Constitutional Law

The study of the maintenance of the maintenance of the proper balance between authority as
represented by the three inherent powers of the state and liberty as guaranteed by the Bill of rights.

Liberty
Includes the “the right to exist and the right to be free from arbitrary personal restraint or
servitude. It includes the right of the citizen to be free to use his faculties in all lawful ways.”

Police power
The power of promoting public welfare by restraining and regulating the use of liberty and
property.

Scope and characteristics: Police power is the most pervasive, the least limitable, and the
most demanding of the three powers. The justification found in the Latin maxis:
1. Salus populi est suprema lex; and
2. Sic utere tuo ut non laedas.

Vaccination issue (hypotheticals)

Can it be imposed? Yes, on the basis of public interest and the general welfare clause.
How is will it be exercised? Through proper exercise of the police power:
1. Lawful subject; and
2. Reasonable means employed.

Machiavelli’s proposition that “the end justifies the means” is diametrically opposed to the Constitution
of due process.

Ynot v. IAC case

Did not satisfy the requirement number to in the exercise of police power: reasonable means
employed.
EO 626-A was declared violative of due process because the owner of the carabaos confiscated
is denied the right to be heard in his defense and immediately condemned and punished.

Eminent domain
Is the inherent power of the government to take private property for public use upon payment
of just compensation.

Public use
Definition was expanded. “Public use” in the general concept is the meeting of a public need or
public exigency, now it is synonymous to “Public interest” or “Public benefit”, “Public welfare”, and
“Public convenience”. Even if the use is not directly available to the public, but will redound to their
indirect advantage or benefit, it is included in the term “Public use”.

Art. III, Sec. 9 is not intended as a grant but a limitation on the exercise of the power of eminent domain.
Just compensation
The full and fair equivalent of the property taken;
It is the fair market value of the property.
It is settled that the market value of the property is “that sum of money which a person,
desirous but not compelled to buy, and an owner, willing but not compelled to sell, would agree on as a
price to be given and received therefor.
Fixing of just compensation is a justiciable question.
Should be paid in cash, except in the case of Agrarian reform, cash plus LBP bonds were declared
valid.
The agrarian reform was said to be an “extraordinary expropriation” in the exercise of police
power. Retention limits is five (5) hectares.

Republic v. Castelvi
The Supreme Court enumerated the following requisites for valid taking:
1. The expropriator must enter a private property;
2. Entry must be for more than a momentary period;
3. Entry must be under warrant or color of authority;
4. Property must be devoted to public use or otherwise informally appropriated or injuriously
affected; and
5. Utilization of the property must be in such a way as to oust the owner and to deprive him of
beneficial enjoyment of the property.

There is taking even if not physically taken, as long as the use of property is reduced or curtailed.

Can you question the “necessity” of the taking?

Qualified answer.
No, if it is through a valid act of Congress. It is a political question.
Yes, if it is an exercise of a delegate. Necessity must be proven and is a justiciable question.

What if the property is already devoted to public use, can it be expropriated?

Yes, but only by Congress and not by a delegate.

Taxation
Is one of the inherent powers of the State, acting through the legislature, to impose burdens or
charges upon persons, property or property rights, for the use and support of the government, to
enable it to discharge its function.

When you buy, you are already taxed.

Tax exemptions:
Requisites: No law granting any tax exemption shall be passed without the concurrence of a
majority of all the Members of Congress. (Sec. 28 (4), Art. VI, 1987 Constitution)

1. Sec. 28 (3), Art. VI (CCP+ MAN)

 1) Charitable institutions;
2) Churches;
3) Parsonages or convents appurtenant thereto;
4) Mosques;
5) Non-profit cemeteries; and
6) All lands, buildings and improvements (LIB), actually, directly, and exclusively (ADE) used
for religious, charitable or educational (REC) purposes;
shall be exempt from taxation. (Real estate tax only)

2. Sec. 4 (3), Art. XIV

All revenues and assets of non-stock, non-profit educational institutions used actually,
directly, and exclusively (ADE) for educational purposes shall be exempt from taxes and
duties.
Proprietary educational institutions, including those co-operatively owned, may likewise
be entitled to such exemptions subject to the limitations provided by law including
restrictions on dividends and provisions for reinvestment.

3. Sec 4 (4), Art. XIV

Subject to conditions prescribed by law, all grants, endowments, donations, or
contributions used actually, directly, and exclusively (ADE) for educational purposes shall be
exempt from tax.

4. Where tax is granted gratuitously, it may be revoked at will; but not if granted for a valuable
consideration. (Mactan Cebu International Airport v. Marcos)

Rule on constructions that pass tax exemptions: Rules that pass tax exemption are not favored.

Taxation must be uniform and equitable:

Uniformity means that persons or things belonging to the same valid classification shall be taxed
at the same rate.
Equitable means that taxes should be apportioned among the people according to their capacity
to pay.

