Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
• They are inherent powers because they belong to the very essence of
government and without them no government can exist.
Similarities:
Differences:
paid
Limitations:
A. POLICE POWER
Justification of existence:
• Salus populi est suprema lex – the welfare of the people is the supreme
law;
• Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas – a person must use his own
property so as not to injure another
Scope:
Tests (Limitations):
“[T}he mere fact that some individuals in the community may be deprived of
their business or a particular mode of earning a living cannot prevent the
exercise of police power. .. [P]ersons licensed to pursue occupations
which may in the public need and interest be affected by the exercise of
the police power embark in these occupations subject to the
disadvantages which may result from the exercise of that power. ”
Government can take away a license and increase the cost of license fees
even to prohibitive levels, if public interest dictates so, without any
constitutional violations.
police power and the right to exact fees is may be implied from that power
to regulate. In setting the fees, municipal corporations are given wider
discretion in this class of licenses (than for licenses issued to regular
business). Courts have generally upheld these because of the desirability
of imposing restraints on individuals who engage in these unuseful
enterprises.
• In Ynot v. IAC, the Court here ruled that the ban on transportation of
carabao under the assailed ordinance and their outright confiscation and
disposal without court hearing is a violation of due process hence it is an
invalid exercise of police power.
The court adopted the measures laid down in the Toribio case
Protection general welfare is a function of police power which both restrains and
is restrained by due process, which requires notice and hearing
Case emphasized the need to have a lawful method to follow due process
requirement
Reasons why ordinance is invalid are:
◦ No reasonable connection between means employed (absolute
ban on movement of carabeef) and purpose sought to be
achieved (conservation of carabao for general welfare)
◦ Unduly oppressive since petition not given due process or
opportunity to be heard in proper court
B. EMINENT DOMAIN
Eminent Domain – is the use of the government of its coercive authority, upon
just compensation, to forcibly acquire the needed property in order to devote the
same to public use.
• The Regional Trial Court (RTC) has the jurisdiction over a complaint for
eminent domain.
1. Necessity of exercise
2. Private property
3. Taking
4. Public use
5. Just compensation
1. Necessity of Exercise
2. Private Property
• General Rule: anything that can come under the dominion of man is
subject to expropriation
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
• Exceptions: money and chose in action (personal right not reduced into
possession, i.e. the right to bring an action to recover debt, money or
thing)
• Private property already devoted to public use cannot be expropriated by
a delegate acting under a general grant of authority (City of Manila vs
Chinese Community)
3. Taking
4. Public Use
Public use – is whatever may be beneficially employed for the general welfare,
including both direct or indirect benefit or advantage to the public
5. Just Compensation
Just compensation – is fair and full equivalent payment for the loss sustained,
which is the measure of the indemnity, not whatever gain would accrue to the
expropriating agency. It is not market value per se. (Epza v. Dulay)
• Entitlement of interest:
◦ General Rule: when there is delay, there must be interest by way of
damages (Art. 2209, CC)
◦ Exception: when waived by not claiming the interest
• Payment of Taxes : taxes paid from the time of the taking until the
transfer of the title, during which the owner did not enjoy any beneficial
use of the property, are reimbursable by the expropriator.
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
• But in Republic vs. Knecht, the same property was ordered expropriated.
Apparently, BP 340, which called for the taking of the property, was
enacted after the 1st De Knecht case. De Knecht argued that there was
already a law of the case, which should not be disturbed.
Court responded that while it is true that there was a law of the case, it is
equally true that there is constitutional grant given to the State to take
private property upon payment of just compensation. “Such expropriation
proceedings may be undertaken by the [State] not only by voluntary
negotiation with landowners but also by taking appropriate court action or
by legislation.”
The prior court decision is no obstacle for the legislature to make its own
assessment of the circumstances that prevailed after the decision as well
as supervening events and reaching a conclusion as to the propriety of
undertaking the appropriation of the De Knecht property.
• In the case Republic v. PLDT, the Court ordered the PLDT to allow the
reconnection of telephone lines of the Republic.
◦ No cogent reason appears why Eminent Domain may be availed of to
impose only a burden upon the owner of condemned property without
loss of title or possession for public use subject to just compensation
◦ Case highlights that even services may be subjected to eminent
domain
• In Epza v. Dulay, P.D. Nos. 76, 464, 794, and 1533 prescribed a formula
for arriving at just compensation in expropriation proceedings , dispense
with the need to appoint commissioners to determine just compensation.
The Court held that those decrees are unconstitutional and void for they
constitute “impermissible encroachment on judicial prerogatives.”
C. POWER OF TAXATION
Taxes vs Licenses
Tax License
• to raise • for regulatory purpose only
revenues • justified under police power
• amount of fees required is usually limited to the
cost of regulation
Scope
• all income earned in the taxing state, whether by citizens or aliens, and all
immovable and tangible personal properties found in its territory, as well
as tangible personal property owned by persons domiciled therein
• where the tax is used solely for the purpose of raising revenues
Limitations of Taxation:
1. Due Process
• Procedural : due process does not require previous notice and hearing
before a law prescribing specific taxes on specific articles may be
enacted. However, where the tax to be collected is to be based on the
value of the taxable property, the taxpayer is entitled to be notified of the
assessment proceedings and to be heard therein on the correct valuation
of the property.
2. Equal Protection
• embodied in Sec. 28 (1), Art. VI, 1987 Constitution (The rule of taxation
shall be uniform and equitable. The Congress shall evolve a progressive
system of taxation.)
(a) standards that are used are substantial and not arbitrary
(b) categorization is germane to achieve the legislative purpose
(c) the law applies, all things being equal, to both present and future
conditions
(d) classification applies equally well to all those belonging to the same
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
class
3. Public Purpose
◦ when additional taxes are laid on the same subject by the same taxing
jurisdiction during the same taxing period and for the same purpose.
◦ constitutional
▪ Art. Vi, Sec. 28 (3) : when lands, buildings and improvements are
actually, directly and exclusively for religious, charitable or
educational purposes – entitled to exemption
Bill of Rights – set of prescriptions setting forth the fundamental civil and
political rights of the individual, and imposing limitations on the powers of the
government as a means of securing the enjoyment of those rights.
Rights is a guarantee that there are certain areas of a person's life, liberty, and
property which governmental power may not touch.
