CONSTI2 NOTES Tan

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE PHILIPPINES
CONSTITUTION OF THE PHILIPPINES

FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF THE STATE
POLICE POWER
POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN
EMINENT DOMAIN
Section 9. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.
A. POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN It is the power of the State to take private property for public use
following the payment of just compensation to the owner of that property.
B. JUST COMPENSATION It is “the full and fair equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the
expropriator”, and that the gauge for computation is not the taker’s gain but the owner’s loss. In order
for the payment to be “just,” it must be real, substantial, full and ample.
POWER OF TAXATION
ARTICLE III – BILL OF RIGHTS, 1987 PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION
BILL OF RIGHTS
It is a charter of liberties for the individual and a limitation upon the power of the State
PURPOSE
To protect the people against arbitrary and discriminatory use of political power.
TWO KINDS OF RIGHTS EMBODIED IN ARTICLE III:

1. POLITICAL RIGHTS
陳美仁 1|Page
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Atty. Adonis Gabriel
Those that are in relation to the participation of the individual, directly or
indirectly, in the establishment or administration of government. Ex. Freedom of
Speech and assembly
2. CIVIL RIGHTS
These are non-political rights of all citizens, especially those relating to personal
liberty
Ex. Right against Involuntary Servitude, Right against Unreasonable searches
and seizures
RIGHTS UNDER ARTICLE III:

o Section 1 Right To Due Process And Equal Protection Of The Laws.
o Section 2 Right Against Unreasonable Searches And Seizures
o Section 3 Right To Privacy Of Communication And Correspondence
o Section 4 Freedom Of Expression
o Section 5 Freedom Of Religion
o Section 6 Liberty Of Abode And Right To Travel
o Section 7 Right To Information
o Section 8 Right To Form Associations
o Section 9 Just Compensation
o Section 10 Non-Impairment Of Obligations And Contracts
o Section 11 Free Access To Courts
o Section 12 Rights Of Persons Under Custodial Investigation
o Section 13 Right To Bail
o Section 14 Rights Of The Accused
o Section 15 Privilege Of The Writ Of Habeas Corpus
o Section 16 Right To A Speedy Disposition Of Cases
o Section 17 Right Against Self-Incrimination
o Section 18 Right Against Involuntary Servitude
o Section 19 Right Against Excessive Fines And Cruel And Degrading Punishments
o Section 20 Right Against Imprisonment For Non-Payment Of Debt Or Poll Tax
o Section 21 Right Against Double Jeopardy
o Section 22 Right Against Ex Post Facto Law And Bill Of Attainder
陳美仁 2|Page
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS
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.
DUE PROCESS OF LAW

It is a law that hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders
judgment only after trial.
ASPECTS OF DUE PROCESS:

a) Substantive due process
b) Procedural due process
SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS
a) This serves as a restriction on the government’s law and rule-making powers.
It requires the intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with the rights of the
person to his life, liberty, or property.
b) It must be a guarantee against the exercise of arbitrary power even when the
power is exercised according to proper forms and procedure.
c) Publication of laws is part of substantive due proces
REQUIREMENTS:
1. The interests of the public in general, as distinguished from those
of a particular class, require the intervention of the State;
2. The means employed are reasonably necessary for the
accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly oppressive on
individuals.
PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS
a) This serves as a restriction on actions of judicial and quasi-judicial
agencies of the government.
b) It concerns about the legal processes itself that requires notice and
hearing before judgment.
REQUIREMENTS:
陳美仁 3|Page
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
1. Impartial court or tribunal clothed with judicial power to hear
and determine the matters before it;
2. Jurisdiction properly acquired over the person of the defendant
and over property which is the subject matter of the proceeding;
3. Opportunity to be heard; and
To be heard does not mean verbal arguments in court;
one may be heard also through pleadings. Where
opportunity to be heard, either through oral arguments
or pleadings, is accorded, there is no denial of due
process.
4. Judgment rendered upon lawful hearing and based on evidence
adduced5.
LIFE
It refers to the right of an individual to his body in its completeness, and extends
to the use of God-given faculties which make life enjoyable. It also includes the
right to a good life and have a dignified and decent standard of living.
LIBERTY
It includes the right to exist and the right to be free from arbitrary personal
restraint or servitude.
PROPERTY
It means anything that can come under the right of ownership and be the subject
of contract. It represents more than the things that a person owns, it includes
the right to procure and dispose of them.
RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS WAIVABLE
The right to be heard may be waived as it may be invoked, and validly so, as long
as the person is given the opportunity to be heard on his behalf. It is sufficient
that he was given the opportunity to be heard. He need not be heard.
DUE PROCESS DOES NOT ALWAYS REQUIRE TRIAL-TYPE PROCEEDINGS
o The essence of due process is found in the opportunity to be heard and the
submission of evidence. To be heard does not necessarily mean verbal
arguments in court; one may be heard also through pleadings.
陳美仁 4|Page
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
o What the law prohibits is not the absence of previous notice but the absolute
absence thereof and the lack of opportunity to be heard.
EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS

It requires that all persons or things similarly situated should be treated alike, both as to
the rights conferred and liabilities imposed.
 What the Constitution requires is equality among equals. If the classification is
reasonable, the law may operate only on some and not all of the people without
violating the equal protection clause.
 The guaranty of the equal protection clause is not violated by a legislation based on
a reasonable classification.
 A law is NOT invalid simply because of simple inequality. In the exercise of its power
to make classifications for the purpose of enacting laws over matters within its
jurisdiction, the State is recognized as enjoying a wide range of discretion.
CLASSIFICATION
The grouping of persons or things similar to each other in certain particulars and
different from all others in these same particulars.
REQUIREMENTS for a VALID CLASSIFICATION:
1. Such classification rests upon substantial distinctions;
2. It is not confined to existing conditions only;
3. It applies equally to all members of the same class; and
4. It must be germane to the purposes of the law11
Section 2 RIGHT AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE

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.
陳美仁 5|Page
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
 The right against unreasonable search and seizure is a restraint upon the government. It does
not apply so as to require exclusion of evidence which came into the possession of the
Government through a search made by a private citizen.
SCOPE
o It is a popular right, hence, protects all persons, including aliens 13 and, to a limited
extent, artificial persons.
o Available to all persons, including aliens whether accused of crime or not.
o Artificial persons are entitled to the guaranty but they may be required to open their
books of accounts for examination by the State in the exercise of the police power or
the power of taxation. Their premises may be not be searched nor may their papers
and effects be seized except by virtue of a valid warrant.
Reasonable Searches and Seizures are not Forbidden
o The term "unreasonable search and seizure" is not defined in the
Constitution or in General Orders, No. 58, and it is said to have no fixed,
absolute or unchangeable meaning, although the term has been defined
in general language. All illegal searches and seizures are unreasonable
while lawful ones are reasonable. What constitutes a reasonable or
unreasonable search or seizure in any particular case is purely a judicial
question, determinable from a consideration of the circumstances
involved, including the purpose of the search, the presence or absence of
probable cause, the manner in which the search and seizure was made,
the place or thing searched, and the character of the articles procured.
o The right is personal; it may be invoked only by the person entitled to it.
Such right may be waived either expressly or impliedly.
o Waiver must be made by the person whose right is invaded, not by one
who is not duly authorized to effect such waiver.
o The constitutional viability of the mandatory, random, and suspicion less
drug testing for students emanates primarily from their waiver of their
right to privacy when they seek entry to the school, and from their
voluntary submitting their persons to the parental authority of school
authorities.
陳美仁 6|Page
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
o In case of private and public employees, the constitutional soundness of
the mandatory, random and suspicion less drug testing proceeds from
the reasonableness of the drug test policy and requirement.
o However, there is no valid justification for mandatory drug testing for
persons accused of crimes. As they are singled out and impleaded against
their will. Thus, to impose mandatory drug testing on the accused is a
blatant attempt to harness a medical test as a tool for criminal
prosecution.
o Persons may lose the protection of the search and seizure clause by
exposure of their persons or property to the public in a manner reflecting
a LACK OF SUBJECTIVE EXPECTATION of privacy.
ARREST
It is the taking of a person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer
for the commission of an offense.
Requisites of Valid Warrant

1. PROBABLE CAUSE
o Such facts and circumstances antecedent to the issuance of a warrant
that in themselves are sufficient to induce a cautious man to rely on
them and act in pursuance thereof
o Must refer to one specific offense.
a. For a search warrant
Such facts and circumstances which would lead a
reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an
offense has been committed and that the objects sought
in connection with the offense are in the place sought to
be searched.
b. For a warrant of arrest
Such facts and circumstances which would lead a
reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an
offense has been committed by the person sought to be
arrested.
陳美仁 7|Page
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
2. Determination of probable cause personally by the judge;
a. For a search warrant
The judge must, before issuing a search warrant,
determine whether there is probable cause by examining
the complainant and witnesses through searching
questions and answers. His failure to comply with this
requirement constitutes grave abuse of discretion.
b. For a warrant of arrest
o What the Constitution underscores is the exclusive
and personal responsibility of the issuing judge to
satisfy himself of the existence of probable cause. In
satisfying himself of the existence of probable cause
for the issuance of a warrant of arrest, the judge is
not required to personally examine the complainant
and his witnesses.
o Following established doctrine and procedure, he
shall: Personally evaluate the report and the
supporting documents submitted by the fiscal
regarding the existence of probable cause and, on
the basis thereof, issue a warrant of arrest; or
If on the basis thereof he finds no probable cause, he
may disregard the fiscal's report and require the
submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses to
aid him in arriving at a conclusion as to the existence
of probable cause.
3. After personal examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant
and the witnesses he may produce
a. The personal examination must not be merely routinary or
pro forma, but must be probing and exhaustive. The purpose
of this rule is to satisfy the examining judge as to the
existence of probable cause.
陳美仁 8|Page
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
b. Witnesses are not necessary when the affidavit of the
applicant or complainant contains sufficient facts within his
personal and direct knowledge, it is sufficient if the judge is
satisfied that there exists probable cause; however when the
applicant's knowledge of the facts is mere hearsay, the
affidavit of one or more witnesses having a personal
knowledge of the facts is necessary. (1) Test of Sufficiency of
Oath: Whether it had been drawn in such a manner that
perjury could be charged thereon and affiant be held liable
for damages caused.
4. On the basis of their personal knowledge of the facts they are testifying
to. Hearsay is not allowed. It must not be based on mere information or
belief.
5. The warrant must describe particularly the place to be searched and the
persons or things to be seized.
a. A description of the place to be searched is sufficient if the officer
with the warrant can, with reasonable effort, ascertain and
identify the place intended.
b. Sufficiency of the description of the object is closely related with
the sufficient particularity of the averments of the offense.
c. However, it is not required that a technical description be given.
General Rule
Only the judge has the power to issue a warrant after the proper procedure has been duly
taken.
Exceptions
1. The Commissioner of Immigration and Deportation may issue warrants only for the
purpose of carrying out a final decision of deportation. In such case, probable cause
is not necessary.
a. The constitutional guarantee set forth in Section 1 (3), Article III of the
Constitution aforesaid, requiring that the issue of probable cause be
determined by a judge, does not extend to deportation proceedings.
陳美仁 9|Page
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
b. Warrant of arrest may be issued by administrative authorities only for the
purpose of carrying out a final finding of a violation of law and not for the sole
purpose of investigation or prosecution. It may be issued only after the
proceeding has taken place as when there is already a final decision of the
administrative authorities.
Subject to Search and Seizure

