Sie sind auf Seite 1von 79

ARTICLE III

BILL OF RIGHTS

BILL OF RIGHTS
The declaration and enumeration of
the persons rights and privileges
designed to protect against
violations by the government or by
an individual &
to limit the powers of the State.

SECTION 1. No person shall be


deprived of life, liberty, or property
without due process of law,
nor shall any person be denied
the equal protection of the laws.

2 ASPECTS OF DUE PROCESS OF


LAW
1. PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS
- method or manner by which the law
is enforced
2. SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS
- the law itself is fair, reasonable and
just

EQUAL PROTECTION
OF THE LAW
all persons under like
circumstances and conditions both
in the privileges conferred and
liabilities imposed should be treated
alike

ICHONG vs. HERNANDEZ


FACTS: The legislature passed a law R.A. No.
1180 entitled An Act to Regulate the Retail
Business nationalizing the retail trade
business by prohibiting aliens and foreign
corporations from engaging in the retail trade.
Petitioner Ichong, on behalf of other alien
residents, brought an action for judicial
declaration that R.A. No. 11 80 is
unconstitutional for being violative of the equal
protection clause and depriving them of their
liberty and property without due process of
law.
ISSUES: Whether or not R.A. No. 1180 violates
the due process of law and equal protection
clause

HELD: There is no violation of due process of law.


R.A. No. 1180 was enacted to remedy a real
actual threat and danger to the national
economy posed by alien dominance and control
of the retail business the law is reasonable.
R.A. No. 1180 does not violate the equal
protection clause as there exist sufficient
grounds for the distinction between alien and
citizen in the exercise of the occupation the
alien resident owes allegiance to the country of
his birth. His stay here is for personal
convenience. His gains and profits are not
invested in industries that would help the
countrys economy and increase national wealth.

DECS vs. SAN DIEGO


FACTS: Mr. San Diego took the NMAT (National Medical
Admission Test) three times and flunked it three times
also. When he applied to take it again, the DECS
rejected his application on the basis of the MECS rule.
ISSUE: Whether or not MECS rule on the 3 flunk rule
violates the equal protection clause.
HELD: No. A law does not have to operate with equal
force on all persons or things. In the present case,
there exists a substantial distinction between medical
students and other students who are not subjected to
the 3 flunk rule. The medical profession directly
affects the lives of the people. An accountant does
not hold the same delicate responsibility.

SECTION 2.
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.

probable cause
- such facts and circumstances
sufficient to induce a cautious man to
believe that a crime
might have been committed.

SEARCH WARRANT
- an order in writing issued by the
court commanding a peace officer to
search for certain personal property.

WARRANT OF ARREST
- an order in writing issued by the
court commanding a peace officer to
arrest a person.

INSTANCES WHEN SEARCH MAY BE


MADE WITHOUT A WARRANT
1.
2.
3.

4.
5.

6.

There is a consent or waiver


Search is incidental to a lawful arrest
When forfeited goods are being
transported by powerful ship or other
automobiles
Plain View Doctrine
Inspection is in the exercise of Police
Power
Searches made at the border or at the

WHEN ARREST MAY BE MADE


WITHOUT WARRANT
1.

When, in the presence of the arresting


officer, the person to be arrested has
committed, is actually committing or is
attempting to commit an offense.

2.

When an offense has in fact just been


committed and the arresting officer has
personal knowledge of the facts.

3.

When the person to be arrested is an

PADILLA vs. COURT OF APPEALS


FACTS: One night, in Angeles City, Manarang and his
compadre heard a screeching sound produced by
the sudden and hard breaking of a vehicle running
very fast. Maranang went to the location of the
accident and found out that the vehicle had hit
somebody. He reported the incident to the police
who chased the vehicle which was cut and forced to
stop in the Abacan bridge. The driver rolled down
the window and put his head out while raising both
hands. Because he was wearing a short leather
jacket, a gun tucked on his waist was revealed. He
was arrested and firearms were confiscated.

ISSUES: 1) Whether or not his warrantless arrest is


legal.
HELD: 1) Yes. The warrantless arrest is legal. Padilla
was arrested after he has committed an offense
hit and run in the presence of the arresting
person. Presence does not only require that the
arresting person sees the offense but also when he
hears the disturbance and proceed at once to the
scene.
In fact, caught in the act with possession of
unlicensed firearm and ammunition is another
offense which Padilla is actually committing when
he was arrested.