Classification of Rights
2. Civil Rights – rights which municipal law will enforce at the instance of
private individuals for the purpose of securing them the enjoyment of their
means of happiness;
4. Human Rights.
A. DUE PROCESS
Protection of Person
Covers Natural (citizen and alien) and Artificial Persons. As to the latter, with
respect only to property because its life and liberty are derived from and subject
to control of legislature
• When the State acts to interfere with life, liberty, or property, the
presumption is that the action is valid.
1. Life
2. Liberty
3. Property
• anything that can come under the right of ownership and be the subject of
contract
• However, one cannot have a vested right to a public office as this is not
regarded as property. If created by statue, it may be abolished by the
legislature at any time.
• Mere privileges are not property rights and are therefore revocable at will
Substantive due process – requires intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with
the rights of the person to his life, liberty or property
Requisites:
Requisites:
(c) Hearing
Requisites:
(f) Tribunal, body, or any of its judges must act on its or his own
independent consideration of the facts and law of the controversy
• The law is vague when it lacks comprehensible standards that men “of
common intelligence must necessarily guess as to its meaning and differ
as to its application. It is repugnant to the Constitution in two respects:
▪ it violates due process for failure to accord persons fair notice of
conduct to avoid; and,
▪ it leaves law enforcers unbridled discretion in carrying out its
provisions and becomes arbitrary flexing of the Government
muscle.
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
◦ Although the Bill of Rights does not mention ‘privacy’ the Court ruled
that that the right was to be found in the "penumbras" of other
constitutional protections. “The First Amendment has a penumbra
where privacy is penumbra where privacy is protected from
governmental intrusion.”
• In Lochner v. New York, Lochner was charged with violation of the labor
laws of New York for wrongfully and unlawfully permitting an employee to
work more than 60 hours in one week. The statute allegedly violated
mandates that no employee shall contract or agree to work more than 10
hours per day.
The statute interferes with the liberty of a person and the right of free contract
between employer and employee by determining the hours of labor in the
occupation of a baker without reasonable ground for doing so.
The state may interfere with and regulate both property and liberty rights to
prevent the individual from making certain kinds of contracts in its exercise of
police power which relates to safety, health, morals and general welfare of the
society. In this instance, the 14th amendment cannot interfere.
The trade of a baker is not an alarmingly unhealthy one that would warrant the
state’s interference with rights to labor and contract.
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
Doctrine: The rule must have a more direct relation, as means to an end, and the
end itself must be appropriate and legitimate, before an act can be held to be
valid which interferes with the general right of an individual to be free in his
person and in his power to contract in relation to his own labor.
• Our cases include Court of Industrial Relations (Ang Tibay vs. CIR) as an
administrative court which exercises judicial and quasi-judicial functions in
the determination of disputes between employers and employees.
National Telecommunications Company (PHILCOMSAT vs. Alcuaz),
National Labor Relations Commission or NLRC (DBP vs. NLRC) and
school tribunals (Ateneo vs. CA-Board of Discipline, Alcuaz vs. PSBA,
Non vs. Judge Dames, Tinker vs. Des Moines Community School
District) also are clothed with quasi-judicial function. It is a question of
whether the body or institution has a judicial or quasi-judicial function that
makes it bound by the due process clause. (Judicial function is
synonymous to judicial power which is the authority to settle justiciable
controversies or disputes involving rights that are legally enforceable and
demandable or the redress of wrongs for violations of such rights. It is a
determination of what the law is and what the legal rights of the parties are
with respect to a matter in controversy).
• In Ang Tibay vs. CIR, the Court laid down cardinal requirements in
administrative proceedings which essentially exercise a judicial or quasi-
judicial function. These are:
(1) the right to a hearing, which includes the right to present one’s case and
submit evidence in support thereof
(5) The decision must be based on the evidence presented at the hearting or
at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected
(6) The tribunal or body of any of its judges must act on its own independent
consideration of the law and facts of the controversy and not simply
accept the views of a subordinate
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
(7) The Board or body should, in all controversial questions, render its
decision in such manner that the parties to the proceeding can know the
various issues involved and the reason for the decision rendered.
B. EQUAL PROTECTION
Section 2, Art. III. The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of
whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search
warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be
determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or
affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things
to be seized.
Section 2, Art. III – deals with tangibles; embodies the “castle” doctrine (a
man's house is his castle; a citizen enjoys the right against official intrusion and is
master of all the surveys within the domain and privacy of his own home.)
Section 3 (2), Art. III – Exclusionary Rule (which embodies the Doctrine of the
Fruit of the Poisonous Tree)
• available to natural and artificial persons, but the latter's books of accounts
may be required to open for examination by the State in the exercise of
police power or power of taxation
[NOTE: each of these requires probable cause, except stop and frisk]
Requisites:
1. the item to be searched was within the arrestee's custody or area of
immediate control
2. the search was contemporaneous with the arrest
Requisites:
1. prior valid intrusion to a place
2. evidence was inadvertently discovered by the police who has the
right to be there
3. evidence is immediately apparent
4. there is no further search
5. consented searches
6. stop and frisk (limited protective search of outer clothing for weapons)
1. in flagrante delicto
2. hot pursuit
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
Preliminary investigation
proper (task of the
prosecutor) – ascertainment
whether the offender should
be held for trial or be
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
released
3. After Not merely routinary but must Not merely routinary but must
examination be probing and exhaustive be probing and exhaustive
under oath or
affirmation of
the
complainant
and the
witnesses he
may produce
4.Particularity General Rule: it must General Rule: when the
of description contain the name/s of the description therein is as specific
persons to be arrested as the circumstances will
ordinarily allow.
Exception: if there is some
descriptio personae which Exception: when no other more
will enable the officer to accurate and detailed
identify the accused description could have been
given.
• In Valmonte v. Gen. De Villa, the Court held that not all searches and
seizures are prohibited. Those which are reasonable are not forbidden. A
reasonable search is not to be determined by any fixed formula but is to
be resolved according to the facts of the case.
Checkpoints are not illegal per se... Routine inspection and few questions do not
constitute unreasonable searches. If the inspection becomes more thorough to
the extent of becoming a search, this can be done when there is deemed to be
probable cause. In the latter situation, it is justifiable as a warrantless search of a
moving vehicle.
The Court also held that the search warrant description has the “sweeping tenor”
making the document a general warrant. The search warrant particularly
states:”all printing equipment, typewriters... of the WE Forum newspaper and any
other documents...”