1. Property subject of the offense
2. Property stolen or embezzled and other proceeds or fruits of the offense 3. Property
used or intended to be used as the means of committing an offense
SEARCH WARRANT
It is an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the Philippines, signed by a
judge, and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for personal property
described therein and bring it before the court.
Valid Search Warrant
1. Must particularly describe the place to be searched and the things to be
seized.
2. A search warrant is NOT a sweeping authority empowering a raiding party to
undertake a fishing expedition to confiscate any and all kinds of evidence or
articles relating to a crime.
3. The search is limited in scope so as not to be general or explanatory.
4. Nothing is left to the discretion of the officer executing the warrant.
5. Although the properties may have been seized in violation of the
Constitution, it does not follow that its owner shall be entitled to recover it
immediately. If the said property is the subject of litigation, like a prosecution
for illegal possession of firearms, it will remain in custodia legis until the case
is terminated.
6. If the property is prohibited by law like illegal drugs, it shall be confiscated
and destroyed.
7. Seizure is limited to those items particularly described in a valid search
warrant. Searching officers are without discretion regarding what articles
they shall seize. Evidence seized on the occasion of such an unreasonable
陳美仁 10 | P a g e
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
search and seizure is tainted and excluded for being the proverbial "fruit of a
poisonous tree." In the language of the fundamental law, it shall be
inadmissible in evidence for any purpose in any proceeding.
PROPER DESCRIPTION OF THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED

1. The executing officer’s prior knowledge as to the place intended in the warrant is
relevant.
2. SCATTER-SHOT WARRANT
a. A general or scatter-shot warrant is a search warrant issued for more than
one specific offense.
b. It is void because it violates the constitutional requirement that there must
be particularity of the things to be seized and the places to be searched.
c. It is a search warrant which vaguely describes and does not particularize the
personal properties to be seized without a definite guideline to the searching
team as to what items might be lawfully seized.
Valid Searches WITHOUT WARRANT

1. In times of war and within the area of military occupation;
2. As an incident to a lawful arrest, provided the search is contemporaneous to arrest
and within permissible area of search
REQUISITES
1) The arrest must be lawful;
2) The search and seizure must be contemporaneous with arrest; AND
3) The search must be within permissible areas of search.
3. A valid arrest must precede the search; the process cannot be reversed48. c) A
warrantless search incidental to a lawful arrest may be made only within the
permissible area of search, or the place within the immediate control of the person
being arrested.
4. When there is consent
REQUISITES
1. There is a right;
2. There must be knowledge of the existence of such right; and
3. There must be intention to waive.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Plain View Doctrine
o When there are prohibited articles open to eye and hand
o It merely serves to supplement the prior justification – whether it be a
warrant for another object, hot pursuit, search as an incident to a lawful
arrest or some legitimate reason.
o The objects within the sight of an officer who has a right to be in a position to
have that view are subject to seizure and may be presented as evidence (open
to the eye and hand).
o The plain view doctrine is usually applied where the police officer is not
searching for evidence against the accused, but nonetheless inadvertently
comes upon an incriminating object.
ELEMENTS
1. A prior valid intrusion based on a valid warrantless arrest in which the
police are legally present in the pursuit of their official duties;
2. The evidence was inadvertently discovered by the police who have
the right to be where they are;
3. The evidence must be immediately apparent; and
4. Plain view justified mere seizure of evidence without further search.
An Incident Of Inspection
a. Searches of vessel and aircraft for violation of fishery, immigration and
customs laws
b. Searches and seizures without warrant of vessels and aircraft for violation of
customs laws have been traditional exception to the constitutional
requirement because the vessel can be quickly moved out of the locality or
jurisdiction in which the search must be sought before the warrant could be
secured.
c. Searches of automobiles at borders or constructive borders for violation of
immigration and smuggling laws. Customs searches however are not
available in dwelling places
d. Inspection of buildings and other premises for the enforcement of fire,
sanitary and building regulations
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
e. Visual search at checkpoints
f. Conduct of “aerial target zoning” and “saturation drive” in the exercise of
military powers of the President
g. When there is a genuine reason to “stop and-frisk” in the light of the police
officer’s experience and surrounding conditions to warrant a belief that the
person detained has weapons concealed [MALACAT V. COURT OF APPEALS]
h. Doctrine of exigent circumstances
KNOCK-AND-ANNOUNCE PRINCIPLE
Police officers are obliged to give notice, show their authority and demand that they be
allowed entry. They may only break open any outer or inner door or window of a house
to execute the search warrant if, after such notice and demand, such officers are refused
entry to the place of directed search.
Exceptions
a. Intrusion into the premises is permissible
b. A party whose premises or is entitled to the possession thereof refuses, upon
demand, to open it;
c. When such person in the premises already knew of the identity of the officers
and of their authority and persons;
d. When the officers are justified in the honest belief that there is an imminent
peril to life or limb; and
e. When those in the premises, aware of the presence of someone outside
(because, for example, there has been a knock at the door), are then engaged
in activity which justifies the officers to believe that an escape or the
destruction of evidence is being attempted.
MOVING VEHICLES
A warrantless search of a moving vehicle is justified on the ground that it is not practicable
to secure a warrant because the vehicle can be quickly moved out of the locality or
jurisdiction in which the warrant must be sought. However, the exception from securing
a search warrant when it comes to moving vehicles does NOT give the police authorities
unbridled discretion to conduct a warrantless search.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
“STOP AND FRISK”
o Where a police officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to
conclude that in light of his experience that criminal activity may be afoot and that
the person with whom he is dealing may be armed and presently dangerous, where
in the course of investigating this behavior he identifies himself as a policeman and
makes reasonable inquiries, and where nothing in the initial stages of the encounter
serves to dispel his reasonable fear for his own or other’s safety, he is entitled for the
protection of himself and of others in the area to conduct a carefully limited search
of the outer clothing of such persons in an attempt to discover weapons which might
be used to assault him.
o While probable cause is NOT required to conduct stop-and-frisk, it nevertheless holds
that suspicion or a hunch will not validate a stop-and-frisk. A genuine reason must
exist, in light of the police officer’s experience and surrounding circumstances, to
justify the belief that the person detained has weapons concealed.
CHECKPOINTS
o Under exceptional circumstances, as where the survival of organized government is
on the balance, or where the lives and safety of the people are in grave peril,
checkpoints may be allowed and installed by the government.
o Although the general rule is that motorists and their vehicles as well as pedestrians
passing through checkpoints may only be subjected to routine inspection, vehicles
may be stopped and extensively searched when there is probable cause that which
justifies a reasonable belief of the men at the checkpoints that either the motorist is
a law offender or the contents of the vehicle are or have been instruments of some
offense.
WARRANT OF ARREST
It is an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the Philippines, signed by a
judge, and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to arrest the person designated
therein and bring him before the court.
Valid Warrantless Arrest
1. In Flagrante Delicto (Caight in the Act) - When person to be arrested has
committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
2. Doctrine of Hot Pursuit
a. An offense has just been committed; and
b. He has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of
facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed
it;
3. When a person to be arrested is an escapee or detention prisoner.
The long-standing rule in this jurisdiction, applied with a great degree of
consistency, is that "reliable information" alone is not sufficient to justify
a warrantless arrest under Section 5 (a), Rule 113. The rule requires, in
addition, that the accused perform some overt act that would indicate
that he "has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to
commit an offense." The officer arresting a person who has just
committed, is committing, or is about to commit an offense must have
personal knowledge of that fact. The offense must also be committed in
his presence or within his view.
(1) Membership in organizations like NPA is a continuing offense,
thus, a person can be arrested anytime.
(2) When the right is waived by the person arrested, provided he
knew of such right and knowingly decided not to invoke it.
(3) An application for or admission to bail shall not bar the
accused from challenging the validity of his arrest, provided that
he raises them before entering his plea.
WAIVER OF RIGHT AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE

When one voluntarily submits to a search or consents to have it made on the person or
premises, he is precluded from later complaining thereof. The right to be secured may,
like every right, be waived and such waiver may be made either expressly or impliedly.
RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

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.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose
in any proceeding.
The right to be alone and to be left alone in his personal dealings.
Limitations
1. By lawful order of the court;
2. Public safety or public order requires otherwise, as may be provided by law
ABSOLUTE FREEDOM OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE SPOUSES

1. Neither husband nor wife may testify for or against the other without the consent of
the affected spouse while the marriage subsists.
2. Neither may one be examined without the consent of the other as to any
communication received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage,
save for specified exceptions.
3. But one thing is freedom of communication; quite another is a compulsion for each
one to share what one knows with the other.
ANTI-WIRE TAPPING ACT (R.A. 4200)

o This Act prohibits any person, not being authorized by all the parties to any private
communication or spoken word to tap any wire or cable, or by using any other device
or arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept or record the same, or to
communicate the content thereof to any other person.
o It is illegal for any person not authorized by all parties to any communication, to
secretly record such communication by means of tape recorder.
The law does not make any distinction, and as such, RA 4200 may be violated
even by a party to the communication.
o A telephone extension line is not among the devices covered by RA 420068.
o The law prohibits the overhearing, intercepting, or recording of private
communications but not those which are public in character.
o The right to privacy of those detained is subject to Section 4 of RA 7438, stating in
part that any security officer with custodial responsibility over a detainee may
undertake such measures reasonable measures to secure his safety and prevent his
escape. By the very fact of their detention. Pre-trial detainees and convicted
prisoners have a diminished expectation of privacy rights.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
The authorities may, upon a written order of the Court of Appeals, listen
to, intercept and record, with the use of any mode, form, kind or type of
electronic or other surveillance equipment or intercepting and tracking
devices, or with the use of any other suitable ways and means for that
purpose, any communication, message, conversation, discussion, or
spoken or written words between members of terrorist group as defined
in the Human Security Act of 2007. Provided, That surveillance,
interception and recording of communications between lawyers and
clients, doctors and patients, journalists and their sources and
confidential business correspondence shall not be authorized.
FRUIT FROM THE POISONOUS TREE DOCTRINE
o Section 3, (2) This means that illegally obtained documents, articles, or effects are
inadmissible as evidence in court. EXCLUSIONARY RULE Evidence obtained in
violation of Section 2, Art. III, shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding
(Fruit of Poisonous Tree Doctrine).
o Evidence obtained in violation of the search and seizure clause, whether or not it is
also self-incriminating testimonial evidence, is inadmissible.
o The illegally seized object must be returned if it is not a prohibited object; but if
contraband, it can be confiscated
DETERMINE REASONABLENESS OF PERSON'S EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY

1. Whether by his conduct, the individual has exhibited an expectation of privacy
2. Whether this expectation is one that society recognizes as reasonable.
Section 4 FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

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.
 All the rights mentioned under this section, while not identical, are inseparable. In every case,
therefore there is a limitation placed on the exercise of this right, the judiciary is called upon
to examine the effects of the challenged governmental actuation76.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
2. Speech, expression and press include every form of expression, whether oral, written,
tape or disc recorded. It also includes movies as well as symbolic speech such as the
wearing of an arm band as a symbol of protest, as well as peaceful picketing.
3. Sovereignty would be negated if they were denied the opportunity to participate in
the shaping of public affairs through the arbitrary imposition upon them of the ban
of silence.
4. The Constitutional right guaranteeing the freedom of expression is available only
against government intrusion. This is apparent in the provision since it says “no law”
shall be passed abridging the freedom.
Scope
a. The Constitution guarantees the liberty to utter what is in his mind and also
guarantees him the liberty not to utter what is not in his mind.
b. The Freedom also includes the right to an audience, in the sense that the state cannot
prohibit the people from hearing what a person has to say, whatever be the quality
of his thoughts.
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
Freedom from censorship or prior restraint
Means freedom from official governmental restrictions on the press or other
forms of expression in advance of actual publication or dissemination
a. Live TV coverage may be prohibited since the right of the accused must
prevail over the right of the public to information and freedom of the
press
b. The doctrine of freedom of speech was formulated primarily for the
protection of the “core speech,” speech which communicates political,
social or religious ideas.
c. It does not apply to commercial speech or the communication which
no more than proposes a commercial transaction.
For commercial speech to enjoy protection, it must not be false

or misleading and should not propose an illegal transaction.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
However, even truthful and lawful commercial speech may be
regulated if:
(a) Government has substantial interest to protect;
(b) The regulation directly advances that interest; and
(c) It is not more extensive than is necessary to protect
that interest
Freedom from subsequent punishment

