LAW ON PROPERTY | ACOSTA V. OCHOA, ET AL., G.R. NO.

211559;

G.R. NO. 215634, OCTOBER 15, 2019.

TOPIC/DOCTRINE

Ownership and possession of firearms is not a property right, but a mere privilege. Should the State find
that bearing arms would be contrary to its legitimate interests, it can revoke the license without violating
the due process clause.

FACTS

This is a consolidated petition assailing the constitutionality of certain provisions of Republic Act No.
10591, or the Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act, and their corresponding
provisions in the 2013 Implementing Rules and Regulations for allegedly violating petitioners right to
bear arms, right to property, and right to privacy.

Yes, Section 9 of Republic Act No. 10591 which mandates applicants for Types 3 to 5 licenses to comply
with "inspection... requirements." The law and the corresponding provision in the Implementing Rules.
Initially the law is silent and has not yet provided a standard or scope of the inspection.

Also, in the pro forma Individual Application for New Firearm Registration, included a paragraph
indicating the Consent of Voluntan; Presentation for Inspection, to be signed by the applicant. It provides
that the applicant agrees to voluntarily consent to the inspection of the firearm at the residence indicated
in the application.

ISSUE

Whether or not the license to possess a firearm is a property?

Whether or not Republic Act No. 10591 and its Implementing Rules and Regulations unduly restrict their
right to bear arms, their right to property, and their right to privacy.

RULING

No.

The court held that license to possess a firearm is not property. There is no vested right in the continued
ownership and possession of firearms. Like any other license, the license to possess a firearm is “neither a
property nor a property right. “As a mere” permit or privilege to do what otherwise would be unlawful," it
does not act as "a contract between the authority granting it and the person to whom it is granted.” Being
a license, the permit to carry firearm outside residence is neither a property nor a property right. A grantee
of the permit does "not have a property interest in obtaining a license to carry a firearm.”

Yes.

The court held that the inspection requirement is an unreasonable search prohibited in Article III, Section
2 of the Constitution, and a violation of their right to privacy. Further, signing the Consent of Voluntary
Presentation for Inspection would allegedly be an invalid waiver, as it is not given "freely, voluntarily,
and knowingly" by the applicant who would just sign it, lest the application not be approved. Considering
that the inspection is done before a license is issued, there is no compelling urgency to immediately
conduct the inspection. A search warrant must first be obtained from a judge to determine probable cause
for its issuance. This inspection requirement is an unreasonable search prohibited in Article III, Section 2
of the Constitution, and a violation of their right to privacy. Further, signing the Consent of Voluntary
Presentation for Inspection would allegedly be an invalid waiver, as it is not given "freely, voluntarily,
and knowingly" by the applicant who would just sign it, lest the application not be approved.