It is not required that the property to be searched should be owned by the person
against whom the search warrant is directed. It is sufficient that the property is
under the control or possession of the person sought to be searched.
• In Lim v. Felix, the Court held that the judge in issuing a warrant of arrest
cannot rely solely on the certification or recommendation of a prosecutor
that probable cause exists. The judge must look at the report, the
affidavits, the transcripts of stenographic notes (if any), and all other
supporting documents behind the Prosecutor's certification.
The Court further held that the objection to an unlawful search or seizure and to
evidence obtained thereby is purely personal and cannot be availed by third
parties.
D. MIRANDA RIGHTS
4. The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this
Section as well as compensation to the rehabilitation of victims of torture
or similar practices, and their families.
(1) any person under custodial investigation has the right to remain silent;
(2) anything he says can and will be used against him in a court of law;
(3) he has the right to talk to an attorney before being questioned and to have
his counsel present when being questioned; and
(4) if he cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided before any questioning
if he so desires.
(a) Voluntary
(b) With assistance of counsel
(c) In writing, and
(d) Express
v. Agustin)
(e) To be provided with counsel if the person cannot afford the services
of one
(b) Right to counsel when making the waiver of the right to remain silent or to
counsel
• RA 7309: victims of unjust imprisonment may file their claims with the
Board of Claims under DOJ
the police desk officer after the crime was committed may be given in
evidence against him by the police officer to whom the admission was
made, as part of the res gestae.
E. RIGHT TO BAIL
Section 13, Art. III. 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. The right to bail shall not be
impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is
suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required.
Bail – is security given for the release of a person in custody of law, furnished by
him or a bondsman, to guaranty his appearance before any court as may be
required
Kinds of Bail
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
A person under detention even if no formal charges have yet been filed (Rule
114, Rules of Court)
(b) Persons convicted by the trial court. Bail is only discretionary pending
appeal.
(c) Persons who are members of the AFP facing a court martial.
One is under the custody of the law either when he has been arrested or has
surrendered himself to the jurisdiction of the court, as in the case where through
counsel petitioner for bail who was confined in a hospital communicated his
submission to the jurisdiction of the court.
• The right to bail shall NOT be impaired even when the privilege of the writ
of habeas corpus is suspended.
(a) The person claiming the right must be in actual detention or custody of the
law.
(b) The constitutional right is available only in criminal cases, not, e.g. in
deportation and extradition proceedings.
Note:
(a) Right to bail is not available in the military.
• In Comendador v. De Villa, soldier under court martial does not enjoy the
right to bail. It is because of the disciplinary structure of the military and
because soldiers are allowed the fiduciary right to bear arms and can
therefore cause great havoc... Nor can appeal be made to the equal
protection clause ebcause equal protection applies only to those who are
equally situated.
(b) Apart from bail, a person may attain provisional liberty through
recognizance.
2. Proper observance of all the rights accorded the accused under the
Constitution and the applicable statutes (example of statutory right of the
accused: right to Preliminary investigation)
• There is violation of due process when law not published and a person is
impleaded for violation of such law.
2. Presumption of Innocence
Equipoise Rule – evidence of both sides are equally balanced, in which case
the constitutional presumption of innocence should tilt the scales in favor of the
accused.
• Indispensable in any criminal prosecution where the stakes are the liberty
or even the life of the accused
• Assistance of counsel begins from the time a person is taken into custody
and placed under investigation for the commission of a crime.
▪ This is not subject to waiver.
(c) If the accused desires counsel, but cannot afford one, a counsel de
oficio must be appointed;
(d) If the accused desires to obtain his own counsel, the court must
give him a reasonable time to get one.
(1) To furnish the accused with a description of the charge against him as will
enable him to make his defenses;
• The description and not the designation of the offense is controlling (The
real nature of the crime charged is determined from the recital of facts in
the information. It is not determined based on the caption or preamble
thereof nor from the specification of the provision of law allegedly
violated.)
• If the information fails to allege the material elements of the offense, the
accused cannot be convicted thereof even if the prosecution is able to
present evidence during the trial with respect to such elements.
Void for Vagueness Rule – accused is denied the right to be informed of the
charge against him and to due process as well, where the statute itself is
couched in such indefinite language that it is not possible for men of ordinary
intelligence to determine therefrom what acts or omissions are punished and
hence, shall be avoided.
5. The Trial
(2) If he is detained, he can file a petition for the issuance of writ of habeas
corpus.
Speedy trial -
1. Free from vexatious, capricious and oppressive delays
2. To relieve the accused from needless anxieties before sentence is
pronounced upon him
• Public trial: The attendance at the trial is open to all irrespective of their
relationship to the accused. However, if the evidence to be adduced is
“offensive to decency or public morals”, the public may be excluded.
• The right of the accused to a public trial is not violated if the hearings are
conducted on Saturdays, either with the consent of the accused or if failed
to object thereto.
• General Rule: the accused may waive the right to be present at the trial
by not showing up. However, the court can still compel the attendance of
the accused if necessary for identification purposes.
• Trial in Absentia is mandatory upon the court whenever the accused has
been arraigned.
• The trial in absentia does not abrogate the provisions of the Rules of Court
regarding forfeiture of bail bond if the accused fails to appear at his trial.
• A court has the power to prohibit a person admitted to bail from leaving the
Philippines as this is a necessary consequence of the nature and function
of a bail bond
(2) To allow the judge the opportunity to observe the deportment of the
witness
7. Compulsory Process
• There are exceptional circumstances when the defendant may ask for
conditional examination, provided the expected testimony is material of
any witness under circumstances that would make him unavailable from
attending the trial.
8. Trial in Absentia
Trial in Absentia May Only Be Allowed If the Following Requisites Are Met:
G. HABEAS CORPUS
Section 15, Art. III. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be
suspended except in cases of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety
requires it.
• Habeas corpus lies only where the restraint of a person's liberty has been
judicially adjudged to be illegal or unlawful (In re: Sumulong)
Right was accorded a person was sentenced to a longer penalty than was
subsequently meted out to another person convicted of the same offense.
(Gumabon vs Director of Prisons)
Procedure
Need to comply with writ; disobedience thereof constitutes contempt
1. invasion or rebellion
Section 18, Art. VII. 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.
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.
The suspension of the privilege of the writ 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, any person thus arrested
or detained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall
be released.