A limitation on the power of the State to impose a punishment after publication or
dissemination.
Tests for Valid Government Interference to Freedom of Expression

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.
a. Clear
causal connection with the danger of the substantive evil arising from the
utterance questioned; and
b. Present
time element, identified with imminent and immediate danger; the
danger must not only be probable, but very likely inevitable80.
Dangerous Tendency Rule
o Words uttered create a dangerous tendency of an evil which the State has a
right to prevent.
o It is sufficient if the natural tendency and probable effect of the utterance be
to bring about the substantive evil which the legislative body seeks to
prevent.
Balancing Of Interest Rule
o When a particular conduct is regulated in the interest of public order, and the
regulation results in an indirect, conditional and partial abridgment of
speech, the duty of the court is to determine which of the two conflicting
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
interests demands the greater protection under the particular circumstances
presented.
o When “speech” and “non-speech” elements are combined in the same course
of conduct, a sufficiently important governmental interest in regulating the
non-speech element can justify incidental limitations on free speech.
o For legislation whose object is not the prevention of evil measurable in terms
of proximity and degree
o Used for commercial speech.
Valid Governmental Regulation

1. it is within the constitutional power of the Government,
2. furthers an important or substantial governmental interest unrelated to the
suppression of free expression, and
3. if the incidental restriction on alleged freedom is no greater than what is essential to
that interest.
EXCEPTIONS TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH

1. Clear and present danger that the Congress has the right to prevent;
2. Prohibition regarding certain forms of propaganda “to prevent distortion and
prostitution of electoral process;”
3. Demonstrations within a radius of 200 meters from the boundary of any hall of justice
to ensure the people to an impartial and orderly administration of justice.
4. Persons organizing public meetings using public streets must procure a special permit
from the local authorities to conduct the said meeting, parade, procession, etc.
ASSEMBLY AND PETITION

o 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.
o However, the right must be exercised in such a way that it will not prejudice the public
welfare.
o When such rights were exercised on regular school days instead of during the free
time of the teachers, the teachers committed acts prejudicial to the best interests of
the service.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
EXTENT OF AUTHORITY OF THE STATE TO REGULATE PUBLIC ASSEMBLIES
Primacy of human rights
o freedom of expression, of peaceful assembly and of petition for redress of
grievances—over property rights has been sustained
o To justify limitations on freedom of assembly there must be proof of
sufficient weight to satisfy the clear and present danger test
o The Philippine obligation under the Vienna Convention to protect the
premises of embassies must be honored but it does not preclude application
of the clear and present danger rule.
o If assembly is to be held at a public place, permit for the use of such place,
and not for the assembly itself, may be validly required. Power of local
officials is merely for regulation and not for prohibition.
RULES ON ASSEMBLY AND PETITION

1. The applicant for a permit to hold an assembly should inform the licensing authority
of the date, the public place where and the time when it will take place.
2. If it is a private place, only the consent of the owner or of the one entitled to its legal
possession is required.
3. Such application should be filed ahead in time to enable the public official concerned
to appraise whether there may be a valid objections to the grant of the permit or to
its grant but to another public place. It is an indispensable condition to such refusal
or modification that the clear and present danger test be the standard for the decision
reached.
4. The decision of the public authority, favorable or adverse, must be transmitted to the
applicant at the earliest possible opportunity so they can have recourse to the proper
judicial authority.
Permit for public assembly is NOT necessary if meeting is to be held in

1. Private places;
2. The campus of a government-owned or operated educational institution; and
3. Freedom parks.
Tests of a lawful assembly

b. Purpose for which it is held regardless of the auspices under which it is organized
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
c. Auspices test Nature of the people composing the assembly
BP No. 880 : The Public Assembly Act of 1985

o The provisions of BP No. 880 are not an absolute ban of public assemblies but a
restriction that simply regulates the time, place and manner of the assemblies. The
Court referred to it as a “contentneutral” regulation.
o In view of the maximum tolerance mandated by BP No. 880, Calibrated Pre-emptive
Response serves no valid purpose if it means the same thing as maximum tolerance
and is illegal if it means something else. Accordingly, what is to be followed is and
should be that mandated by the law itself, namely, maximum tolerance, which
specifically means “the highest degree of restraint that the military, police and other
peace keeping authorities shall observe during a public assembly or in the dispersal
of the same.”
Procedure under BP 880
1. An application for the permit to assemble shall be filed before the Office of
the Mayor within 5 working days before the scheduled public assembly.
2. Upon receipt, the same shall immediately be posted at a conspicuous place
in the city or municipal building.
3. The mayor shall act on the application within 2 working days from the date
the application was filed, failing which, the permit shall be deemed granted.
4. Should for any reason the mayor or any official acting in his behalf refuse to
accept the application for a permit, said application shall be posted by the
applicant on the premises of the office of the mayor and shall be deemed to
have been filed.
5. If the mayor or any official acting in his behalf denies the application or
modifies the terms thereof in his permit, the applicant may contest the
decision in an appropriate court of law.
o While prudence requires that there be a realistic appraisal not of
what may possibly occur but of what may probably occur, given all
the relevant circumstances, still the assumption – especially so where
the assembly is scheduled for a specific public place – is that the
permit must be for the assembly being held there. The exercise of
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
such a right, in the language of Justice Roberts, speaking for the
American Supreme Court, is not to be "abridged on the plea that it
may be exercised in some other place.
o It is an indispensable condition to such refusal or modification that
the clear and present danger test be the standard for the decision
reached. If he is of the view that there is such an imminent and grave
danger of a substantive evil, the applicants must be heard on the
matter.
DEMONSTRATIONS IN THE VICINITY OF COURTS

Demonstrators, picketers, rallyists and all other similar persons are enjoined from holding
any activity on the sidewalks and streets adjacent to, in front of, or within a radius of 200
meters from, the outer boundary of the Supreme Court Building, any Hall of Justice, and
any other building that houses at least 1 court sala.
 Academic freedom enjoyed by institutions of higher learning includes the right to set
academic standards to determine under what circumstances failing grades suffice for the
expulsion of students. It cannot be utilized to discriminate against those students who
exercise their constitutional right to peaceable assembly and free speech.
RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION
o This is embraced in the freedom of expression because it can be used as vehicle for
expression of views that has a bearing on the public welfare.
o The right to association also includes the right not to join any organization
o The constitutional right to association does not preclude the imposition of relevant
qualifications for membership in any organization. As such, any person who does not
meet the qualifications of a particular organization cannot invoke his right to
association if membership is denied.
Section 5 FREEDOM OF RELIGION

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.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
TWO-FOLD ASPECTS
FREEDOM OF BELIEF FREEDOM TO ACT ON ONE’S BELIEF
State CANNOT exercise control over one’s The State CAN regulate the acts done
belief because of one’s belief
Freedom is absolute NOT absolute
Need not be contrary to law, public It must not be contrary to law, public
morals, public safety, public policy, public morals, public safety, public policy, public
health, or national interest. health, or national interest.
Reason
Cogitationis Poenam Nemo Emeret : No one commits a crime in his thoughts
RELIGION
o Any specific system of belief, worship, conduct, etc. often involving a code of ethics
and philosophy; profession of faith to an active power that binds and elevates man to
his Creator
o Separation of church and state delineate the boundaries between two institutions to
avoid encroachment by one against another.
NON-ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE
Scope
1. State cannot set up a church;
2. Cannot pass laws which aid one or all religions or prefer one over another;
3. Cannot influence a person to go to or remain away from church against his
will; or
4. Force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.
o Neither the state nor the government can set up a church, pass laws which aid one
religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can openly nor
secretly participate in the affairs of the religious organizations or groups and vice
versa.
Tests to determine when there is no violation of establishment clause

5. The statute has a secular legislative purpose;
6. 2. Its principal or primary effect is one that neither advances nor inhibits religion;
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
7. 3. It does not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion
Constitutionally Created Exceptions to the Non-Establishment Clause:

1. Article VI Section 29;
2. Article VI Section 28 (3);
3. Article XIV Section 3 (3).
FREEDOM OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF AND WORSHIP

Dual aspect of freedom of religious belief and worship
FREEDOM TO BELIEVE
absolute as long as it is confined in the realm of thought
FREEDOM TO ACT ON ONE’S BELIEF
Subject to regulation where the belief is translated into external acts that affect
the public welfare.
 Freedom to believe carries with it the corollary expectation that the government, while it may
look into the good faith of a person, cannot inquire into a person’s religious pretensions.
However, the moment belief flows into action, it becomes subject to government regulation.
1. To compel students to take part in a flag ceremony when it is against their religious
beliefs will violate their religious freedom.
2. Expulsion/excommunication of members of a religious institution/organization is a
matter best left to the discretion of the officials, and the laws and canons, of said
institution/organization. It is not for the courts to exercise control over church
authorities in the performance of their discretionary and official functions. Rather, it
is for the members of religious institutions/organizations to conform to just church
regulations.
3. Benevolent neutrality recognizes that government must pursue its secular goals and
interests but at the same time strive to uphold religious liberty to the greatest extent
possible within flexible constitutional limits. Thus, although the morality
contemplated by laws is secular, benevolent neutrality could allow for
accommodation of morality based on religion, provided it does not offend compelling
state interests.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
The COMPELLING STATE INTEREST TEST
involves a three-step process. The Court explained this process in detail, by showing the
questions which must be answered in each step, viz:
1. “Has the statute or government action created a burden on the free exercise
of religion?” The courts often look into the sincerity of the religious belief,
but without inquiring into the truth of the belief because the Free Exercise
Clause prohibits inquiring about its truth.
2. The court asks: “Is there a sufficiently compelling state interest to justify this
infringement of religious liberty?” In this step, THE GOVERNMENT HAS TO
ESTABLISH THAT ITS PURPOSES ARE LEGITIMATE FOR THE STATE AND THAT
THEY ARE COMPELLING.
3. The court asks: “Has the state in achieving its legitimate purposes used the
least intrusive means possible so that the free exercise is not infringed any
more than necessary to achieve the legitimate goal of the state?” The
analysis requires the state to show that the means in which it is achieving its
legitimate state objective is the LEAST INTRUSIVE MEANS,
i.e., it has chosen a way to achieve its legitimate state end that imposes
as little as possible on religious liberties
 This freedom is not absolute as it is subject to the police power of the State.
Section 6 LIBERTY OF ABODE AND FREEDOM TO TRAVEL

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.
Concept
o Includes the right to choose one’s residence, to leave whenever he pleases and to
travel wherever he wills.
o The right to travel It is the right to move from one place to another100
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
LIMITATIONS
Liberty of Abode
May be impaired only upon lawful order of the court and within the limits
prescribed by law.
Right to Travel
o May be curtailed even by administrative authorities, in the interest of national
security, public safety or public health as may be provided by law.
o Any person on bail.
 Under the Human Security Act, cases where EVIDENCE OF GUILT IS NOT STRONG, and the
person charged with the crime of terrorism as therein defined is entitled to bail and is granted
the same, the court, upon application by the prosecutor, shall limit the right of travel of the
accused within the municipality or city where he resides or where the case is pending, in the
interest of national security and public safety.
The right to travel only includes

1. The right to travel from the Philippines to another country; and
2. The right to travel within the Philippines.
 While the right to travel of citizens covers both exit from and entry into the country, aliens
cannot claim the same right. Every sovereign nation has the power to forbid the entrance of
foreigners within its dominions, or to admit them only in such cases and upon such
conditions as it may see fit to prescribe.
 The right to return to one’s country is not included in the right to travel.
 A court has the power to prohibit a person admitted to bail from leaving the Philippines. This
is a necessary consequence of the nature and function of a bail bond.
GENERAL RULE
Every person has the right to establish his home and to travel to a place anywhere he
likes.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
EXCEPTIONS
c. National interest;
d. Public safety; OR
e. Public health.
Watch-list and Hold-departure Orders

1. These do not circumvent the right to travel as it is in the exercise of the police power
of the State.
2. Provided, however, that these orders are not issued arbitrarily, whimsically, and
exercised with grave abuse of discretion.
Section 7 RIGHT TO INFORMATION

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.
Rights guaranteed
8. Right to information on matters of public concern, as well as to government research
data used as basis for policy development; and
9. Corollary right of access to official records and documents.
These are political rights that are available to citizens only.

