Facts: Issue:

• Petitioner sought a permit from the City of Should the application of the petitioner to hold
Manila to hold a march and rally from the peaceful assembly be granted?
Luneta Park to the gates of the US Embassy.
Once there, a short program would be held in
an open space of public property. Held:
• Respondent denied the application because The Court ruled in the affirmative.
there were police intelligence reports that
subversive/criminal elements would infiltrate
or disrupt any assembly where a large number
of people is expected to attend.
• Moreover, respondent relied on Ordinance
No. 7275 prohibiting the holding or staging of
rallies or demonstration within a radius of 500
ft from any foreign mission, or chancery, and
for other purposes.
• Petitioner filed the present petition for
mandamus with a prayer for writ of
mandatory injunction.
Sec. 4, Art. III of the Constitution Limitations:
No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of These rights must not be denied, unless there be
speech, or of the press, or the right of the people a clear and present danger of a substantive evil
peaceably to assemble and petition the that the State has a right to prevent.
Government for redress of grievances.
• One may not advocate disorder in the name of
• Free speech, like free press, is the liberty to protest, or preach rebellion under the cloak of
discuss publicly and truthfully any matter of dissent.
public concern without the censorship or
• Riotous conduct, injury to property, and acts of
punishment;
vandalism must be avoided.
• Freedom to peaceably assemble and petition
the government for redress is the right of the
people to meet peaceably for consultation and
discussion of matters of public concern, and air
their grievances to the Government, without
the fear of punishment.
Guidelines on the application for permit to On the power of the licensing authority to issue
peaceably assemble permit
• The applicants for a permit to hold an • The licensing authority are strictly limited, in
assembly should inform the licensing authority the issuance of licenses, with a view to
of the time and place where it will take place. conserve public convenience and to provide
the proper policing, and are not invested with
• If it were a private place, only the consent of
the arbitrary discretion to issue or refuse
the owner or the one entitled to its legal
license.
possession is required.
• The authority of the municipality to impose
• Such application should be filed ahead of time
regulations in order to assure the safety and
to enable the public official to determine
convenience of the people in the use of public
whether there may be valid objections to the
highways has never been regarded as
grant of the permit, or to its grant but to
inconsistent with the civil liberties, but rather
another public place.
as one of the means of safeguarding good
• The refusal or modification of such application order.
must be based on the existence of a clear and
present danger; and that the applicants must
be heard on the matter.
• That the decision on the application, whether
favorable or adverse, must be communicated
to the applicants at the earliest opportunity.
Such that, in case of a denial, they can have
recourse to the proper judicial authority.
In the present case… Dispositive Portion:
• The Court held that there is no clear and Wherefore, the mandatory injunction prayed is
present danger. There can be no legal granted. No costs.
objection on the choice of Luneta as the place
where the peace rally would start. Likewise,
there can be no valid objection to the use of
the streets to the gates of the US embassy. The
mere assertion that subversives may infiltrate
the ranks of the demonstrators does not
suffice.
• The reliance of Mayor Bagatsing on Ordinance
No. 7295 is misplaced. The said ordinance is
supported by the Vienna Convention on
Diplomatic Relations in which the Philippines is
a signatory. Under said ordinance, it is
prohibited to hold or stage rallies within the a
radius of 500 ft from any foreign mission or
chancery and for other purposes. In the
present case, however, there was no proof that
the distance between the chancery and the
embassy gate is less than 500 ft.
• Therefore, the mandatory injunction prayed
for is granted.