Lansang doctrine (Lansang vs Garcia): SC has the power to inquire into the
factual basis of the suspension of the privilege of the writ. It is written in Article
VII, Sec. 18 of the Constitution.
H. WRIT OF AMPARO
The writ shall cover extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats
thereof.
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
SEC. 2. Who May File. The petition may be filed by the aggrieved party or by
any qualified person or entity in the following order:
The filing of a petition by the aggrieved party suspends the right of all other
authorized parties to file similar petitions. Likewise, the filing of the petition by an
authorized party on behalf of the aggrieved party suspends the right of all others,
observing the order established herein.
SEC. 3. Where to File. The petition may be filed on any day and at any time
with the Regional Trial Court of the place where the threat, act or omission was
committed or any of its elements occurred, or with the Sandiganbayan, the Court
of Appeals, the Supreme Court, or any justice of such courts. The writ shall be
enforceable anywhere in the Philippines.
When issued by a Regional Trial Court or any judge thereof, the writ shall be
returnable before such court or judge.
When issued by the Supreme Court or any of its justices, it may be returnable
before such Court or any justice thereof, or before the Sandiganbayan or the
Court of Appeals or any of their justices, or to any Regional Trial Court of the
place where the threat, act or omission was committed or any of its elements
occurred.
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
SEC. 4. No Docket Fees. The petitioner shall be exempted from the payment of
the docket and other lawful fees when filing the petition. The court, justice or
judge shall docket the petition and act upon it immediately.
SEC. 5. Contents of Petition. The petition shall be signed and verified and shall
allege the following:
The petition may include a general prayer for other just and equitable reliefs.
SEC. 6. Issuance of the Writ. Upon the filing of the petition, the court, justice or
judge shall immediately order the issuance of the writ if on its face it ought to
issue. The clerk of court shall issue the writ under the seal of the court; or in case
of urgent necessity, the justice or the judge may issue the writ under his or her
own hand, and may deputize any officer or person to serve it.
The writ shall also set the date and time for summary hearing of the petition
which shall not be later than seven (7) days from the date of its issuance.
SEC. 7. Penalty for Refusing to Issue or Serve the Writ. A clerk of court who
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
refuses to issue the writ after its allowance, or a deputized person who refuses to
serve the same, shall be punished by the court, justice or judge for contempt
without prejudice to other disciplinary actions.
SEC. 8. How the Writ is Served. The writ shall be served upon the respondent
by a judicial officer or by a person deputized by the court, justice or judge who
shall retain a copy on which to make a return of service. In case the writ cannot
be served personally on the respondent, the rules on substituted service shall
apply.
SEC. 9. Return; Contents. Within seventy-two (72) hours after service of the
writ, the respondent shall file a verified written return together with supporting
affidavits which shall, among other things, contain the following:
1. The lawful defenses to show that the respondent did not violate or
threaten with violation the right to life, liberty and security of the
aggrieved party, through any act or omission;
2. The steps or actions taken by the respondent to determine the fate
or whereabouts of the aggrieved party and the person or persons
responsible for the threat, act or omission;
3. All relevant information in the possession of the respondent
pertaining to the threat, act or omission against the aggrieved party;
and
4. If the respondent is a public official or employee, the return shall
further state the actions that have been or will still be taken:
The return shall also state other matters relevant to the investigation, its
resolution and the prosecution of the case.
SEC. 10. Defenses not Pleaded Deemed Waived. All defenses shall be raised
in the return, otherwise, they shall be deemed waived.
SEC. 11. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions. The following pleadings and
motions are prohibited:
1. Motion to dismiss;
2. Motion for extension of time to file return, opposition, affidavit,
position paper and other pleadings;
3. Dilatory motion for postponement;
4. Motion for a bill of particulars;
5. Counterclaim or cross-claim;
6. Third-party complaint;
7. Reply;
8. Motion to declare respondent in default;
9. Intervention;
10. Memorandum;
11. Motion for
reconsideration of interlocutory orders or interim relief orders; and
12. Petition for certiorari,
mandamus or prohibition against any interlocutory order.
SEC. 12. Effect of Failure to File Return. In case the respondent fails to file a
return, the court, justice or judge shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte.
SEC. 13. Summary Hearing. The hearing on the petition shall be summary.
However, the court, justice or judge may call for a preliminary conference to
simplify the issues and determine the possibility of obtaining stipulations and
admissions from the parties.
The hearing shall be from day to day until completed and given the same priority
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
SEC. 14. Interim Reliefs. Upon filing of the petition or at anytime before final
judgment, the court, justice or judge may grant any of the following reliefs:
(a) Temporary Protection Order. The court, justice or judge, upon motion
or motu proprio, may order that the petitioner or the aggrieved party and
any member of the immediate family be protected in a government agency
or by an accredited person or private institution capable of keeping and
securing their safety. If the petitioner is an organization, association or
institution referred to in Section 3(c) of this Rule, the protection may be
extended to the officers involved.
The Supreme Court shall accredit the persons and private institutions that
shall extend temporary protection to the petitioner or the aggrieved party
and any member of the immediate family, in accordance with guidelines
which it shall issue.
The accredited persons and private institutions shall comply with the rules
and conditions that may be imposed by the court, justice or judge.
(b) Inspection Order. The court, justice or judge, upon verified motion and
after due hearing, may order any person in possession or control of a
designated land or other property, to permit entry for the purpose of
inspecting, measuring, surveying, or photographing the property or any
relevant object or operation thereon.
The motion shall state in detail the place or places to be inspected. It shall
be supported by affidavits or testimonies of witnesses having personal
knowledge of the enforced disappearance or whereabouts of the
aggrieved party.
The movant must show that the inspection order is necessary to establish
the right of the aggrieved party alleged to be threatened or violated.
(c) Production Order. The court, justice or judge, upon verified motion and
after due hearing, may order any person in possession, custody or control
of any designated documents, papers, books, accounts, letters,
photographs, objects or tangible things, or objects in digitized or electronic
form, which constitute or contain evidence relevant to the petition or the
return, to produce and permit their inspection, copying or photographing
by or on behalf of the movant.
The court, justice or judge shall prescribe other conditions to protect the
constitutional rights of all the parties.
(d) Witness Protection Order. The court, justice or judge, upon motion or
motu proprio, may refer the witnesses to the Department of Justice for
admission to the Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Program,
pursuant to Republic Act No. 6981.