The law may exempt certain types of information from public scrutiny, such as those
affecting national security. Availability of access to a particular public record must be
circumscribed by the nature of the information sought
i.e., (a) being of public concern or one that involves public interest, and,
(b) not being exempted by law from the operation of the constitutional
guarantee.
Threshold Question
WHETHER OR NOT THE INFORMATION SOUGHT IS OF PUBLIC INTEREST OR PUBLIC
CONCERN.
RESTRICTIONS ON THE ACCESS OF TO INFORMATION

1. National security matters and intelligence information
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
2. Trade secrets and banking transactions
3. Criminal matters
4. Other confidential information
Scope
Contemplates inclusion of negotiations leading to the consummation of the transaction.
Otherwise, the people can never exercise the right if no contract is consummated, or if
one is consummated, it may be too late for the public to expose its defects.
Exceptions
1. The exercise is subject to reasonable regulations to project the integrity of public
records and to minimize disruption of government operations.
2. National Security matters. These include state secrets regarding military, diplomatic
and other national security, and information on inter government exchanges prior to
the conclusion of treaties and executive agreements.
3. Trade secrets and banking transactions, pursuant to the Intellectual property Law,
and other related laws, and to the secrecy of bank deposits act.
4. Criminal matters or classified law enforcement matters, such As those relating to the
apprehension, prosecution and detention of criminals, which courts may not inquire
into prior such arrest, detention and prosecution,
5. Other confidential matters.
a. Parties to a government contract cannot stipulate that the terms thereof
should be considered confidential and should be, open for examination by
the public.
b. The right to information does not extend to matters recognized as “privileged
information” under the separation of powers, by which the Court meant
Presidential conversations, correspondences, and discussions in closed-door
Cabinet meetings.
As to Public Documents
f. 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
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
as basis for policy development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such
limitations as may be provided by law.
g. Except perhaps when it is clear that the purpose of the examination is unlawful or
sheer, idle curiosity, we do not believe it is the duty under the law of registration
officers concern themselves with the motives, reasons, and objects of the persons
seeking access to the records. The authority to regulate the manner of examining
public records does not carry with it the power to prohibit.
Section 8 RIGHT TO ASSOCIATION

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.
 This general provision is fortified by Article IX-B, Section 2(5) which affirms that “the right to
self-organization shall not be denied to government employees”.
 While there is no question that the Constitution recognizes the right of government
employees to organize, it is silent as to whether such recognition also includes the right to
strike. A reading of the proceedings of the Constitutional Commission shows that in
recognizing the right of the government employees to organize, the commissioners intended
to limit the right to information of unions or association
Section 10 NON-IMPAIRMENT OF OBLIGATIONS OF CONTRACTS CLAUSE

Section 10. No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.
When is there impairment of the obligations of contracts?

When a right is taken OR when a person is deprived of the means of enforcing such right,
there is impairment.
CONTRACT
Any lawful agreement on the property or property rights, whether real or personal,
tangible or intangible but does not cover licenses, marriage contract, and public office.
IMPAIRMENT
Anything that diminishes the efficacy of a contract.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
When is there impairment
There is impairment when there is a change in the terms of a legal contract
between parties, either in the time or mode of performance, or imposes new
conditions, or dispenses with those expressed, or authorizes for its satisfaction
something different from that provided in its terms.
Degree of diminution is immaterial.
As long as the original rights of either parties are changed to their prejudice, there
is already impairment of the obligation of contract.
NO IMPAIRMENT
As long as a substantial and efficacious remedy remains; holds true even if there is remedy
remained but it is the most difficult to employ, the easy ones are withdrawn
EXCEPTIONS
o Police power
public welfare is superior to private rights
o Eminent Domain
o Taxation
In every contract, there is an implied reservation that it is subject to the police
power of the State.
Section 11 FREE ACCESS TO COURTS

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.
 The IBP provides deserving indigents with free legal aid, including representation in court, and
similar services are available from the Department of Justice to litigants who cannot afford
retained counsel.
 There are also private legal assistance organizations functioning for the benefit of penurious
clients who otherwise might be unable to resort to the courts of justice because only of their
misfortune of being poor.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
 Free access to the court does not mean that the courts cannot impose filing fees.
Section 12 CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION

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.
(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this section as well as compensation
to and rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices, and their families.
Custodial Investigation
o Questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken
into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.
o Time when the investigation is no longer a general inquiry into an unsolved crime
but has begun to focus on a particular suspect, the suspect has been taken into
police custody, the police carryout a process of interrogations that lender itself
to eliciting statements.
RIGHTS OF PERSONS UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION

1. Right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to counsel;
2. Right to be reminded that if he waives his right to remain silent, anything he says
can and will be used against him;
3. Right to remain silent;
4. Right to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice;
5. Right to be provided with counsel, if the person cannot afford the services of one;
6. No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation or any other means which vitiate
the free will shall be used against him;
7. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of
detention are prohibited;
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
8. Confessions or admissions obtained in violation of these rights are inadmissible
as evidence.
RIGHT TO BE INFORMED OF HIS RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT AND TO COUNSEL
1. It carries the correlative obligation on the part of the investigator to explain, and
contemplates effective communication which results in the subject
understanding what is conveyed.
2. As a rule, therefore, it would not be sufficient for a police just to repeat the person
under investigation the provisions of the constitution. He is not only duty bound
to tell the person the rights to which the latter is entitled, he must also explain
their effects in practical terms.
RIGHT TO HAVE COMPETENT AND INDEPENDENT COUNSEL PREFERABLY OF HIS
OWN CHOICE
"Preferably of his own choice" Does not mean that the choice of a lawyer is
exclusive as to preclude other equally competent and independent attorneys
from handling the defense.
RIGHT TO BE PROVIDED WITH COUNSEL, IF THE PERSON CANNOT AFFORD THE
SERVICES OF ONE
While the choice of the lawyer is naturally lodged in the police investigators, the
suspect has the final choice as he may reject the counsel chosen for him and ask
for another one.
FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE
Confessions or admissions obtained in violation of these rights are inadmissible
as evidence
Requisites of admissible extrajudicial confession

1. Voluntary
2. With assistance of a counsel
3. In writing
4. Express
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
o What is sought to be avoided by the rule is the evil of extorting from the very mouth
of the person undergoing interrogation for the commission of an offense the very
evidence with which to prosecute and thereafter to convict him.
MIRANDA DOCTRINE
1. Person in custody must be informed at the outset in clear and unequivocal terms that
he has a right to remain silent.
2. After being so informed, he must be told that anything he says can and will be used
against him in court.
3. The right to consult with a lawyer and to have a lawyer with him during the
interrogation.
4. If he is indigent, a lawyer will be appointed to represent him.
5. Even if he consents to answer questions without the assistance of counsel, the
moment he asks for a lawyer at any point in the investigation, the interrogation must
cease until an attorney is present.
6. If the foregoing are not demonstrated, no evidence obtained cannot be used against.
AVAILABILITY
The rights under Section 12, Art. III are available when the investigation is no longer a
general inquiry unto an unsolved crime but has begun to focus on a particular suspect, as
when the suspect has been taken into police custody and the police carry out a process
of interrogation that lends itself to eliciting incriminating statements.
 The constitutional safeguards on custodial investigation do not apply to spontaneous

statements, or those not elicited through questioning by law enforcement authorities but
given in an ordinary manner whereby the appellant verbally admits to having committed the
offense.
 A municipal mayor has "operational supervision and control" over the local police and may
arguably be deemed a law enforcement officer for purposes of applying Section 12 (1) and (3)
of Article III of the Constitution.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
 Section 2 of RA No. 7438 provides that custodial investigation shall include the practice of
issuing an invitation to a person who is under investigation in connection with an offense he
is suspected to have committed.
 The rights under custodial investigation are not available in administrative proceedings.
What rights may be waived

10. Right to remain silent;
11. Right to counsel (Waiver must be in writing and in the presence of counsel.)
What rights cannot be waived:

1. Right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to counsel;
2. Right to counsel when making the waiver of the right to remain silent or to counsel.
Rights of Person Suspected and Subsequently Charged
1. Before case is filed for preliminary investigation but after being put into custody or
otherwise deprived of liberty, and on being interrogated by police:
a. The continuing right to remain silent and counsel;
b. To be informed thereof;
c. Not to be subjected to force, violence, threat or intimidation which vitiates free
will;
d. To have evidence obtained in violation of these rights inadmissible as evidence.
2. After the case is filed in court:

a. To refuse to be witness against himself;
b. Not to have prejudice imputed on him as a result of such refusal;
c. To testify on his behalf;
d. To cross-examination; while testifying, to refuse questions which tend to
incriminate him for some crime other than the present charge.
 It was, therefore, wrong for the trial court to hold that Section 12(1), Article III of the
Constitution is strictly limited to custodial investigation and that it does not apply to a person
against whom a criminal complaint or information has already been filed because after its
filing he loses his right to remain silent and to counsel. If we follow the theory of the trial
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
court, then police authorities and other law enforcement agencies would have a heyday in
extracting confessions or admissions from accused persons after they had been arrested but
before they are arraigned because at such stage the accused persons are supposedly not
entitled to the enjoyment of the rights to remain silent and to counsel
 A police line-up is not considered part of any custodial inquest because it is conducted before
that stage of investigation is reached and because the process has not yet shifted from
investigatory to accusatory stage and it is usually the witness or complainant who is
interrogated and who gives statement in the course of the line up.
 However, after the start of the custodial investigation, any identification of an uncounseled
accused made in a police line-up is inadmissible.
Section 13 RIGHT TO BAIL