ISSUES: 2) Whether or not the warrantless seizure of


firearms is legal.
HELD: Yes. The seizure Padillas firearms falls under the
following instances for a warrantless seizure:
*Plain View Doctrine the revolver and magazine were
tucked in Padillas waist and pocket when he raised his
hands after alighting from pajero.
*Search incidental to a lawful arrest searches were
made during the commission of two offenses ( hit &
run and illegal possession of firearms)

SECTION 3.
(1) The privacy of communication and
correspondence shall be inviolable
except upon lawful order of the court,
or when public safety or order requires
otherwise as prescribed by law.
(2)
Any evidence obtained in
violation of this or the preceding
section shall be inadmissible for any
purpose in any proceeding.

Gaanan vs. IAC


FACTS:
During the telephone conversation between Atty.
Pintor and Atty. Laconico regarding the settlement of
their case, Gaanan secretly listen to it through a
telephone extension as per instruction of Atty.
Laconico. Gaanan heard that Atty. Pintor demanded
P8,000 for the withdrawal of the case for direct
assault. For this ground, Atty. Pintor was charged with
the crime of robbery/extortion using the testimony of
Gaanan on the conversation as evidence.
Atty. Pintor argues that the telephone conversation
cannot be used as evidence for being violative of the
Anti-Wiretapping Act (which prohibits a person from
tapping any wire or cable by using other device to
secretly overhear a communication.

ISSUE:
Whether or not listening to the private
conversation on an extension line is a violation of
the Anti-Wire Tapping Act.
HELD:
No. The law refers to a tap of a
wire or use of a device for the purpose of secretly
overhearing, intercepting, recording the
communication. There must be physical
interruption. Telephone extension was not
installed for that purpose. It just happened to be
there foe ordinary office use.

SECTION 4. 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.
(VIDEO ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION)

ELEMENTS:
1.

2.

Freedom from Previous


Restraint
Freedom from Subsequent
Punishment

EXCEPTION:
CLEAR & PRESENT DANGER RULE
- abridgment of the liberty can
be justified only where there exists
substantial danger that the speech
will likely lead to an evil which the
government has the right to
prevent.

Malabanan vs. Ramento


FACTS:
By virtue of the permit granted by Gregorio
Araneta University Foundation, officers of the
Student Council held a general assembly at the
basketball court of the school. They manifested their
opposition to the proposed merger of the Institute of
Animal Science with the Institute of Agriculture. They
marched toward the area which is outside the
coverage of the permit. As a result, classes were
disturbed, work of the non-academic personnel were
stopped because of the noise created. The school
imposed the penalty of 1 year suspension for holding
an illegal assembly.
ISSUE:
Whether or not such act of the school is a
violation of freedom of speech and right to assemble.

HELD:
Yes. Student leaders would be
ineffective if they speak in the guarded language.
Audience may give the speakers the benefit of
their applause, but with the activity taking place
in the school premises during daytime, no clear
and present danger of public is discernible.

Ayer Production vs. Capulong


FACTS: Ayer Productions, a movie production company,
proposed a motion picture entitled Four Day Revolution
(documentary film) which is a reenactment of the events
that made possible the EDSA Revolution where Juan
Ponce Enrile played a major role. Pending the shooting,
Enrile filed a complaint with TRO seeking to stop Ayer
Production from producing the movie for being violative
of his right of privacy. The court issued the TRO.
On the other hand, Ayer Production claim that the
filming of the motion picture is just an exercise of their
freedom of speech and expression.
ISSUES: 1.) whether or not Enriles right of privacy is
violated
2.) whether or not Ayer Productions freedom of
speech and expression is violated

HELD: 1.) No. Right of privacy cannot be invoked to


resist publication of matters of public interest. Such
right is the right to free from the wrongful publicizing
of the private matters and affairs of an individual
which are outside the parameters of legitimate
public concern. The film relates to a highly critical
stage in the history of this country and as such ,
must be regarded as having passed into the public
domain and as an appropriate subject for speech
and expression and coverage by any form of mass
media. The film is not all about Enrile.
2.) Yes. The issuance of TRO by the court is a prior
restraint from filming and producing the entire
motion picture. No one knew yet what the completed
film would look like , therefore, no clear and present
danger is present.