The court, justice or judge may also refer the witnesses to other
government agencies, or to accredited persons or private institutions
capable of keeping and securing their safety.
inspection order or production order under paragraphs (b) and (c) of the
preceding section.
A motion for inspection order under this section shall be supported by affidavits
or testimonies of witnesses having personal knowledge of the defenses of the
respondent.
SEC. 16. Contempt. The court, justice or judge may order the respondent who
refuses to make a return, or who makes a false return, or any person who
otherwise disobeys or resists a lawful process or order of the court to be
punished for contempt. The contemnor may be imprisoned or imposed a fine.
SEC. 17. Burden of Proof and Standard of Diligence Required. The parties
shall establish their claims by substantial evidence.
The respondent who is a private individual or entity must prove that ordinary
diligence as required by applicable laws, rules and regulations was observed in
the performance of duty.
The respondent public official or employee cannot invoke the presumption that
official duty has been regularly performed to evade responsibility or liability.
SEC. 18. Judgment. The court shall render judgment within ten (10) days from
the time the petition is submitted for decision. If the allegations in the petition are
proven by substantial evidence, the court shall grant the privilege of the writ and
such reliefs as may be proper and appropriate; otherwise, the privilege shall be
denied.
SEC. 19. Appeal. Any party may appeal from the final judgment or order to the
Supreme Court under Rule 45. The appeal may raise questions of fact or law or
both.
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
The period of appeal shall be five (5) working days from the date of notice of the
adverse judgment.
The appeal shall be given the same priority as in habeas corpus cases.
SEC. 20. Archiving and Revival of Cases. The court shall not dismiss the
petition, but shall archive it, if upon its determination it cannot proceed for a valid
cause such as the failure of petitioner or witnesses to appear due to threats on
their lives.
A periodic review of the archived cases shall be made by the amparo court that
shall, motu proprio or upon motion by any party, order their revival when ready
for further proceedings. The petition shall be dismissed with prejudice upon
failure to prosecute the case after the lapse of two (2) years from notice to the
petitioner of the order archiving the case.
The clerks of court shall submit to the Office of the Court Administrator a
consolidated list of archived cases under this Rule not later than the first week of
January of every year.
SEC. 21. Institution of Separate Actions. This Rule shall not preclude the filing
of separate criminal, civil or administrative actions.
SEC. 22. Effect of Filing of a Criminal Action. When a criminal action has
been commenced, no separate petition for the writ shall be filed. The reliefs
under the writ shall be available by motion in the criminal case.
The procedure under this Rule shall govern the disposition of the reliefs available
under the writ of amparo.
SEC. 23. Consolidation. When a criminal action is filed subsequent to the filing
of a petition for the writ, the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal action.
When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to a
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
petition for a writ of amparo, the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal
action.
After consolidation, the procedure under this Rule shall continue to apply to the
disposition of the reliefs in the petition.
SEC. 24. Substantive Rights. This Rule shall not diminish, increase or modify
substantive rights recognized and protected by the Constitution.
SEC. 25. Suppletory Application of the Rules of Court. The Rules of Court
shall apply suppletorily insofar as it is not inconsistent with this Rule.
SEC. 26. Applicability to Pending Cases. This Rule shall govern cases
involving extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats thereof
pending in the trial and appellate courts.
SEC. 27. Effectivity. This Rule shall take effect on October 24, 2007, following
its publication in three (3) newspapers of general circulation.
Section 16, Art. III. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition
of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.
1. Length of delay
2. Reason of delay
3. Assertion of the right or failure to assert it
4. Prejudice caused by delay
Based on:
1. Humanitarian reasons – it is intended to prevent the State, with all
its coercive powers, from extracting from the suspect testimony that
may convict him;
Applicable to:
Use and Fruit Immunity Statute – prohibits the use of the witness' compelled
testimony and its fruit in any manner in connection with the criminal prosecution
for an offense to which such compelled testimony relates.
• Only natural persons can invoke this right. Judicial persons are subject to
the visitorial powers of the state in order to determine compliance with the
conditions of the charter granted to them.
Scope:
• The right does not prohibit the examination of the body of the
accused or the use of findings with respect to his body as physical
evidence. Hence, the fingerprinting of an accused would not violate the
right against self-incrimination. However, obtaining a sample of the
handwriting of the accused would violate this right if he is charged for
falsification.
- Either:
a) Directly, or
b) By failure to invoke it PROVIDED the waiver is certain and
unequivocal and intelligently and willingly made.
Section 18 (1), Art. III. No person shall be detained solely by reason of his
political beliefs and aspirations.
Section 18 (2), Art. III. No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist
except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly
convicted.
(1) Slavery –civil relation in which one man has absolute power over the life,
fortune and liberty of another;
General Rule
No involuntary service in any form shall exist.
Exceptions
1. Punishment for a crime for which the party shall have been duly
convicted (Sec. 18, Art. III)
3. Naval enlistment – remain in service until the end of voyage so that the
crew would not desert the ship, making it difficult for the owners to recruit
new hands to continue the voyage (Robertson vs Baldwin)
US vs An Act providing for the method by which the people of the town
Pompeya may be called upon to render assistance for the protection of the
public and the preservation of peace and good order is
constitutional. It was enacted in the exercise of the police power of
the state and does not violate the constitutional prohibition on
involuntary servitude.
Pollock No indebtedness warrants a suspension of the right to be free from
vs compulsory service, and no state can make the quitting of work
Williams any component of a crime, or make criminal sanctions available for
holding unwilling persons to labor.
Standards Used
(1) The punishment must not be so severe as to be degrading to the dignity of
human beings.
(4) It must not be excessive, i.e. it must serve a penal purpose more
effectively than a less severe punishment would.
Excessive Fine
Note: Fr. Bernas says that the accused cannot be convicted of the crime to
which the punishment is attached if the court finds that the punishment is cruel,
degrading or inhuman.
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
Section 20, Art. III. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment
of a poll tax.
Debt – any civil obligation arising from a contract, expressed or implied, resulting
in any liability to pay in money.
• If an accused fails to pay the fine imposed upon him, this may result in his
subsidiary imprisonment because his liability is ex delicto and not ex
contractu.
POLL TAX
Poll tax – a specific sum levied upon every person belonging to a certain class
without regard to his property or occupation.
• A tax is not a debt since it is an obligation arising from law. Hence, its
non-payment maybe validly punished with imprisonment.