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. 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
SECTION 1 RULE 114 OF RULES OF COURT
The security given for the release of a person in custody of law, furnished by him
or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as required under
conditions specified hereinafter.
Forms of Bail
1. Corporate surety;
2. Property bond;
3. Cash deposit;
4. Recognizance
An obligation of record, entered into before some court or magistrate duly
authorized to take it, with the condition to do some particular act.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
PURPOSE of BAIL
To ensure that he appears before the proper court at the scheduled time and place to
answer charges against him. [BASCO V RAPATALO]
Conditions of Bail
SECTION 2 RULE 114
a. The undertaking shall be effective upon approval, and unless cancelled, shall
remain in force at all stages of the case until promulgation of the judgment
of the Regional Trial Court, irrespective of whether the case was originally
filed in or appealed to it;
b. The accused shall appear before the proper court whenever required by the
court or these Rules;
c. The failure of the accused to appear at the trial without justification and
despite due notice shall be deemed a waiver of his right to be present
thereat. In such case, the trial may proceed in absentia; and
d. The bondsman shall surrender the accused to the court for execution of the
final judgment.
The original papers shall state the full name and address of the accused, the
amount of the undertaking and the conditions required by this section.
Photographs (passport size) taken within the last six (6) months showing the
face, left and right profiles of the accused must be attached to the bail.
AVAILABLE TO WHO
People under the CUSTODY OF LAW (when law enforcement deprives you of your
freedom of action).
1. Accused
2. Material Witness
SEC 14 RULE 119
Upon proof or oath that a material witness will not testify when required,
upon a motion of either party, court may order witness to post bail and
when refused to post bail, court shall commit him to prison.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Hearing
BASCO V RAPATALO
Bail hearing is mandatory. Whether bail is a matter of right or of discretion,
reasonable notice of hearing is required to be given the prosecutor, or at least he
must be asked for his recommendation, because in fixing the amount of bail, the
judge is required to take into account a number of factors.
3 Day Motion Rule

BAYLON V JUDGE SISON
Bail hearing should still follow regular hearing procedure such as the 3
day motion rule. Where prosecution must be informed of the motion to
bail 3 days before the actual hearing.
Standards for fixing amount of bail

SECTION 9 RULE 114
1. Financial ability of accused;
2. Nature and circumstances of offense;
3. Penalty for offense;
4. Character and reputation of accused;
5. Age and health of accused;
6. Weight of evidence against him;
7. Probability of his appearance at trial;
8. Forfeiture of other bail;
9. Whether he was a fugitive from justice when arrested; and
10. Pendency of other cases where he is on bail.
Excessive Bail
“teasing illusion like a magnificent request in a pauper’s will.”
Prohibited under the constitution, same as denying his right to bail when accused
cannot afford his bail
Bail as Right v Discretionary

PEOPLE V JUDGE DONATO
BAIL, A MATTER OF RIGHT
SECTION 4 RULE 114
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
All persons in custody shall be admitted to bail as a matter of
right, with sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance as
prescribed by law or this rule:
1. Before or after conviction by the MTC; and
2. Before conviction of the RTC of an offense not
punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment.
BAIL, WHEN DISCRETIONARY
SECTION 5 RULE 114
o Upon conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by
death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment.
o If the court imposed a penalty of imprisonment exceeding 6
years but not more than 20 years, the accused shall be
denied bail, or his bail previously granted shall be cancelled,
upon showing by the prosecution, with notice to the accused,
of the following or other similar circumstances:
a. that the accused is a recidivist, quasi recidivist, or
habitual delinquent, or has committed the crime
aggravated by the circumstance of reiteracion;
b. that the accused is found to have previously escaped
from legal confinement, evaded sentence, or has
violated the conditions of his bail without valid
justification;
c. that the accused committed the offense while on
probation, parole, or under conditional pardon;
d. that the circumstances of the accused or his case
indicate the probability of flight if released on bail; or
e. that there is undue risk that during the pendency of
the appeal, the accused may commit another crime.
Discretion Lies Upon:

The exercise of discretion of the court is only limited in the
determination of the gravity of guilt of the accused. If after
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
summary hearing, it is determined that the evidence of guilt of the
accused is strong, the court has no choice but to deny the application
for bail. Inversely, if the court finds that the evidence of guilt of the
accused is weak, the court has no discretion but to grant bail. Lord’s
Mansfield “discretion when applied to court of justice means sound
discretion guided by law. It must be governed by rule, not by humor;
it must not be arbitrary, vague and fanciful; but legal and regular.”
BASCO V RAPATALO
Four Fold Duties of the Court when Bail is a Matter of Discretion
1. Notify the prosecutor of the hearing of the application for bail or
require him to submit his recommendation
2. Conduct a hearing for the application for bail regardless of whether
or not the prosecution refuses to present evidence to show that the
guilt of the accused is strong for the purpose of enabling the court to
exercise its sound discretion
3. Decide whether the evidence of the guilt of the accused is strong
based on the summary of evidence of the prosecution.
4. If the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge the accused upon
the approval of the bail bond
WHEN BAIL SHALL BE DENIED

o No person, regardless of the stage of the criminal prosecution, shall be admitted to
bail if:
a) Charged with a capital offense, or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua
or life imprisonment or death; OR
b) Evidence of guilt is strong.
If convicted before the RTC- guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
PEOPLE V FORTES
Accused is charged with a crime punishable by reclusion
perpetua is convicted by trial court and sentenced to suffer such
penalty. Evidence of guilt is beyond reasonable doubt, sufficient
to deny bail even if case is on appeal.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
o Not available to military personnel during court martial proceedings
COMMENDADOR V DE VILLA
Due to the unique structure of the military they are accorded with the
right to a speedy trial, this right is emphasized.
BAIL – WAIVABLE RIGHT

PEOPLE V JUDGE DONATO
This right is personal to the accused, as provided under Art 6 of the Civil Code.
This could be an actual or implied waiver such as when the accused did not apply
for a bail hearing.
 The right to bail may be invoked once detention commences even if no formal charges have
yet been filed.
 Suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus does not suspend right to bail.
 Even when the accused has previously jumped bail, still he cannot be denied bail before
Bail on Extradition Cases

GOV. OF US V PURUGANAN
Five postulates of extradition proceedings

1. Extradition is a major instrument for suppression of crime
by facilitating the arrest and the custodial transfer of a fugitive
from one state to the other.
2. The requesting State will accord due process to the accused
extradition treaty presupposes that both parties thereto have
examined, and that both accept and trust, each other’s legal
system and judicial process.
3. The proceedings are sui generis
It is not a criminal proceeding which will call into operation all
the rights of an accused as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. To
begin with, the process of extradition does not involve the
determination of the guilt or innocence of an accused. His guilt
or innocence will be adjudged in the court of the state where he
will be extradited.
4. Compliance shall be in good faith
Bound by pacta sunt servanda to comply in good faith with our
obligations under the Treaty. This principle requires that we
deliver the accused to the requesting country if the conditions
precedent to extradition, as set forth in the Treaty, are satisfied.
5. There is underlying risk of flight
Prima facie presumption finds reinforcement in the experience
of the executive branch: nothing short of confinement can
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
ensure that the accused will not flee the jurisdiction of the
requested state in order to thwart their extradition to the
requesting state.
An extraditee has also the right to apply for bail under the right to due process
under Sec1 Art III of the Constitution. It is broad enough to include the grant of
basic fairness to extraditees. The right to due process extends to the “life,
liberty or property” of every person.
Bail is granted only upon a clear and convincing evidence showing
1. that, once granted bail, the applicant will not be a flight risk or a
danger to the community; and
2. that there exist special, humanitarian and compelling
circumstances.
GOV OF HONG KONG V HON OLALIA
o Uphold the fundamental human rights as well as value the worth and
dignity of every person. This is enshrined in Section II, Article II of our
Constitution which provides: “The State values the dignity of every human
person and guarantees full respect for human rights.”
o Bail has been allowed in this jurisdiction to persons in detention during the
pendency of administrative proceedings, taking into cognizance the
obligation of the Philippines under international conventions to uphold
human rights.
o Our extradition law does not provide for the grant of bail to an extraditee,
however, there is no provision prohibiting him or her from filing a motion
for bail, a right to due process under the Constitution. The prospective
extraditee thus bears the onus probandi of showing that he or she is not a
flight risk and should be granted bail.
Section 14 RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED DURING TRIAL

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.
CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Rights of an Accused under Sec. 14
1. To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved
2. to be heard by himself and counsel
3. to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him
4. to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial
5. to meet the witnesses face to face (right to confrontation), and
6. to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the
production of evidence in his behalf (right to compulsory process)
Rights of an Accused after the Filing of Information in Court

PEOPLE V JUDGE AYSON
1. To refuse to be a witness
2. Not have any prejudice whatsoever result to him by such refusal
3. Testify in his own behalf, subject to cross examination by the prosecution
4. While testifying, to refuse to answer a specific question which tends to
incriminate him for some crime
Elements of Criminal Due Process

ALLONTE V SAVELLANO
1. Court or tribunal trying the case is properly clothed with judicial power to
hear and determine the matter before it
2. Jurisdiction is lawfully acquired by it over the person of the accused
3. That the accused is given an opportunity to be heard
4. Judgment is rendered only upon lawful hearing
Due Process SECTION 1 ARTICLE III Due Process SECTION 14 ARTICLE III
substantive and procedural and procedural in nature for criminal
covers all proceedings. proceeding
Preliminary Investigation
ANIAG V COMELEC
Is essential because regardless of its origin once the procedure is provided for,
that procedure must be complied with otherwise there is a violation in criminal
due process.
TATAD V SANDIGANBAYAN
The long delay in the termination of preliminary investigation by Tanodbayan as

violative of the constitutional right of due process. Substantial adherence to the
requirements of law governing the conduct of preliminary investigation.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Substantial adherence to the requirements of law governing the conduct of
preliminary investigation is part of procedural due process constitutionally
granted by the fundamental law. Lack of preliminary investigation is a
correctible defect but the delay is not a correctible defect.
GALMAN V SANDIGANBAYAN
Any avowal of independent action or resistance to presidential pressure become

illusory from the very moment they stepped inside the Malacanang palace. The
Supreme Court cannot permit such sham trial and verdict and travesty of justice
to stand unrectified. The courts of the land under its aegis are courts of law and
justice and equity.
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
Prima facie presumption that a person is innocent until proven beyond reasonable doubt of
guilt.
Proof Beyond Reasonable doubt

Only requires moral certainty
PEOPLE V DRAMAYO
It is meant that which of possibility may arise, but it is doubt engendered by an

investigation of the whole proof and an inability, after such investigation, to let
the mind rest easy upon the certainty of guilt.
Treatment to Accused
DUMLAO V COMELEC & PEOPLE V DRAMAYO
A person merely charged with an offense cannot be treated like a person who
has been found guilty to an offense.
Fugitive from Justice

MARQUEZ V COMELEC
1. Convicted after Trial

2. Persons who flee to avoid prosecution
Persons who are already convicted should be treated the same manner as to
persons who are merely charged.
Equipoise Rule
CORPUS V PEOPLE
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
It is the evidence of both sides are equally balanced, in which case the
constitutional presumption of innocence should tilt the scales in favor of the
accused
Available to Corporate Entity

FEEDER INTERNATIONAL LINE V CA
A corporate entity has no right to be presumed innocent. Such right is only
available to individuals accused in a criminal case.
RIGHT TO BE HEARD BY HIMSELF AND COUNSEL

The right to be heard can be understood to mean the totality of the rights embodied in an
adequate criminal procedural system, which can be viewed as expressing both the qualities of the
hearer and the manner of the hearing.
1. Right to present evidence and to be present at the trial