People vs. Kottinger


FACTS: Camera Supply Co., managed by Kottinger, was
raided . The authorities confiscated the post cards
(portraying the inhabitants of the country in native
dress as they appear and can be seen in the regions in
which they live) for being obscene and indecent
publications.
ISSUE: whether or not such postcards are obscene or
indecent
HELD: No. Obscene ordinarily means something which is
offensive to chastity; something that is foul, offensive
to pure minded persons. The photos in question
merely depict persons as they actually live, without
attempted presentation of persons in unusual dress.
The moral sense of the people in the Philippines would
not be shocked by photographs of this type.

SECTION 5. 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 for the exercise of
civil or political rights.
(VIDEO OM RELIGIOUS FREEDOM)

RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
- right to worship and to entertain
such religious views without dictation
or interference by any person
2 ASPECTS OF RELIGIOUS
PROFESSION & WORSHIP
1. Freedom to believe (absolute)
2. Freedom to act in accordance with
such belief (limited)

American Bible Society vs. City of Manila


FACTS: ABS, a missionary corporation, has been selling
bibles and other religious materials until the City of
manila informed them that it was conducting the
business of general merchandise without mayors
permit and municipal license, hence, a violation of an
ordinance. To avoid the closing of its business, ABS
paid under protest the said permit and license fee
arguing that it is not engaged in the business of
general merchandise but is just exercising its right to
religion and it never made any profit from the sale of
its bibles.
ISSUE : whether or not right to religion of ABS is violated
when City of Manila required it to pay license fees .

HELD: Yes. ABS does not engaged in the business


of selling merchandise for profit. Imposition of
license fee would impair its free exercise of
religious profession and worship, as well as, its
right to disseminate religious beliefs.

SECTION 6.
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.

Manotoc, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals


FACTS:
Manotoc, Jr. and other stockholders of
Manotoc Securities, Inc. filed a petition with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) a
petition for the appointment of a management
committee. Because of the fake document
submitted by Manotoc, Jr. to SEC, a criminal case
for estafa was filed. Pending disposition, SEC
requested the Bureau of Immigration to issue a
Hold Departure Order (HDO) against him.
Manotoc, Jr. filed before the court a Motion for
permission to leave the country stating his ground
his desire to go to the U.S. relative to his business
transactions invoking his right to travel.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Manotoc, Jr., facing a
criminal charges has an absolute right to travel.

HELD:
No. Under Section 6 of Article III,
right to travel may be impaired upon lawful order
of the court. If accused would be allowed to leave
the Philippines without sufficient reasons, he may
be placed beyond the reach of the courts.

SECTION 7.
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.

SECTION 8.
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.

SECTION 9.
Private property
shall not be taken for public use
without just compensation.

3 INHERENT/ESSENTIAL
POWERS OF THE GOVT.
1. POLICE POWER
- power to regulate the use of liberty & property for
the promotion of public health, public morals, public
safety, and the general welfare and convenience of the
people.
2. EMINENT DOMAIN
- power to take private property
for public use
upon payment of just compensation
3. TAXATION
- power to impose charge on persons/properties
for the support of the government

SIMILARITIES of the STATES INHERENT POWERS

1. They all rest upon necessity because


there can be no effective government
without them.
2. They are inherent in sovereignty, hence,
they can be exercised even without being
expressly granted in the Constitution.
3. They are ways by which the State
interferes with private rights and
property.

DISTINCTIONS AMONG THE THREE POWERS


As to authority which exercises the power
POLICE POWER is exercised only by the government.
EMINENT DOMAIN may be granted to public service
companies.
TAXN POWER is exercised only by the government.
As to purpose
POLICE POWER, property is taken or destroyed for the
purpose of promoting general welfare.
EMINENT DOMAIN, property is taken for public use.
TAXN POWER, property is taken for the support of the govt.