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
M. DOUBLE JEOPARDY
Section 21, Art. III. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment
for the same offense. If an act is punished by a law and an ordinance,
conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another
prosecution for the same act.
Double jeopardy – when a person was charged with an offense and the case
was terminated by acquittal or conviction or in any other manner without his
consent, he cannot again be charged with the same or identical offense.
(1) When a person is put twice in jeopardy of punishment for the same
offense (1st sentence of Section 21)
(2) When a law and an ordinance punish the same act (2nd sentence of
Sec. 21)
Same Offense
(b) If, upon pleading guilty, the accused presents evidence of complete self-
defense, and the court thereafter acquits him without entering a new plea
of not guilty for accused.
(c) If the information for an offense cognizable by the RTC is filed with the
MTC.
1) Acquittal
2) Conviction
3) Dismissal W/O the EXPRESS consent of the accused
4) Dismissal on the merits.
(d) If the dismissal violates the right of due process of the prosecution.
(a) Exact identity between the offenses charged in the first and second cases.
Same Act
• Double jeopardy will result if the act punishable under the law and the
ordinance are the same. For there to be double jeopardy, it is not
necessary that the offense be the same.
Supervening Facts
1) Under the Rules of Court, a conviction for an offense will not bar a
prosecution for an offense which necessarily includes the offense charged
in the former information where:
(b) The facts constituting the graver offense became known or were
discovered only after the filing of the former information.
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
(c) The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the
consent of the fiscal and the offended party.
2) Under (1)(b), if the facts could have been discovered by the prosecution
but were not discovered because of the prosecution’s incompetence, it
would not be considered a supervening event.
• In Almario v. CA, the Court held that the delays were not unreasonable;
hence, there was no denial of the right to speedy trial. Second, the
dismissal was with the consent of the accused. Hence, reinstatement did
not violate the right against double jeopardy.
Section 22, Art. III. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
(1) One which makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which
was innocent when done, criminal, and punishes such action.
(2) One which aggravates the crime or makes it greater than when it was
committed.
(3) One which changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than
that which the law annexed to the crime when it was committed.
(4) One which alters the legal rules of evidence and receives less testimony
than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense in order
to convict the accused.
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
(5) One which assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only BUT, in
effect, imposes a penalty or deprivation of a right, which, when done, was
lawful.
(6) One which deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful protection
to which he has become entitled such as the protection of a former
conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of amnesty. (In Re Kay Villegas
Kami)
• In Lacson v. Exec. Sec., the Court held that in general, ex post facto law
prohibits retrospectivity of penal laws. RA No. 8249 is not a penal law....
The contention that the new law diluted their right to a two-tiered appeal is
incorrect because “the right to appeal is not a natural right but statutory in
nature that can be regulated by law. RA 8249 pertains only to matters of
procedure, and being merely an amendatory statute it does not partake
the nature of ex post facto law.”
• In Calder v. Bull, the Court said that when the law alters the legal rules of
evidence or mode of trial, it is an ex post facto law. Exception: (Beazell v.
Ohio) unless the changes operate only in limited and unsubstantial
manner to the disadvantage of the accused.
BILL OF ATTAINDER
Bill of attainder – is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without judicial trial.
If the punishment be less than death, the act is termed a bill of pains and
penalties.” (Cummings v. Missouri)
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
O. PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION
1. letters
2. messages
3. telephone calls
4. telegrams, and
5. the likes
Public Order and Safety – the security of human lives, liberty, and property
against the activities of invaders, insurrectionists, and rebels.
P. RIGHT TO PRIVACY
“In no uncertain terms, we also underscores that the right to privacy does not bar
all incursions into individual privacy. The right is not intended to stifle scientific
and technological advancements that enhance public service and the common
good. It merely requires that the law be narrowly focused.” Intrusions into the
right must be accompanied by proper safeguards and well-defined standards to
prevent unconstitutional invasions.
• In Roe v. Wade, the Court held that abortions are permissible for any
reason a woman chooses, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes
‘viable,’ that is, potentially able to live outside the mother's womb.
(a) The Constitution does not explicitly mention any right to privacy but
the Court has recognized that such right does exist in the
Constitution. The Court deemed abortion a fundamental right under
the United States Constitution, thereby subjecting all laws
attempting to restrict it to the standard of strict scrutiny. Where
certain “fundamental rights” are involved, the Court has held that
regulation limiting these rights may be justified only by a
“compelling state interest.”
(b) The right to privacy is broad enough to encompass a woman’s
decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. But a woman’s
right to terminate her pregnancy at whatever time, in whatever way
and for whatever reason she alone chooses is NOT absolute. While
recognizing the right to privacy, the Court also acknowledges that
some state regulation in areas protected by a right is appropriate. A
state may properly assert important interests in safeguarding
health, in maintaining medical standards, and in protecting potential
life.
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
• It is governed by The Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data (A.M. No. 08-1-16-
SC – full text), which was approved by the Supreme Court on 22 January
2008. That Rule shall not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights.
Constitutional Basis
Section 5(5), Art. VIII. Promulgate rules concerning the protection and
enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in
all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal
assistance to the under-privileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified
and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be
uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase,
or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and
quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the
Supreme Court.
• The Rule takes effect on 2 February 2008, following its publication in three
(3) newspapers of general circulation.
Who may file a petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas data?
(1) Regional Trial Court where the petitioner or respondent resides, or that
which has jurisdiction over the place where the data or information is
gathered, collected or stored, at the option of the petitioner.
(4) Sandiganbayan, when the action concerns public data files of government
offices.
(b) The manner the right to privacy is violated or threatened and how it affects
the right to life, liberty or security of the aggrieved party;
(c) The actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to secure the data or
information;
(d) The location of the files, registers or databases, the government office,
and the person in charge, in possession or in control of the data or
information, if known;
(e) The reliefs prayed for, which may include the updating, rectification,
suppression or destruction of the database or information or files kept by
the respondent. In case of threats, the relief may include a prayer for an
order enjoining the act complained of; and
Upon the filing of the petition, the court, justice or judge shall immediately order
the issuance of the writ if on its face it ought to issue. The clerk of court shall
issue the writ under the seal of the court and cause it to be served within three
(3) days from its issuance; or, in case of urgent necessity, the justice or judge
may issue the writ under his or her own hand, and may deputize any officer or
person to serve it. The writ shall also set the date and time for summary hearing
of the petition which shall not be later than ten (10) work days from the date of its
issuance.