2. Right to present evidence includes the right to testify in one’s favor and the
right to be given time to call witnesses.
3. If accused of two offenses, he is entitled to a trial of each case, and it is error
for the court to consider in one case the evidence adduced against him in
another.
4. Right to be assisted by counsel
5. Right to counsel during the trial is not subject to waiver
6. Right to compulsory process to compel the attendance of witnesses in his
behalf.
7. Right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him
8. Right to speedy, impartial and public trial
9. Right to meet the witnesses face to face (Right to confrontation)
10. Right to compulsory process to secure attendance of witnesses and production
of evidence
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
RIGHT TO BE INFORMED OF THE NATURE AND CAUSE OF THE
ACCUSATION AGAINST HIM
Description
not designation of the offense, is controlling.
Purposes:
1. To furnish the accused with such a description of the charge against him as will
enable him to make his defense;
2. To avail himself of his conviction or acquittal for protection against a further
prosecution for the sane cause; and
3. To inform the court of the facts alleged, so that it may decide whether they are
sufficient in law to support a conviction, if one should be had.
 In Soriano v. Sandiganbayan, the petitioner claims that he cannot be convicted of bribery

under the Revised Penal Code because to do so would be violative of as constitutional right
to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. The Supreme Court
held that the contention is wrong because a reading of the information which has been
reproduced clearly makes out a case of bribery so that the petitioner cannot claim deprivation
of the right to be informed.
RIGHT TO SPEEDY, IMPARTIAL AND PUBLIC TRIAL

Purpose
To serve as safeguard against attempt to employ our courts as instruments of
persecution. The knowledge that every criminal trial is subject to contemporaneous
review in the forum of public opinion is an effective restraint on possible abuse of judicial
power.
Speedy
o It means free from vexatious, capricious and oppressive delays;
o The concept of speedy trial is necessarily relative. A determination as to whether the
right has been violated involves the weighing of several factors such as the length of
the delay, the reason for the delay, the conduct of the prosecution and the accused,
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
and the efforts exerted by the defendant to assert his right, as well as the prejudice
and damage caused to the accused
Impartial
The accused entitled to cold neutrality of an impartial judge;
Public
o To prevent possible abuses which may be committed against the accused.
o Public trial is when anyone interested in observing the manner a judge conducts the
proceedings in his courtroom may do so. There is to be no ban on such attendance.
The reason for this safeguard is the belief that the accused is afforded further
protection, that his trial is likely to be conducted with regularity and not tainted with
any impropriety.
o General public may be excluded when the evidence to be presented in the proceeding
may be characterized as offensive to decency or public morals.
o A public trial is not synonymous with a publicized trial; it only implies that court doors
must be open to those who wish to come, sit in available seats, and conduct
themselves with decorum and observe the trial process.
o The right may be waived. But waiver is not to be inferred from mere failure of the
accused to urge the trial of the case. Such waiver or abandonment may be presumed
only when the postponement of the trial has been sought and obtained by the accused
himself or by his attorney. The presumption is always against the waiver of
constitutionally protected rights.
RIGHT TO CONFRONTATION (RIGHT TO MEET THE WITNESSES FACE TO

FACE)
Two-fold purpose:
1. To afford the accused an opportunity to test the testimony of the witness by cross
examination; and
2. To allow the judge to observe the deportment of the witness.
 Right to cross-examination may be waived.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
 Testimony of witness who was not cross-examined is not admissible as evidence for being
hearsay.
 If cross-examination actually commenced, but, for lack of material time, was not completed,
and the witness in the meantime died before cross-examination could be resumed, so much
of the testimony as had already been covered by cross-examination is admissible.
 An accused is not entitled, as a matter of right, to be present during the preliminary

examination nor to cross-examine the witnesses presented against him before his arrest, the
purpose of said examination being merely to determine whether or not there is sufficient
reason to issue a warrant of arrest. A preliminary examination is generally a proceeding ex
parte in which the person charged has no right to participate or be present.
COMPULSORY PROCESS
The accused is entitled to the issuance of
1. subpoena ad testificandum and
2. subpoena duces tecum
for the purpose of compelling the attendance of the witnesses and the production of
evidence that he may need for his defense.
 failure to obey the process is punishable as contempt of court; if necessary, the witness may
even be arrested so he can give the needed evidence.
Requirements:
1. That the witness is really material;
2. That he is guilty of no neglect in previously obtaining attendance of said witness;
3. That the witness will be available at the time desired; and
4. That no similar evidence could be obtained.
TRIAL IN ABSENTIA
 This is mandatory upon the court whenever the accused has been arraigned, notified of date/s
of hearing, and his absence is unjustified.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
 The right to be present during the trial may be waived provided that after arraignment he
may be compelled to appear for the purpose of identification by the witnesses of the
prosecution, unless he unqualifiedly admits in open court after his arraignment that he is the
person named as the defendant in the case on trial.
The presence of the accused is mandatory

a. During arraignment and plea;
b. During trial, for identification, unless the accused has already stipulated on his
identity during the pre-trial and that he is the one who will be identified by the
witnesses as the accused in the criminal case; or
c. During promulgation of sentence, unless for a light offense.
Section 15 PRIVILEGE OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

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.
Habeas Corpus - You have the body

Writ of Habeas Corpus
A writ requiring a person to be brought before a judge or court, especially for investigation of a
restraint of the person's liberty, used as a protection against illegal imprisonment.
Availability
WHO
RULE 120 SECTION 1
Shall extend to all cases
1. Illegal confinement; or
2. Detention by which the rightful custody of any person is withheld from
the person entitle thereto.
WHEN
1. In cases of illegal detention in order to test the validity of detention.
Reckoning period:
as of the filing for the petition of the writ of habeas corpus at the
earliest time and if there are supervening events that will
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
supersede the petition of the writ of habeas corpus and bar his
release from custody.
2. Speedy trial
 Habeas corpus lies only where the restraint of a person’s liberty has been judicially adjudged
to be illegal or unlawful.
IN RE: THE ISSUANCE OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FOR DR. AURORA PARONG ET AL PONCE ENRILE
Once a person detained is DULY CHARGED in court, he may no longer question his detention
through a petition for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. His remedy would be to quash the
information and/or the warrant of arrest duly issued. The writ of habeas corpus should not
be allowed after the party sought to be released had been charged before any court.
 The term “court” in this context includes quasi-judicial bodies of governmental agencies
AUTHORIZED TO ORDER THE PERSON’S CONFINEMENT, like the Deportation Board of the
Bureau of Immigration
Types of Writ of Amparo

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE V. MANALO
Other high prerogative writ that produce the same effect like writ of amparo
1. amparo libertad
for the protection of personal freedom, equivalent to the habeas corpus
writ;
2. amparo contra leyesfor
the judicial review of the constitutionality of statutes;
3. amparo casacion
for the judicial review of the constitutionality and legality of a judicial
decision;
4. amparo administrativo
for the judicial review of administrative actions; and
5. amparo agrario
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
for the protection of peasants’ rights derived from the agrarian reform
process
 Privilege was suspended by the President can it be vailidly obtained through this writ of
amparo?
No. although the constitution provides only for the suspension of the writ of habeas
corpus, all similar writs are also suspended because if it is allowed then the provision in
the constitution would be useless.
Suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus

Only the privilege is suspended not the writ itself.
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PRIVILEGE OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS
application for habeas corpus is filed where the return of the respondent
and the court finds the petition in shows that the person in custody is
proper form, it will issue the writ as a being held for a crime covered by the
matter of course, ordering the proclamation suspending the privilege
production of the person allegedly and in a place where it is effective will
detained and requiring the respondent the court dismiss the petition.
to justify the detention.
Purpose
To enable the government to deal with situation of an invasion or a rebellion and
the government must charge JUDICIALLY those who are involved in the rebellion
or invasion.
Who May Suspend
President
Valid Grounds
1. In cases of rebellion when public safety requires it
2. In cases of invasion when public safety requires it
o 1935 Constitution
LANSANG V GARCIA
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Imminent threat of rebellion or invasion is a valid ground for the
suspension of habeas corpus
o 1987 Constitution
Mere threat is not valid ground
Offenses Covered
Rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly connected with invasion.
Section 16 RIGHT TO A SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF CASES

Section 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi
judicial, or administrative bodies.
 The constitutional right to a speedy disposition of cases is not limited to the accused in criminal
proceedings but extends to all parties in all cases, including civil and administrative cases, and in
all proceedings, including judicial and quasi-judicial hearings.
 In case of violation of the right to a speedy trial, the remedy for violation of said right is dismissal
obtained through mandamus.
Section 17 RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION

Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Availability
Not only in criminal proceedings, but also in all other government proceedings, including
civil actions and administrative or legislative investigations. May be claimed not only by
the accused (when called to testify) but also by the witness to whom an incriminating
question is addressed.
Effect of Violation
Declared that once the primary source is shown to have been unlawfully obtained, any
secondary or derivative evidence derived from it is inadmissible.
Scope
o Applies only to testimonial compulsion and production of documents, papers and
chattels in court except when books of account are to be examined in the exercise of
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
police power and the power of taxation. An accused may be compelled to be
photographed or measured, his garments may be removed, and his body may be
examined.
o An order requiring the accused to write so that his handwriting may be validated with
the documentary evidence is covered by the constitutional proscription against self-
incrimination.
Waiver of the right against self-incrimination

o Either directly or by failure to invoke it, provided the waiver is certain and unequivocal
and intelligently, understandingly and willingly made.
o The witness may be cross examined and asked incriminating questions on any matter
he testified to on direct examination.
Transactional Immunity Statute

The testimony of any person or whose possession of documents or other evidence
necessary or convenient to determine the truth in any investigation conducted is immune
from criminal prosecution for an offense to which such compelled testimony relates.
Use and Fruit Immunity Statute

This prohibits the use of the witness’ compelled testimony and its fruits in any manner in
connection with the criminal prosecution of the witness.
Section 18 INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE

Section 18.(1) No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.
(2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a crime whereof
party shall have been duly convicted.
Non-Detention by Reason of Political Beliefs or Aspiration

No man is to be interfered with because of his opinions, provided his avowal of them does
not disturb public order or established law.
Involuntary Servitude
o Condition where one is compelled by force, coercion, or imprisonment, and against
his will, to labor for another, whether he is paid or not.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
o REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10364
“refers to a condition of enforced and compulsory service induced by means of
any scheme, plan or pattern, intended to cause a person to believe that if he or
she did not enter into or continue in such condition, he or she or another person
would suffer serious harm or other forms of abuse or physical restraint, or threat
of abuse or harm, or coercion including depriving access to travel documents and
withholding salaries, or the abuse or threatened abuse of the legal process”
o General Rule: No involuntary servitude shall exist.
TWO ASPECTS OF INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE

1. Compulsion to perform or work in consideration of debt against his will
2. Slavery
o The civil relation wherein one man has absolute power over the life, fortune
and liberty of another.
o REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10364
“refers to the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the
powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised”
*Peonage
A condition of enforced servitude by which the servitor is restrained of his
liberty and compelled to labor in liquidation of some debt or obligation real
or pretended, against his will.
Exceptions
a. As punishment for a crime whereof one has been duly convicted
5 SEC. 18(2), ART. III
eg: punishment is community service
b. Service in defense of the State
SEC 4, ART. II
the right of the State weighs over individual rights
c. Naval enlistment
ROBERTSON V. BALDWIN, NO. 334, JANUARY 25, 1897
eg: cruise in the middle of its trip
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
d. Posse comitatus - command to help them find some criminals
U.S. V. POMPEYA, NO. 10255, AUGUST 6, 1915
e. Return to work order in industries affected with public interest

PHIL. REFINING COMPANY WORKER’S UNION V PHIL. REFINING CO.
The voluntariness of employees entering into contract
employment. They have free choice between entering
into it or not with such an implied condition negates the
possibility of involuntary servitude ensuing.
f. Patria Potestas - mass of rights & obligation which parents have in
relation to the person or property of their children until majority of age
ART. 211, PAR.(2), FAMILY CODE
g. Obligation/ Duty under the law
IN THE MATTER OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS OF SEGIFREDO

