasonable delay in the
proceedings in violation of the right
of the accused to speedy trial
ii. Provisional- dismissal without
prejudice to the reinstatement
thereof before the order of
dismissal becomes final, or to the
subsequent filing of a new info
within the periods allowed under the
RPC OR ROC; dismissal on
procedural grounds
iii. Dismissal of fiscal because on
reinvestigation it was shown that
complainants were real agressors
(consent not given by accused)
hence this is a bar
iv. Consent of the accused to the
dismissal cannot be implied or
presumed; must be expressed
v. If made at the instance of the
accused- no double jeopardy
vi. Motion to dismiss- insufficiency of
evidence- ACQUITTAL
vii. When the proceedings have been
unreasonably prolonged as to
violate the right of the accused to
speedy trial
viii. Revival of th criminal cases
provisionally dismissed – sec 8, rule
117- time bar of 2 years within
which the state may revive criminal
cases provisionally dismissed with
the express consent of the accused
and with a priori notice to the
offended party, if the offense
charged is penalized by more than
6 years imprisonment and one year
if the penalty imposable does not
exceed 6 years imprisonment or a
fine in whatever amount- dec 1,
2000
ix. Appeal by prosecution- bawal if
judgment is acquittal on the merits
x. 1. Against a second prosecution for
the same offense after acquittal, 2
against a second prosecution for
the same offense after conviction, 3
against multiple punishments for
the same offense
xi. Acquittal can not be appealed
except where a mistrial resulted in a
denial of due process ( capricious
dimissial of an info deprives the
state opportunity to prosecute and
convict
1. State no fair op
2. Simissal is purely
capricious of info or
complaint
3. Lack of proper notice
4. Accused waived or is
estopped
5. Dismissal is with GAD
6. Finding of mistiral
7. Or trial is a sham
xii. Appeal from the order of dismissal
by lower court is not foreclosed
where the order was issued before
arraignment
xiii. Discharge of co-accused- as govt
witness must be considered solid
for determining DJ, absent proof
that he refused or failed to testufy, it
is a bar
Crimes Covered
 Not for an identical offense or any attempt to commit
the same of frustration thereof or any offense which
necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the
offense charged in the original complaint or info
Section 9. Failure to move to quash or to allege any
ground therefor. — The failure of the accused to assert any
ground of a motion to quash before he pleads to the complaint
or information, either because he did not file a motion to quash
or failed to allege the same in said motion, shall be deemed a
waiver of any objections based on the grounds provided for in
paragraphs (a), (b), (g), and (i) of section 3 of this Rule. (8)

 No DJ if subsequent info different offense even if

EX POST FACTO LAW AND BILL OF ATTAINDER
same act or set of acts

Kinds
Doctrine of Supervening event- the accused may stillbe
prosecuted for another offense if a subsequent development
changes the character of the first indictment under which he (1) One which makes an action done before the passing of
may have already been charged or convicted (sec 7, rule 117) the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal, and
punishes such action.
(2) One which aggravates the crime or makes it greater than
Section 7. Former conviction or acquittal; double
when it was committed.
jeopardy. — When an accused has been convicted or
(3) One which changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
acquitted, or the case against him dismissed or otherwise
punishment than that which the law annexed to the crime when
terminated without his express consent by a court of
it was committed.
competent jurisdiction, upon a valid complaint or information or
(4) One which alters the legal rules of evidence and receives
other formal charge sufficient in form and substance to sustain
less testimony than the law required at the time of the
a conviction and after the accused had pleaded to the charge,
commission of the offense in order to convict the accused.
the conviction or acquittal of the accused or the dismissal of
(5) One which assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies
the case shall be a bar to another prosecution for the offense
only BUT, in effect, imposes a penalty or deprivation of a right,
charged, or for any attempt to commit the same or frustration
which, when done, was lawful.
thereof, or for any offense which necessarily includes or is
(6) One which deprives a person accused of a crime of some
necessarily included in the offense charged in the former
lawful protection to which he has become entitled such as the
complaint or information.
protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation
of amnesty
However, the conviction of the accused shall not be a bar to
another prosecution for an offense which necessarily includes
CHARACTERISTICS
the offense charged in the former complaint or information
under any of the following instances:
 REFERS TO CRIMINAL MATTERS
(a) the graver offense developed due to supervening
facts arising from the same act or omission constituting the  IT IS RETROACTIVE IN APPLICATION
former charge;
 IT WORKS TO THE PREJUDICE OF THE ACCUSED
(b) the facts constituting the graver charge became
known or were discovered only after a plea was entered in the PENAL LAWS- those acts of the legislature which prohibit
former complaint or information; or certain acts and establish penalties for their violations or those
that define crimes, treats of their nature and provides for their
(c) the plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made punishment
without the consent of the prosecutor and of the offended party
except as provided in section 1 (f) of Rule 116.
 Judge can not declare it is an ex post facto law
without any motion to that effect
In any of the foregoing cases, where the accused satisfies or
serves in whole or in part the judgment, he shall be credited
BILL OF ATTAINDER- legislative act that inflicts punishment
with the same in the event of conviction for the graver offense.
without trial
(7a)