• A clerk of court who refuses to issue the writ after its allowance, or a
deputized person who refuses to serve the same, shall be punished by the
court, justice or judge for contempt without prejudice to other disciplinary
actions.
• The writ shall be served upon the respondent by the officer or person
deputized by the court, justice or judge who shall retain a copy on which to
make a return of service. In case the writ cannot be served personally on
the respondent, the rules on substituted service shall apply.
• The respondent shall file a verified written return together with supporting
affidavits within five (5) work days from service of the writ, which period
may be reasonably extended by the Court for justifiable reasons.
Contents of Return
(a) The lawful defenses such as national security, state secrets, privileged
communication, confidentiality of the source of information of media and
others;
(i) a disclosure of the data or information about the petitioner, the nature of such
data or information, and the purpose for its collection;
(ii) the steps or actions taken by the respondent to ensure the security and
confidentiality of the data or information; and
(iii) the currency and accuracy of the data or information held; and
• When the respondent fails to file a return, the court, justice or judge shall
proceed to hear the petition ex parte, granting the petitioner such relief as
the petition may warrant unless the court in its discretion requires the
petitioner to submit evidence.
• The hearing on the petition shall be summary. However, the court, justice
or judge may call for a preliminary conference to simplify the issues and
determine the possibility of obtaining stipulations and admissions from the
parties.
• Upon its finality, the judgment shall be enforced by the sheriff or any lawful
officer as may be designated by the court, justice or judge within five (5)
work days.
• When a criminal action has been commenced, no separate petition for the
writ shall be filed, but the reliefs under the writ shall be available by motion
in the criminal case, and the procedure under this Rule shall govern the
disposition of the reliefs available under the writ of habeas data.
• When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to
a petition for a writ of habeas data, the petition shall be consolidated with
the criminal action. After consolidation, the procedure under this Rule shall
continue to govern the disposition of the reliefs in the petition.
• The introduction of the Writ of Habeas Data into Philippine Justice System
complemented several writs used in the Philippines. These writs which
protect the rights of the individual against the state are as follows:
Section 7, Art. III. The right of the people to information on matters of public
concern shall be recognized. Access to official records, and to documents
and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as
to government research data used as basis for policy development, shall
be afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be provided by
law.
• the citizenry has a right to know what is going on in the country and in his
government so he can express his views thereon knowledgeably and
intelligently.
Rights Guaranteed
• These are political rights that are available to citizens only (Bernas,
Philippine Constitution, p. 85).
Valmonte v The people have a right to access official records but they can’t
Belmonte compel custodians of official records to prepare lists, abstracts,
1989 summaries and the like, such not being based on a
demandable legal right.
S. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
Freedom of Speech – “at once the instrument and the guaranty and the bright
consummate flower of all liberty.” (Wendell Philips)
Scope
• Freedom of Expression is available only insofar as it is exercised for the
discussion of matters affecting the public interest. Purely private interest
matters do not come within the guaranty (invasion of privacy is not
sanctioned by the Constitution).
• covers ideas that are acceptable to the majority and the unorthodox view.
(One of the functions of this freedom is “to invite dispute” – US Supreme
Court; “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death
your right to say it.” - Voltaire)
• The freedom to speak includes the right to silent. (This freedom was
meant not only to protect the minority who want to talk but also to benefit
the majority who refuse to listen. - Socrates)
Importance
The ultimate good desired is better reached by a free trade in ideas – that the
best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the
competition of the market; and that truth is the only ground upon which their
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
Modes of Expression
Section 4, Art. III. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech,
of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.
• Censor, therefore, assumes the role of arbiter for the people, usually
applying his own subjective standards in determining the good and the
not. Such is anathema in a free society.
• In New York Times v. United States, the Court held that prohibition of
“prior restraint” is not absolute, although any system of prior restraint
comes to court bearing a heavy presumption against its constitutionality.
• In SWS v. Comelec, Sec. 1 of RA No. 9006, the Fair Election Act says
that surveys affecting national candidates shall not be published fifteen
(15) days before an election and surveys affecting local candidates shall
not be published seven days before an election. The provision is
challenged as violative of freedom of expression. The Court held that as
prior restraint, the rule is presumed to be invalid. The power of the
Comelec over media franchises is limited to ensuring “equal opportunity,
time, space and the right to reply” as well as to reasonable rates of
charges for the use of media facilities for “public information and forums
among candidates.” Here the prohibition of speech is direct, absolute and
substantial. Nor does the rule pass the O'Brien test for content related
regulation because (1) it suppresses one type of expression while
allowing other types such as editorials, etc. and (2) the restriction is
greater than what is needed to protect government interest because the
interest can be protected by narrower restriction such as subsequent
punishment.
• In Re: Request for Radio-TV Coverage of the Estrada Trial, the Court
held that the propriety of the Estrada trial involves the weighing out of the
constitutional guarantees of freedom of the press and the right to public
information, on the one hand, and the fundamental rights of the accused,
on the other hand, along with the constitutional power of a court to control
its proceedings in ensuring a fair and impartial trial... With the possibility
of losing not only the precious liberty but also the very life of an accused, it
behooves all to make absolutely certain that an accused receives a verdict
solely on the basis of a just and dispassionate judgment...”
compensation.
Adiong vs COMELEC's resolution prohibiting the posting of decals, and
COMELEC stickers in mobile units like cars and other moving vehicles
was declared unconstitutional for infringmenet of freedom of
expression.
Besides, the constitutional objective of giving the rich and
poor candidates' equal opportunity to inform the electorate is
not violated by the posting of decals and stickers on cars and
other vehicles.
“Overbreadth doctrine” = prohibits the government from
achieving its purpose by means that weep unnecessarily
broadly, reaching constitutionally protected as well as
unprotected activity; the government has gone too far; its
legitimate interest can be satisfied without reaching so
broadly into the area of protected freedom.
Gonzales vs petitioner questioned the classification of the movie as “for
katigbak adults only.” the petition was dismissed because the Board
did not commit grave abuse of discretion.
Section 18(1), Art. III. No person shall be detained solely by reason of his
political beliefs and aspirations.
• Without this 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.