Double taxation
Additional taxes are laid on the same subject by the same taxing jurisdiction during the same
taxing period and for the same purpose. (Punzalan v. Municipal Board of Manila)

Is double taxation prohibited? No, there is no law prohibiting double taxation, but if
the same will result in a violation of the equal protection clause it will be prohibited.

What is a progressive system of taxation?

A tax system is progressive when the rate increases as the tax base increases.
The concept of progressive taxation reflects the wish of the Commission that the legislature
should use the power of taxation as an instrument for a more equitable distribution of wealth.
A tax must not be confiscatory.

Is the power to tax the power to destroy?

No and Yes.
No, when it is for a revenue.
Yes, when it is used as an implement of the police power for a public purpose.

Due process
Sec. 1, Art III, 1987 Constitution, provides that “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or
property with due process of law xxx”
“A law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgement
only after trial” (Darmouth College v. Woodward).
“Responds to the Supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of justice”. (Ermita-Malate
Hotel & Motel Operations Association v. City of Manila)
“The embodiment of the sporting idea of fair play”. (J. Holmes)

Aspects of due process:

1. Substantive; and
2. Procedural.

Substantive due process

This serves as a restriction on governments law and rule-making powers.
Requisites: (similar to police power)
1) Valid governmental objective: The interests of the public, in general, as
distinguished from those of a particular class, require the intervention of the state;
and
2) Lawful manner, not unduly oppressive: The means employed are reasonably
necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose, and not unduly oppressive on
individuals.

Equal protection
Sec. 1, Art III, 1987 Constitution, provides that “nor shall any person be denied the equal
protection of the law.”
All persons or things similarly situated should be treated alike, both as to rights conferred and
responsibilities imposed.
Natural and juridical persons are entitled to this guarantee; but with respect to artificial persons,
they enjoy the protection insofar as their property is concerned.

Valid classification
1. Substantial distinction;
2. Must APPLY equally to all members of the same class;
3. Germane to the purpose of the law; and
4. Not limited to Existing conditions only.
PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION

GMA case, “Hello Garci”

1. The President herself apologized;
2. No objections were initially made by both the President and Mr. Garcillano;
3. Under the aforementioned situation, it cannot be said that an alleged privacy was violated. And
assuming that they actively object, it is too late in the day that the objection is made after the
tapes are already played.

In weighing the scales between the alleged right of privacy and the right of the sovereign people
to information on matters not only of public concern but also of importance, the latter should be
made to prevail.

People v. Marti
The Bill of Rights embodied in the Constitution is not meant to be invoked against act of private
individuals, it is directed only against the government and its agencies tasked with the enforcement of
the law.
The Bill of Rights governs the relationship between the individual and the state.

Waterous Drug Corp v. NLRC

The Supreme Court said that the Bill of Rights does not protect citizens from unreasonable
searches and seizures made by private individuals.
In this case, an officer of the petitioner corporation opened an envelope addressed to the
private respondent and found therein a check evidencing an overprice in the purchase medicine.
Despite the lack of consent on the part of the private respondent, the check was deemed admissible in
evidence.

LIBERTY OF ABODE AND TRAVEL

Sec. 6, Art. III, 1987 Constitution:

The liberty of abode and changing the same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be
impaired ---except--- upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired ---
except--- in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may be provided by law.

Limitations to the right to travel:

1. National security;
2. Public safety; or
3. Public health

Marcos v. Manglapus
The Supreme Court sustained the refusal of the government to allow the petitioner’s return to
the Philippines, on the ground that it would endanger national security.
In the exercise of the Commander -in-Chief powers granted by the Constitution to suppress or
stamped out violence, the State, acting through the government cannot be precluded from taking pre-
emptive action against threats to the existence if, though nascent, they are perceived as apt to become
serious and direct.

Imelda Marcos v. Sandiganbayan

The Court upheld the denial by the Sandiganbayan of the request to travel abroad filed by Mrs.
Marcos, in as much as she had already been convicted. The person’s right to travel is subject to the usual
constraints imposed by the very necessity of safeguarding the system of justice.

RIGHT TO BAIL

Sec. 13, Art. III, 1987 Constitution:

All persons, ---except--- those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when
evidence of guilt is strong shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, ---or--- be released
on recognizance as may be provided by law. This right to bail shall not be impaired even when the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. The right to bail emanates from the right to be
presumed innocent.