Section 8. Provisional dismissal. — A case shall not be
provisionally dismissed except with the express consent of the
accused and with notice to the offended party.
The provisional dismissal of offenses punishable by
imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years or a fine of any
amount, or both, shall become permanent one (1) year after
issuance of the order without the case having been revived.
With respect to offenses punishable by imprisonment of more
than six (6) years, their provisional dismissal shall become
permanent two (2) years after issuance of the order without the
case having been revived. (n)
CHARACTERISTICS
 Substitutes legislative fiat for a judicial determination
of guilt
 Only when a statute applies either to named
individuals or easily ascertainable members of a
group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them
without judicial trial
People vs Ferrer
Facts: Hon. Judge Simeon Ferrer is the Tarlac trial court judge
that declared RA1700 or the Anti-Subversive Act of 1957 as a
bill of attainder. Thus, dismissing the information of subversion
against the following: 1.) Feliciano Co for being an
officer/leader of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP)
aggravated by circumstances of contempt and insult to public
officers, subversion by a band and aid of armed men to afford
impunity. 2.) Nilo Tayag and 5 others, for being
members/leaders of the NPA, inciting, instigating people to
unite and overthrow the Philippine Government. Attended by
Aggravating Circumstances of Aid or Armed Men, Craft, and
Fraud. The trial court is of opinion that 1.) The Congress
usurped the powers of the judge 2.) Assumed judicial
magistracy by pronouncing the guilt of the CPP without any
forms of safeguard of a judicial trial. 3.) It created a
presumption of organizational guilt by being members of the
CPP regardless of voluntariness.
The Anti Subversive Act of 1957 was approved 20June1957. It
is an act to outlaw the CPP and similar associations penalizing
membership therein, and for other purposes. It defined the
Communist Party being although a political party is in fact an
organized conspiracy to overthrow the Government, not only
by force and violence but also by deceit, subversion and other
illegal means. It declares that the CPP is a clear and present
danger to the security of the Philippines. Section 4 provided
that affiliation with full knowledge of the illegal acts of the CPP
is punishable. Section 5 states that due investigation by a
designated prosecutor by the Secretary of Justice be made
prior to filing of information in court. Section 6 provides for
penalty for furnishing false evidence. Section 7 provides for 2
witnesses in open court for acts penalized by prision mayor to
death. Section 8 allows the renunciation of membership to the
CCP through writing under oath. Section 9 declares the
constitutionality of the statute and its valid exercise under
freedom if thought, assembly and association.
Issues:
(1) Whether or not RA1700 is a bill of attainder/ ex post facto
law.
(2) Whether or Not RA1700 violates freedom of expression.
Held: The court holds the VALIDITY Of the Anti-Subversion Act
of 1957.
A bill of attainder is solely a legislative act. It punishes without
the benefit of the trial. It is the substitution of judicial
determination to a legislative determination of guilt. In order for
a statute be measured as a bill of attainder, the following
requisites must be present: 1.) The statute specifies persons,
groups. 2.) the statute is applied retroactively and reach past
conduct. (A bill of attainder relatively is also an ex post facto
law.)
In the case at bar, the statute simply declares the CPP as an
organized conspiracy for the overthrow of the Government for
purposes of example of SECTION 4 of the Act. The Act applies
not only to the CPP but also to other organizations having the
same purpose and their successors. The Act’s focus is on the
conduct not person.
Membership to this organizations, to be UNLAWFUL, it must
be shown that membership was acquired with the intent to
further the goals of the organization by overt acts. This is the
element of MEMBERSHIP with KNOWLEDGE that is
punishable. This is the required proof of a member’s direct
participation. Why is membership punished. Membership
renders aid and encouragement to the organization.
Membership makes himself party to its unlawful acts.
Furthermore, the statute is PROSPECTIVE in nature. Section
4 prohibits acts committed after approval of the act. The
members of the subversive organizations before the passing of
this Act is given an opportunity to escape liability by
renouncing membership in accordance with Section 8. The
statute applies the principle of mutatis mutandis or that the
necessary changes having been made.
The declaration of that the CPP is an organized conspiracy to
overthrow the Philippine Government should not be the basis
of guilt. This declaration is only a basis of Section 4 of the Act.
The EXISTENCE OF SUBSTANTIVE EVIL justifies the
limitation to the exercise of “Freedom of Expression and
Association” in this matter. Before the enactment of the statute
and statements in the preamble, careful investigations by the
Congress were done. The court further stresses that whatever
interest in freedom of speech and association is excluded in
the prohibition of membership in the CPP are weak considering
NATIONAL SECURITY and PRESERVATION of
DEMOCRACY.
The court set basic guidelines to be observed in the
prosecution under RA1700. In addition to proving
circumstances/ evidences of subversion, the following
elements must also be established:
1. Subversive Organizations besides the CPP, it must be
proven that the organization purpose is to overthrow the
present Government of the Philippines and establish a
domination of a FOREIGN POWER. Membership is willfully
and knowingly done by overt acts.
2.. In case of CPP, the continued pursuance of its subversive
purpose. Membership is willfully and knowingly done by overt
acts.
The court did not make any judgment on the crimes of the
accused under the Act. The Supreme Court set aside the
resolution of the TRIAL COURT.