DISTINCTIONS AMONG THE THREE POWERS


As to effect
POLICE POWER, there is a restraint in the injurious use
property
EMINENT DOMAIN, there is transfer of the right to property
TAXN POWER, the money contributed becomes part of
public funds
As to persons affected
POLICE POWER, operates upon a community
EMINENT DOMAIN, operates on an individual as the owner
of a particular property
TAXN POWER, operates upon a community or a class of
individuals

DECS vs. SAN DIEGO


FACTS: Mr. San Diego took the NMAT (National Medical
Admission Test) three times and flunked it three times
also. When he applied to take it again, the DECS
rejected his application on the basis of the DECS rule.
ISSUE: Whether or not DECS rule on the 3 flunk rule is
within the police power of the state.
HELD: Yes. The subject of the challenged regulation is
certainty within the ambit of the police power. It is the
right and responsibility of the State to insure that the
medical profession is not infiltrated by incompetents
to whom patients may entrust their lives and health.
While every person is entitled to aspire to be a
doctor, he does not have a constitutional right to be a
doctor. This is true in any other calling in which the
public interest is involved.

City Government of Quezon City vs. Ericta


FACTS: Quezon City government passed an Ordinance which
provides that at least 60% of the total area of the memorial
park cemetery shall be set aside for charity burial of
deceased persons who are paupers. Himlayang Pilipino
reacted, seeking to annul the ordinance because such is a
taking of property as it restricts the use of the property and
deprives the owner of all beneficial use of its property.
Quezon City government argues that the taking of the
Himlayang Pilipino property is an exercise of police power
and that the land is taken for a public use burial ground of
paupers.
ISSUE: Is the ordinance an exercise of police power or eminent
domain.

HELD: Eminent domain. The ordinance is actually a


taking without compensation of a certain area
from a private cemetery to benefit paupers.
Instead of building or maintaining a public
cemetery for this purpose, the city passes the
burden to private cemeteries.

SECTION 10. No law impairing


the obligation of contracts shall
be passed.

Obligation of a Contract
is the law which binds the parties to
perform their agreement according to
its terms provided it is not contrary to
law, morals, good customs, public
order or public policy.
Purpose of non-impairment
is to protect the creditors, to assure
fulfillment of lawful promises.
Business problems would arise if
contracts are not stable and binding.

CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
OF THE ACCUSED IN
CRIMINAL CASES
Article III, Section 11 to 22

SECTION 11. Free access to the courts


and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate
legal assistance shall not be denied to
any person by reason of poverty.

Reasons for constitutional safeguards:


1. A criminal case, an unequal
contest.
Every criminal case is a contest
between an individual and the
government, thus, an unequal contest
because the parties are of unequal
strength. To remedy the imbalance,
the Constitution gives the accused
several rights.

Reasons for constitutional safeguards:


2. Criminal accusation, a very
serious matter.
A man, accused of having committed
a crime, may lose his job or ruin his
life, and therefore, he needs all
possible opportunities to establish his
innocence.

Reasons for constitutional safeguards:


3. Protection of innocent, the
underlying principle
The purpose is to assure that truth
will be discovered and that justice will
be done. Under the Constitution, the
acquittal of the innocent is given
preference than conviction of the
criminal.

SECTION 12. (1) Any person under


investigation for the commission
of an offense shall have the right to
be informed of his right to remain
silent and to have competent and
independent counsel preferably of
his own choice. If the person
cannot afford the services of
counsel, he must be provided with
one. These rights cannot be
waived except in writing and in
the presence of counsel.

(2) No torture, force, violence,


threat, intimidation, or any other
means which vitiate the free will shall
be used against him. Secret detention
places, solitary, incommunicado, or
other similar forms of detention are
prohibited.
(3) Any confession or admission
obtained in violation of this or Section
17 hereof shall be inadmissible in
evidence against him.

SECTION 13. 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.

Meaning of BAIL: security (cash, property,


recognizance) required by a court & given for
the temporary release of a person under the
custody of the law conditioned upon his
appearance before any court.
Exception:
those charged with offenses
punishable by reclusion perpetua
(imprisonment for 20 years or more) when
evidence of guilt is strong (conduct a hearing).
NOTE: After the finality of judgment, no bail
shall be allowed.

SECTION 14. (1) No person shall be held


to answer for a criminal offense without
due process of law.
(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the
accused shall be presumed innocent until
the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy
the right to be heard by himself and
counsel, to be informed of the nature and
cause of the accusation against him , to
have a speedy, impartial, and public trial,
to meet the witnesses face to face , and
to have compulsory process to secure
the attendance of witnesses and the
production of evidence in his behalf.