Bail, a matter of right

All persons in custode shall:
i. Before or after conviction by the MeTC, MTC, MTCC, and MCTC; and
ii. Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua
or life imprisonment;
Be admitted to bail as a matter of right, with sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance
as prescribed by law or this rule (Sec. 4, Rule 114)

Bail, when discretionary

1. Upon conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or
life imprisonment, the court, on application, may admit the accused to bail.
2. If the court imposed a penalty of imprisonment exceeding six (6) years but not more than
twenty (20) years, the accused shall be denied bail, or his bail previously granted shall be
cancelled, upon a showing by the prosecution, with noticed to the accused, of the following
circumstances or other similar circumstances:
1) That the accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, or habitual-delinquent, or has
committed the crime aggravated by the circumstances of reiteration;
2) That the accused is found to have previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded
sentence, or has violated the conditions of his bail without valid justification;
3) That the accused committed the offense while on probation, or under conditional parol;
4) That the circumstance of the accused or his case indicate the probability of flight if
released on bail; or
5) That there is undue risk that during pendency of the appeal, the accused may commit
another crime. (Sec. 5, Rule 114)
When bail shall be denied
When the accused is charged with a capital offense, or an offense punishable by reclusion
perpetua or higher and evidence of guilt is strong, then bail shall be denied, as it is neither a matter of
right or discretion.

In ejectment cases, party may be ejected upon order by the court.

FREEDOM OF RELIGION

Sec. 5, Art III, 1987 Constitution

No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion ---or--- prohibiting the free
exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment ---of--- religious profession and worship, without
discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required in the exercise
of civil or political rights.

Religion
Any specific system of belief, worship, conduct, etc, often involving a code of ethics and a
philosophy.

Three (3) guarantees:

1. Non-establishment Clause;
2. Freedom of religious profession and worship. (Free exercise clause); and
3. No religious test clause

Two (2) aspects of freedom of religion:

1. Freedom to believe;
2. Freedom to act to one’s belief.

Right to believe is absolute.

Right to act to one’s belief is subject to regulation.

How can religious freedom be regulated?
According to Justice Teehankee, it can only be regulated upon the application of the
“clear and present danger rule”

When can the government give benefit to religion?

Only if all religions are benefited.
A contrary proposition is that the government cannot give any benefit respecting any
establishment of religion as specifically provided under the constitution.

What is the characteristic of the separation of the ecclesiastical and the secular?
The wall is not hostile.

Ebralinag v. Superintendent of Cebu

 The Supreme Court upheld the right of the petitioners to refuse to salute the Philippine flag on
account of their religious scruples.

Estrada v. Escritor
Respondent was administratively charged for immorality for living with a married man not her
husband.
The Supreme Court held that recognizing the religious nature of Filipinos and the elevating
influence of religion in society, the constitution’s religious clauses prescribe not a strict but a benevolent
neutrality.
Benevolent neutrality recognizes that government must pursue its secular goals and interests,
but at the same time, strive to uphold religious liberty to the greatest extent possible within flexible
constitutional limits.
Thus, although the morality contemplated by law is secular, benevolent neutrality could allow
for accommodation of morality based on religion, provided it does not offend compelling state interest.

Compelling state interest test

1. The first inquiry is whether respondent’s right to religious freedom has been burdened;
2. The second step is to ascertain respondent’s sincerity in her religious belief.

Accordingly, the Court found that in this particular case that the burden is great and the
sincerity of the religious belief is not in question, respondent Escritor’s arrangement cannot be
penalized as she made out a case for exemption from the law based on her fundamental right to
freedom of religion.

Morality is determined by religion, and according the Escritor’s religion it was therefore moral.

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Sec. 4, Art III, 1987 Constitution

No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, and of the press, or the
right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.

Meaning of freedom of speech and of the press?

It implies the right to freely utter and publish whatever the citizen may please, and to be
protected from any responsibility for so doing, ---except--- insofar as such publication:
1. from their blasphemy, obscenity, or scandalous character, may be a public offense; or
2. as by their falsehood and malice they may injuriously affect the standing reputation or
pecuniary interest of individuals.

Aspects of freedom of expression:

1. Freedom of prior restraint;
2. Freedom from subsequent punishment;

When can a person speak freely?

 When the subject matter is of public interest. But, as regard private matters, it is restricted.
Freedom from prior restraint
Prior restraint or censorship is a form of curtailment of the freedom of expression and of the
press made through restrictions or conditions in advance of actual publication or dissemination.
This means that the exercise of the said freedom or expression or of the press depends upon the
prior approval of the government.

Moises Padilla case

The Court granted the petition to restrain the public exhibition of the movie “Moises Padilla
Story”, because it contains fictionalized embellishments.

Ayer Productions v. Judge Capulong, Enrile Story

The tribunal upheld the primacy of the freedom of expression over Enrile’s “right to privacy”,
because Enrile was a “public figure”. And a public figure’s right to privacy is narrower than that of an
ordinary citizen.
Besides the movie “A Dangerous Life” would not have been historically faithful without including
the participation of Enrile in the EDSA revolution.

Where the right ends, authority begins.

Freedom from subsequent punishment

Without the assurance, the individual would hesitate to speak for fear that he might be held to
account for his speech, or that he might be provoking the vengeance of the officials he may have
criticized.
However, this freefom