General Rule: a student shall not be expelled or suspended solely on the basis of
articles he has written
Exception: when the article materially disrupts class work or involves substantial
disorder or invasion of rights of others, the school has the right to discipline its
students (in such a case, it may expel or suspend the student)
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
1. Clear and Present Danger Rule – when words are used in such
circumstance and of such nature as to create a clear and present danger that will
bring about the substantive evil that the State has a right to prevent. (As
formulated by Justice Holmes in Schenck v. United States)
Clear – causal connection with the danger of the substantive evil arising from the
utterance
Present – time element; imminent and immediate danger (the danger must not
only be probable but also inevitable). (Gonzales v. Comelec)
When faced with border line situations where freedom (of expression) to speak &
freedom to know (to information) are invoked against (vs.) maintaining free and
clean elections- the police, local officials and COMELEC should lean in favor of
freedom.
For in the ultimate analysis, the freedom of the citizen and the State’s power to
regulate are NOT ANTAGONISTIC.
There can be no free and honest elections if in the efforts to maintain them, the
freedom to speak and the right to know are unduly curtailed.
Libel = falsity + actual malice (uttered in full knowledge of its falsity or with
reckless disregard)
• In New York Times v. Sullivan, The New York Times is protected under
the freedom of speech in publishing paid advertisement, no matter if it
contained erroneous claims and facts. Said publication was not
“commercial” in the sense that it communicated information, expressed
opinion, recited grievances, protested claimed abuses, and sought a
financial support on behalf of a movement. That the Times was paid for
publishing the advertisement is as immaterial as the fact that newspapers
and books are sold.
Newspapers do not forfeit the protection they enjoy under speech freedom just
because they publish paid advertisements. Otherwise, newspapers will be
discouraged from carrying “editorial advertisements” and so might shut off an
important outlet for the promulgation of information and ideas by persons who do
not themselves have access to publishing facilities.
On errors: “Some degree of abuse is inseparable from the proper use of every
thing; and in no instance is this truer than that of the press.” Erroneous statement
is inevitable in free debate.
Moreover, criticism of official conduct does not lose its constitutional protection
merely because it is effective criticism and hence diminishes their official
reputations. Presence of clear and present danger of substantive evil must be
proved. Actual Malice needs to be proved if a public official wants to recover
damages for a defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct. “Even a false
statement may be deemed to make a valuable contribution to public debate since
it brings about the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by
its collision with error.”
Held: MTRCB do not have the power to exercise prior restraint. The power of the
MTRCB is limited to the classification of films.
• The right to assemble is not subject to prior restraint and may not be
conditioned upon the prior issuance of a permit or authorization from the
government authorities. However, the right must be exercised in such a
way that it will not prejudice the public welfare. (De la Cruz v. Court of
Appeals)
• In JBL Reyes v. Bagatsing, retired J. JBL Reyes sought a permit from the
City of Manila to hold a march and rally on Oct 26, 1983 2-5pm from
Luneta to gates of US Embassy, and was denied by the Mayor due to
Vienna Convention Ordinance and fear of subversives may infiltrate the
ranks of the demonstrators.
Held: no justifiable ground to deny permit because Bill of Rights will prevail over
Vienna Ordinance should conflict exist (none proven because 500m not
measured from gate to US Embassy proper) and fear of serious injury cannot
alone justify suppression of free speech and assembly- only clear and present
danger of substantive evil.
Notes: the Court is called upon to protect the exercise of the cognate rights
to free speech and peaceful assembly…
• ideally, the test should be the purpose for which the assembly is held,
regardless of the auspices under which it is organized
• In People v. Bustos, Bustos and several people sent complaint letters via
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
Ratio: the guarantees of free speech and a free press include the right to criticize
judicial conduct. And these people did so in proper channels without undue
publicity, believing they were right.
Right of Association
Section 8, Art. III. The right of the people, including those employed in the
public and private sectors, to form unions, associations, or societies for
purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged.
T. OBSCENITY CASES
There is no effective way to determine the identity or the age of a user who is
accessing material through email, mail exploders, newsgroups or chat rooms.
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
The effect of CDA is such that when a site is blocked for being “indecent” or
“patently offensive” the remaining content even if not indecent cannot be viewed
anymore. Imposition of requirements (adult identification number or credit card)
would bar adults who do not have a credit card and lack the resources to obtain
one from accessing any blocked material. It burdens communication among
adults.
The CDA is punitive, a criminal statute. The CDA is a content- based blanket
restriction on speech, and as such, cannot be properly analyzed as a form of
time, place and manner regulation.
• The CDA was replaced with Child Online Protection Act, 1. The scope had
been limited to material displayed only on the world wide web. Chat and
email were not included. The classification of content was limited as
“harmful to minors” using the Miller V California Test. So, it was upheld by
the Supreme Court.
U. FREEDOM OF RELIGION
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
Religion defined
1. Non-establishment Clause
• other provisions which support this: Sec 2(5), Art. IX-C [a religious sect or
denomination cannot be registered as a political party], Sec 5(2), Art. VI
[no sectoral representative from the religious sector], and Sec 29 (2), Art.
VI [prohibition against the use of public money or property for the benefit
of any religion, or of any priest, minister or ecclsiastic], Sec. 28 (3), Art. VI
[exemption from taxation of properties actually, directly and exclusively
used for religious purposes, Sec 4(2), Art XIV [citizenship requirement of
ownership of educational institutions except those owned by religious
groups], Sec 29(2), Art VI [appropriation allowed where the minister is
employed in the armed forces, penal institution or government-owned
orphanage or leprosarium]
(b) cannot pass laws which aid one religion, all religions or prefer one over
another;
(c) cannot influence a person to go to or remain away from church against his
will; nor
Rationale:
(1) Voluntarism – the growth of a religious sect as a social force must come
from the voluntary support of its members because of the belief that both
spiritual and secular society will benefit if religions are allowed to compete
on their own intrinsic merit without benefit of official patronage.
1. Freedom to Believe
(a) absolute
(b) includes not to believe
(c) “everyone has a right to his beliefs and he may not be called to
account because he cannot prove what he believes”
CODES AND NOTES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
by PORFERIO JR. and MELFA SALIDAGA
(a) happens when the individual externalizes his beliefs in acts or omissions
(b) subject to regulation; can be enjoyed only with proper regard to rights of
others
Religious Tests
V. RIGHT TO TRAVEL
Section 6, Art. III. The liberty of abode and of 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
• Liberty of Abode – “upon lawful order of the court”
• Right to Travel – “national security, public safety or public health as may
be provided by law”