ACLARACION
It is within the court jurisdiction to order a court
stenographer (employed or past employee) to submit
transcripts [Rule 122 Sec7]. Failure to comply with such
court order, could make the stenographer be held in
contempt of court [Rule 71 Sec7].
Section 19 PROHIBITED PUNISHMENT

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.
(2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment against any prisoner or
detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt
with by law.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Prohibited Punishment
Excessive fines, cruel, degrading, inhuman punishment
Excessive Punishment
PEOPLE V ESTOISTA
o It is valid. “Excessive” in excessive punishment does not refer to the duration
of the punishment but to the method of the punishment.
o Court can give the copy of the decision be furnished to the President, thru
the Secretary of Justice, with the recommendation that the imprisonment
imposed be lowered [ART 5 REVISED PENAL CODE].
To be CRUEL, DEGRADING & INHUMAN

the penalty must be flagrantly disproportionate to the offense no matter under what
circumstances the offense may be committed.
Unusual Punishment.
Is not prohibited as long as such punishment is not cruel, degrading & inhuman.
Death Penalty
o While the 1987 Constitution merely impose a limitation on the imposition of death
penalty, RA 9346 prohibits the imposition of death penalty.
o PEOPLE V ESPARAS
the role of the trial court only acts as a commissioner and all judgment of trial
court are merely recommendations. Which needs the approval of the Supreme
court in order to attain the character of finality.
Lethal Injection
ECHAGARAY V. SECRETARY OF JUSTICE
Constitutional protection does not extend towards inherent suffering in
the method of punishment to extinguish life humanely. It protects against
those unnecessary suffering.
Section 20 NON-IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT

Section 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Coverage:
Debt
Any civil obligation arising from a contract.
Poll Tax
A specific sum levied upon any person for being a member of the community and
for being able to vote; in accordance to their ability to pay.
e.g. Community Tax, Sedula
Basis
Social Justice. The inability of the person to pay is due to his dismal contractual condition.
In short the Constitution presumes good faith in part of the debtor.
SERAFIN V LINDAYAG
A simple indebtedness where there is only a promise to pay the amount borrowed
without collateral is within this constitutional protection. It does not amount to estafa.
Obligations from Law

o A tax is not a debt since it is an obligation arising from law. Hence, its non-payment
maybe validly punished with imprisonment.
o LOZANO V MARTINEZ
R.A. 9262
A man is under to support his wife and children. If he fails to provide
support to his family, the man can be convicted for violation of financial
violence. This obligation arising from law, the failure of the father to pay
financial obligation may result in imprisonment.
BP No. 22
o It is not the non-payment of an obligation which the law punishes.
The law is not intended or designed to coerce a debtor to pay his
debt. The thrust of the law is to prohibit, under pain of penal
sanctions, the making of worthless checks and putting them in
circulation the law punishes the act not as an offense against
property but an offense against public order.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
o The mere act of issuing a check turns the obligation from a contract
to law, which is not protected by this constitutional guarantee.
o The drawer has 5 days from notice of dishonor to pay the check to
not be held criminally liable.
Section 21 RIGHT AGAINST DOUBLE JEOPARDY

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.
MELO V PEOPLE
THE RULE OF 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 the consent of the accused; the latter can’t
again be charged with the same or identical offense.
Basis
Under the common law principle of Ne bis in idem- not twice in the same. No one
is tried twice
 An acquittal is final and not appealable on the ground of double jeopardy, whether it happens
in the trial court level or before the Court of Appeals. Only when there is a finding of a sham
trial can the doctrine of double jeopardy be not invoked because the people, as represented
by the prosecution, were denied due process.
General Rule:
Double jeopardy of punishment for the same offense; and
No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense
Exception:
Double jeopardy of punishment for the same act
o The act is punished by law and an ordinance a conviction or acquittal under
either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
o Law and an ordinance having legislated by different bodies can’t be identical
offenses
o PEOPLE V RELOVA
The determining factor is the identity of the act. The acts which
constitute or have given rise to the first offense under a municipal
ordinance are the same acts which constitute or have given rise to the
offense charged under the statute. (same criminal design)
REQUISITES
o To attach the first jeopardy
PEOPLE V OBSANIA
[SECTION 9, RULE 117 OF THE REVISED RULES OF COURT]
5. Valid complaint or information;
6. Filed before a competent court;
7. Arraignment
8. VALID plead to the charge; and
PEOPLE V BALISAN
A new of plea of not guilty must be entered for him but
it was not done. It follows the effect there having been
no standing plea at the time the court a quo rendered its
acquittal, there can be no double jeopardy with respect
to appeal herein.
9. Defendant was previously acquitted or convicted or the case

dismissed or otherwise terminated WITHOUT HIS EXPRESS
CONSENT.
o To raise the defense of double jeopardy

PEOPLE V TAMPAL
1. A first jeopardy must have attached prior to second.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
It is attached upon valid complaint of information sufficient in
form and substance sufficient to sustain conviction and that it
was file before a competent court
2. The first jeopardy must have been validly terminated there must be
acquittal, conviction or dismissal
PEOPLE V PINEDA
The mere filing of two information charging the same
offense is not and appropriate basis for invocation of
double jeopardy since the first jeopardy has not yet set
in by a previous conviction, acquittal or termination of
the case without the consent of the accused.
3. A second jeopardy must be for the same offense as that in the first
Termination of Case
PAULIN V GIMENEZ
No Double Jeopardy
1. the dismissal is made upon motion, or with the express consent of
the defendant;
2. the dismissal is not an acquittal or based upon consideration of the
evidence or of the merits of the case; and
3. the question to be passed upon by the appellate court is purely legal
so that should the dismissal be found incorrect, the case would have
to be remanded to the court of origin for further proceedings, to
determine the guilt or innocence of the defendant.
Acquittal
Always based on the merits, that is, the defendant is acquitted because
the evidence does not show that defendant's guilt is beyond reasonable
doubt
Dismissal Of Action
Dismissals terminate the proceedings, either because the court is not a
court of competent jurisdiction, or the evidence does not show that the
offense was committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the court, or
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
the complaint or information is not valid or sufficient in form and
substance
Dismissal is FINAL even if made with CONSENT of defendant
a. When the ground for dismissal is demurrer to evidence [PEOPLE V CITY
COURT OF SILAY]; or
b. When the proceedings have been unreasonably prolonged as to
violate the right of the accused to a speedy trial, such dismissal is a
dismissal on merit [ESMEÑA V POGOY].
EXEMPTION
When the appeal is made due to the question of the
validity of the presence of the violation against the
accused’ right to a speedy trial. [PEOPLE V TAMPAL]
LEJANO V PEOPLE
Right to Repose
The prosecution is barred from appealing judgment of acquittals, the
accused is entitled to rest. Therefore he may not be continuously or
successively prosecuted by the State for the hope that the fate of the
accused in the appellate court may be overturned
PEOPLE V OBSANIA
Dismissal with Express Consent
o Dismissal therein was not on the merits and not the conclusion that
a dismissal, other than on the merits, sought by the accused, is
deemed to be with his express consent and therefore constitutes a
waiver of his right to plead double jeopardy in the event of an appeal
by the prosecution or a second indictment for the same offense.
o Application of the sister doctrines of waiver and estoppel requires
two sine qua non conditions:
1. the dismissal must be sought or induced by the defendant
personally or through his counsel; and
2. such dismissal must not be on the merits and must not
necessarily amount to an acquittal.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
1st Jeopardy Attaches Only to Criminal Proceedings
ICASIANO V. SANDIGANBAYAN
o Does not attach when the first action is administrative in nature.
o Does not attach in preliminary investigation. There is no arraignment so
therefore there is no first jeopardy that is attached.
PEOPLE V ADIL
Doctrine of Supervening Event
o A new fact supervenes for which the defendant is responsible which changes
the character of the offense and together with facts existing at the time.
o RULE 120 REVISED RULES OF COURT
Doctrine of supervening event can be applied when the accused was
convicted for the lesser offense.
 *IDENTITY OF OFFENSES CHARGED: the constitutional protection against double jeopardy is
available only where an identity is shown to exist between the earlier and the subsequent
offenses charged.
 *Conviction of accused shall NOT bar another prosecution for an offense which necessarily
includes the offense originally charged when:
1. Graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising from the same act or
omission;
2. Facts constituting the graver offense arose or discovered only after the filing of the
former complaint or information; and
Melo Doctrine
Double jeopardy does not apply when 2nd offence does not exist at the
time that the 1st jeopardy existed.
3. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense was made without the consent of prosecutor or
offended party.
Inseparable offenses
o Where one offense is inseparable from another and proceeds from the same act, they
cannot be the subject of separate prosecutions.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
o However, it is possible for one act to give rise to several crimes: separate prosecutions
for each crime may be filed provided the elements of the several crimes are not identical.
Section 22 EX POST FACTO LAW AND BILL OF ATTAINDER

Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
Ex Post Facto Law

It is one that would make a previous act criminal although it was not so at the time it was
committed. A law can never be considered ex post facto as long as it operates prospectively since
its strictures would cover only offenses committed after and not before its enactment.
SALVADOR V MAPA
The constitutional doctrine that outlaws an ex post facto law generally prohibits the
retrospectivity of penal laws. Penal laws are those acts of the legislature which
prohibit certain acts and establish penalties for their violations; or those that define
crimes, treat of their nature, and provide for their punishment.
An ex post facto law has been defined as one —
a. which makes an action done before the passing of the law and which was
innocent when done criminal, and punishes such action; or
b. which aggravates a crime or makes it greater than it was when committed;
or
c. which changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the
law annexed to the crime when it was committed; or (
d. which alters the legal rules of evidence and receives less or different
testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the
offense in order to convict the defendant.
e. that 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; or
f. that 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
Characteristics:
1. Refers to criminal matters;
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
2. Retroactive; and
3. Prejudicial to the accused.
Application:
Prohibition applies only to criminal legislation which affects the substantial rights of the
accused. It also applies to criminal procedural law prejudicial to the accused. But it is
improper to apply the prohibition to an executive proclamation suspending the privilege
of writ of habeas corpus.
CONCEPTION V GARCIA
Act No. 3531 is an Act dealing exclusively with remedies and modes of
procedure. Such an Act is repugnant to no constitutional provision, and
its legality is beyond question. A person has no vested right in any
particular remedy, and a litigant cannot insist on the application to the
trial of his case, whether civil or criminal, of any other than the existing
rules of procedure. Statutes making changes in the remedy or procedure
are laws within the discretion of the lawmaking power, and are valid so
long as they do not deprive the accused of any substantial right, or
conflict with specific and applicable provisions of the Federal Constitution
 Even if the law be penal and retroactive, it will still not be ex post facto if it does not operate
to the disadvantage of the accused.
 If the punishment originally imposed is retroactively made heavier, or the method of its
execution made more severe, then the law will be subject to the constitutional prohibition.
US V DIAZ-CONDE
The Usury Law is a penal law thus it cannot become retroactive unless it is
favorable to the person accused as provided under Art. 21 and 22 of the Revised
Penal Code
VILLAR V PEOPLE
Penal laws and laws which, while not penal in nature, nonetheless have
provisions defining offenses and prescribing penalties for their violation operate
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
prospectively. Penal laws cannot be given retroactive effect, except when they
are favorable to the accused. R.A. No. 8042 amended pertinent provisions of
the Labor Code and gave a new definition of the crime of illegal recruitment and
provided for its higher penalty. There is no indication in R.A. No. 8042 that said
law, including the penalties provided therein, would take effect retroactively. A
law can never be considered ex post facto as long as it operates prospectively
since its strictures would cover only offenses committed after and not before
its enactment.
Bill of Attainder
It is legislative act that inflicts punishment without trial.
 It substitutes legislative fiat for a judicial determination of guilt. Thus, it is only when a statute
applies either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a
way as to inflict punishment on them without judicial trial that it becomes a bill of attainder.
 The provision prevents the legislature from assuming judicial magistracy. It is thus a general
safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function, or more simply – trial by
legislature.
Article IV Citizenship
Section 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines:
1. Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution;
2. Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;
3. Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon
reaching the age of majority; and
4. Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.
Section 2. Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to
perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect Philippine citizenship in
accordance with paragraph (3), Section 1 hereof shall be deemed natural-born citizens.
Section 3. Philippine citizenship may be lost or reacquired in the manner provided by law.
Section 4. Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain their citizenship, unless by their act or
omission they are deemed, under the law, to have renounced it.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Section 5. Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and shall be dealt with by law.
CITIZENSHIP
refers to the membership of a person to a democratic state which bestows upon
him/her full civil and political rights (unless especially disqualified by law), and the
corresponding duty to support and maintain allegiance to the state. Such membership
underscores the symbiotic relationship of the state, which on the one hand gives
protection to the citizen, and the citizen, who on the other hand is duty bound to
support the state.
NATIONALITY
Ethnic concept where one is bound by their racial origin
ACQUIRING CITIZENSHIP
BIRTH
a. jus loci (/lo-si/) or jus soli principle
o “place of birth” determines citizenship.
Philippines applied this principle:
o Treaty of Paris on April 11,1899
 Signed on Dec 10,1898 but only takes effect after
the exchange of the instrument of ratification which
is similar “meeting of the minds” in contracts
 PHILIPPINE BILL OF 1902, signed into law on July 1,
1902, to become the country’s “first organic act.”
Section 4 stipulated that the “inhabitants” of the
Philippine Islands who were Spanish subjects on
April 11, 1899, the date when the Treaty of Paris
was proclaimed as duly ratified by both Spain and
the United States, became “citizens of the
Philippine Islands” (unless one opted for Spanish
nationality).
o Malolos Constitution
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Filipinos included “all persons born on Filipino
territory.” Lifted from the Spanish Constitution
o 1935 Constitution
Caram Provision
 Modified jus soli
 Both parents are foreigner, child lived in the
Philippines and worked in the public office.
Child is considered Filipino
 Made in consideration of Dr. Caram who was
one of those who wrote the constitution
b. jus sanguinis principle