However, after arraignment, trial may


proceed notwithstanding the
absence of the accused provided that
he has been duly notified and his
failure to appear is unjustifiable.

Rights of accused during trial


1. To be presumed innocent

unless proven guilty beyond


reasonable doubt ( amount of
evidence required to convict a person)
burden of proof is upon the
prosecution
it is better to acquit a person upon the
ground of reasonable doubt even
though he may in reality be guilty
than to inflict imprisonment on one
who may be innocent.

2.To be heard by himself and counsel


from the arraignment to the promulgation
of judgment.
ARRAIGNMENT - copy of the
complaint is
being read in the language
or dialect known to him, asking him
whether he
pleads guilty or not guilty.
- it is at this stage that the accused for the
first time is granted the opportunity to
know the precise charge that confronts him.
EXCEPTION: TRIAL IN ABSENTIA

3. To be informed of the nature and


cause of the accusation against him
so as to enable him to prepare his
defense.

4. To have a speedy, impartial and public


trial.
Speedy trial is a trial that can be has as
soon as possible, after a person is indicted
and within such time as the prosecution
within reasonable diligence could prepare
for it.
Impartial trial implies an absence of
bias
in the trial of cases.
Public trial - should permit anyone who
wishes to attend hearings except in certain
cases.

5. To meet the witnesses face to face

to cross examine the witnesses


and to test their recollection and
veracity
to give the judge an opportunity to
see the demeanor and appearance
of witnesses while testfying

6. Compulsory production of witnesses


and evidence

SUBPOENA - an order that may


be issued by the court to compel the
attendance of witnesses in order to
testify in behalf of the accused.

SECTION 15. 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.

Meaning of WRIT OF HABEAS


CORPUS
a court order directing a person
detaining another, commanding him to
produce the body of the prisoner and
show sufficient cause for holding in
custody the person detained.
Purpose:
to inquire the manner of restraint or
detention and to relieve the person if
such restraint is illegal.

Procedure:
1.

2.
3.
4.

5.

Prisoner files a petition to the proper


court.
Court issues the writ.
Writ is sent to the custodian.
Custodian produces the prisoner in
court explaining the cause of detention.
Judge decides whether detention is
legal or not.

SECTION 16. All persons shall


have the right to a speedy
disposition of their cases before
all judicial, quasi-judicial, or
administrative bodies.

SECTION 17. No person shall


be compelled to be a witness
against himself.

Section 17 of Article III is known as the


RIGHT AGAINST SELF
INCRIMINATION

what is being protected here is the so


called TESTIMONIAL SELFINCRIMINATION only which means
getting the evidence or testimony from
the accused own lips or from the
accused handwriting.

SECTION 18. (1) No person


shall be detained solely by reason
of his political beliefs and
aspirations.
(2) No involuntary servitude in
any
from shall exist except as
punishment
for a crime
whereof the party shall have been
duly convicted.

Meaning of INVOLUNTARY
SERVITUDE:
a compulsory service of one to
another.
Purpose of prohibition:
human dignity is not a merchandise
for
commercial barters.

SECTION 19. (1) Excessive fines shall


not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading
or inhuman punishment inflicted.
Neither shall the death penalty be
imposed, unless, for compelling
reasons involving heinous crimes, the
Congress hereafter provides for it. Any
death penalty already imposed shall
be reduced to reclusion perpetua.

HEINOUS CRIMES
- offenses that are exceedingly bad
or evil or those committed with
extreme cruelty as to shock the
general moral sense such as rape,
parricide, murder, robbery with
homicide.

SECTION 20. No person shall


be imprisoned for debt or
non-payment of a poll tax.

SECTION 21. 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.

Meaning of DOUBLE JEOPARDY


when a person is charged with an
offense and the case is terminated by
acquittal or conviction, he will be
charged again with the same offense.
Purpose of Right Against Double
Jeopardy:
protection against the perils of a second
punishment, as well as, a second trial for
the same offense.

SECTION 22. No ex post facto


law or bill of attainder shall be
enacted.

EX POST FACTO LAW


one which, operating retrospectively,
deprives the accused of some
protection or defense previously
available, to their disadvantage.
BILL OF ATTAINDER
inflicts punishment without judicial
trial, thus, a violation of due process
of law.

THE END
THANK YOU