o “blood relations” determine citizenship
o The 1987 Constitution Philippines the jus sanguinis principle and is
now the underlying theory behind Article IV.
MARRIAGE
NATURALIZATION
CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES
SECTION 1 ARTICLE 4 OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
1. Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this
Constitution;
who were already Filipino citizen under the 1935 & 1973 Constitution would still
be citizens at the time of the passage of the 1987 Constitution.
2. Those whose MOTHER OR FATHER are citizens of the Philippines;
1935 Constitution Filipino father = Filipino child (illegitimate/legitimate)
Filipino Mother with Foreigner Father = Illegitimate
child must elect at the age of majority
1973 Constitution Filipino father or mother
Tecson v COMELEC
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Alan despite being American citizen is a Filipino citizen being
born from a Filipino father (who was naturalized from 1902
Mass Filipinization) regardless of being illegitimate hence Alan’s
child in turn is a Filipino citizen
Republic v Lim
Only legitimate children of foreigner father and Filipino mothers
are required to elect Filipino citizenship as required under
Commonwealth Act 625
3. Those born before January 17, 1973 (before the adoption of the 1973 Constitution),
of Filipino mothers, who elect Filipino citizenship upon reaching the age of majority;
and
Those with foreign father who elected their Filipino citizenship upon reaching
the 18 years old in accordance with 1935 Constitution which was in effect at the
time of their birth
4. Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.
Natural Born
A Filipino by birth. Someone who is already a Filipino at the time of his birth and does
not have to do anything to acquire or perfect his citizenship (Sec. 2, Art. II).
Naturalized Citizens.
o Someone who was once a foreigner then later on became a Filipino by legal fiction
o Naturalization entails renunciation of former allegiance and the subsequent act of
formal entrance into a new body politic.
o Naturalized citizens those are clothed by law with the rights and privileges accorded
to a citizen of the Philippines, as well as bound by their duties to the State. They can
vote during elections, acquire real property, and engage in business, among others.
They must likewise observe loyalty to the Philippines, pay their taxes, and obey the
laws and duly constituted authorities of the land.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Limitation of Naturalized Citizens
o The grant of citizenship by naturalization is an act of grace on the part of the
State. Just as the State can confer or grant citizenship, it can also withhold
or take away the same. Thus, aliens or foreigners do not have a natural or
inherent right to demand membership to the State.
o They cannot be elected President or Vice-President, or member of the
Congress, or appointed justice of the Supreme Court or lower collegiate
courts, or member of any of the Constitutional Commissions, or
Ombudsman or his Deputy, or member of the Central Monetary Agency
Kinds of Naturalization
A foreigner can be naturalized in either of three ways:
a. Judicial naturalization
refers to naturalization by means of court judgment pursuant to the
“Revised Naturalization Act.” Applications are filed with the proper
Regional Trial Court which will render the decree of naturalization;
b. Legislative naturalization
refers to naturalization by means of a direct act of Congress, that is, by
the enactment of a law by the Congress declaring therein that a
foreigner is conferred citizenship and admitted into the political
community; and
c. Administrative naturalization
is naturalization by means of administrative proceedings before the
Special Committee on Naturalization pursuant to the “Administrative
Naturalization Law of 2000.” Applicants must be aliens born and
residing in the Philippines with all of the qualifications and none of the
disqualifications provided by law.
SECTION 3, ARTICLE 4 OF THE CONSTITUTION states that Philippine citizenship may be lost or
reacquired in the manner provided by law.
Lost of Citizenship
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
Commonwealth Act No. 63
Citizenship is lost by naturalization in another country, by express renunciation
of citizenship, by subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the constitution
and laws of another country, by rendering service to a foreign armed forces, and
by deserting the armed forces of the Philippines.
Commonwealth Act No. 473
which states that citizenship is lost by cancellation of certificate of naturalization
by court, by permanent residence in the country of origin for a period of five
years from the time of naturalization, by an invalid declaration of intent in the
petition, by failure to with the educational requirements of the minor children,
and by allowing oneself to used by a foreigner.
Reacquisition of Citizenship
o Commonwealth Act No. 63 also provides that citizenship which was lost may
be reacquired by naturalization, by a direct act of Congress, or by
repatriation.
3. Naturalization may be applied for by a former Philippine citizen who

lost his citizenship under any of the aforesaid ways.
4. The Congress can also reinstitute, by means of a law, citizenship to
those who lost it.
5. Repatriation is accomplished by taking the necessary oath of
allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and then registering the
same in the proper Civil Registry and in the Bureau of Immigration.
This is available to women who have lost their citizenship through
marriage to aliens, those who lost their citizenship on account of
economic and political necessity not otherwise disqualified by law,
and deserters of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.
Republic Act No. 9225 Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act of 2003
Amended Commonwealth Act No. 63. It provides that natural born citizens of
the Philippines who lost their citizenship because of naturalization in a foreign
country shall be deemed to have reacquired their Philippine citizenship upon
CONSTI2 2016- 2017
taking the oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines. After the
effectivity of RA 9225, those who are naturalized in a foreign country shall retain
their Philippine citizenship also upon taking the oath of allegiance to the
Republic of the Philippines. Thus, under the present law, it is the taking of the
necessary oath of allegiance and registration of the same that retains and
reacquires Philippine citizenship.
Marriage to an Alien.
Section 4, Article IV, mere marriage to an alien is not a ground for losing
Philippine citizenship, unless there is implied or express renunciation through
acts or omissions.
eg: subscribes to an oath of allegiance to the foreign country
Dual Allegiance
o Section 5, Article IV states, “Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national
interest and shall be dealt with by law.”
o Dual allegiance happens when a naturalized citizen of the Philippines maintains his
allegiance to his country of origin. It is dual allegiance that is prohibited because it
is intentional
Dual Citizenship
The Constitution, however, does not prohibit dual citizenship because of the difference
of the laws of foreign countries. Dual allegiance is different from dual citizenship. Dual
citizenship happens when an individual is a citizen of two countries because the laws of
both countries confer upon him membership to their State.
eg: born in a country where the principle of jus soli is applied; married foreigner
spouse thus gaining the spouse’ citizenship
Limitation on Dual Citizenship.
Dual citizenship may be prohibited under special cases. For instance, pursuant
to the Constitution & RA 9225 requires that all those who are seeking elective
public offices in the Philippines to execute a personal and sworn renunciation of
any and all foreign citizenship to qualify them as candidates in the Philippine
elections.
CONSTI2 2016- 2017

CONSTI2 NOTES Tan

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

CONSTI2 NOTES Tan

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE PHILIPPINES

CONSTITUTION OF THE PHILIPPINES

ARTICLE III – BILL OF RIGHTS, 1987 PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION

TWO KINDS OF RIGHTS EMBODIED IN ARTICLE III:

RIGHTS UNDER ARTICLE III:

DUE PROCESS OF LAW

ASPECTS OF DUE PROCESS:

EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS

Section 2 RIGHT AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE

Requisites of Valid Warrant

Subject to Search and Seizure

PROPER DESCRIPTION OF THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED

Valid Searches WITHOUT WARRANT

WAIVER OF RIGHT AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE

RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

ABSOLUTE FREEDOM OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE SPOUSES

ANTI-WIRE TAPPING ACT (R.A. 4200)

DETERMINE REASONABLENESS OF PERSON'S EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY

Section 4 FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

For commercial speech to enjoy protection, it must not be false

Freedom from subsequent punishment

Tests for Valid Government Interference to Freedom of Expression

Valid Governmental Regulation

EXCEPTIONS TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH

ASSEMBLY AND PETITION

RULES ON ASSEMBLY AND PETITION

Permit for public assembly is NOT necessary if meeting is to be held in

Tests of a lawful assembly

BP No. 880 : The Public Assembly Act of 1985

DEMONSTRATIONS IN THE VICINITY OF COURTS

Section 5 FREEDOM OF RELIGION

FREEDOM OF BELIEF FREEDOM TO ACT ON ONE’S BELIEF

Tests to determine when there is no violation of establishment clause

Constitutionally Created Exceptions to the Non-Establishment Clause:

FREEDOM OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF AND WORSHIP

Section 6 LIBERTY OF ABODE AND FREEDOM TO TRAVEL

The right to travel only includes

Watch-list and Hold-departure Orders

Section 7 RIGHT TO INFORMATION

These are political rights that are available to citizens only.

RESTRICTIONS ON THE ACCESS OF TO INFORMATION

Section 8 RIGHT TO ASSOCIATION

Section 10 NON-IMPAIRMENT OF OBLIGATIONS OF CONTRACTS CLAUSE

When is there impairment of the obligations of contracts?

Section 11 FREE ACCESS TO COURTS

Section 12 CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION

RIGHTS OF PERSONS UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION

Requisites of admissible extrajudicial confession

 The constitutional safeguards on custodial investigation do not apply to spontaneous

What rights may be waived

What rights cannot be waived:

2. After the case is filed in court:

Section 13 RIGHT TO BAIL

3 Day Motion Rule

Standards for fixing amount of bail

Bail as Right v Discretionary

Discretion Lies Upon:

WHEN BAIL SHALL BE DENIED

BAIL – WAIVABLE RIGHT

Bail on Extradition Cases

Five postulates of extradition proceedings

Bail is granted only upon a clear and convincing evidence showing

Section 14 RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED DURING TRIAL