HUMAN RIGHTS

EDUCATION

"Peace can only last where human rights are respected,

where the people are fed, and where individuals and nations are free."
-14th Dalai Lama

Prepared by:

Atty. Christian Leonard V. Masongsong, JD.

 LESSON I: INTRODUCTION TO HUMAN
RIGHTS EDUCATION

After the learning process, you will learn the general idea of human rights and the events
which led to its institutionalization.

What is Human Rights? Every person has dignity and value. One of the ways that we recognize
the fundamental worth of every person is by acknowledging and respecting their human rights.

Human rights are a set of principles concerned with equality and fairness. They recognize our
freedom to make choices about our lives and to develop our potential as human beings. They are
about living a life free from fear, harassment or discrimination. Human rights can broadly be
defined as a number of basic rights that people from around the world have agreed are essential.

These include the right to life, the right to a fair trial, freedom from torture and other cruel and
inhuman treatment, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the rights to health, education
and an adequate standard of living.

These human rights are the same for all people everywhere – men and women, young and old,
rich and poor, regardless of our background, where we live, what we think or what we believe.
This is what makes human rights ‘universal’.

History of Human Rights

The belief that everyone, by virtue of her or his humanity, is entitled to certain human rights is
fairly new. Its roots, however, lie in earlier tradition and documents of many cultures; it took the
catalyst of World War II to propel human rights onto the global stage and into the global
conscience.

Throughout much of history, people acquired rights and responsibilities through their
membership in a group – a family, indigenous nation, religion, class, community, or state. Most
societies have had traditions similar to the "golden rule" of "Do unto others as you would have
them do unto you." The Hindu Vedas, the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi, the Bible, the Quran
(Koran), and the Analects of Confucius are five of the oldest written sources which address
questions of people’s duties, rights, and responsibilities. In addition, the Inca and Aztec codes of
conduct and justice and an Iroquois Constitution were Native American sources that existed well
before the 18th century. In fact, all societies, whether in oral or written tradition, have had
systems of propriety and justice as well as ways of tending to the health and welfare of their
members.

Documents asserting individual rights, such the Magna Carta (1215), the English Bill of Rights
(1689), the French Declaration on the Rights of Man and Citizen (1789), and the US Constitution
and Bill of Rights (1791) are the written precursors to many of today’s human rights documents.
Yet many of these documents, when originally translated into policy, excluded women, people of
color, and members of certain social, religious, economic, and political groups. Nevertheless,
oppressed people throughout the world have drawn on the principles these documents express to
support revolutions that assert the right to self-determination.
The Birth of United Nations.

The idea of human rights emerged stronger after World War II. Governments then committed
themselves to establishing the United Nations, with the primary goal of bolstering international
peace and preventing conflict. People wanted to ensure that never again would anyone be
unjustly denied life, freedom, food, shelter, and nationality. The essence of these emerging
human rights principles was captured in President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s 1941 State of the
Union Address when he spoke of a world founded on four essential freedoms: freedom of speech
and religion and freedom from want and fear.

The calls came from across the globe for human rights standards to protect citizens from abuses
by their governments, standards against which nations could be held accountable for the
treatment of those living within their borders. These voices played a critical role in the San
Francisco meeting that drafted the United Nations Charter in 1945.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

On December 10, 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was adopted by the
56 members of the United Nations. Commonly referred to as the international Magna Carta, it
extended the revolution in international law ushered in by the United Nations Charter – namely,
that how a government treats its own citizens is now a matter of legitimate international concern,
and not simply a domestic issue. It claims that all rights are interdependent and indivisible.

The influence of the UDHR has been substantial. Its principles have been incorporated into the
constitutions of most of the more than 185 nations now in the UN. Although a declaration is not
a legally binding document, the Universal Declaration has achieved the status of customary
international law because people regard it "as a common standard of achievement for all people
and all nations."
What do Human Rights Cover?
Human rights cover virtually every area of human activity. They include civil and political rights,
which refer to a person’s rights to take part in the civil and political life of their community
without discrimination or oppression. These include rights and freedoms such as the right to
vote, the right to privacy, freedom of speech and freedom from torture. The right to vote and take
part in choosing a government is a civil and political right.

They also include economic, social and cultural rights, which relate to a person’s rights to
prosper and grow and to take part in social and cultural activities. This group includes rights such
as the right to health, the right to education and the right to work.

Why are human rights important?

Values of tolerance, equality and respect can help reduce friction within society. Putting human
rights ideas into practice can helps us create the kind of society we want to live in.
In recent decades, there has been a tremendous growth in how we think about and apply human
rights ideas. This has had many positive results - knowledge about human rights can empower
individuals and offer solutions for specific problems.

Human rights are an important part of how people interact with others at all levels in society - in
the family, the community, schools, the workplace, in politics and in international relations. It is
vital therefore that people everywhere should strive to understand what human rights are. When
people better understand human rights, it is easier for them to promote justice and the well-being
of society.

Who has responsibility to protect human rights?

Human rights connect us to each other through a shared set of rights and responsibilities.

A person’s ability to enjoy their human rights depends on other people respecting those rights.
This means that human rights involve responsibility and duties towards other people and the
community. Individuals have a responsibility to ensure that they exercise their rights with
consideration for the rights of others. For example, when someone uses their right to freedom of
speech, they should do so without interfering with someone else’s right to privacy.

Governments have a particular responsibility to ensure that people are able to enjoy their rights.
They are required to establish and maintain laws and services that enable people to enjoy a life in
which their rights are respected and protected.

For example, the right to education says that everyone is entitled to a good education. This
means that governments have an obligation to provide good quality education facilities and
services to their people. Whether or not governments actually do this, it is generally accepted that
this is the government's responsibility and people can call them to account if they fail to respect
or protect their basic human rights.
State as a guarantor of human rights.

The stet is not the giver of human rights, for these are inherent in all human beings. The role of
the state in the social order is to see to it that members of society acknowledge its authority and
that it governs the people properly. In turn, the state must recognize that the people have rights
and freedoms that are inherent in them and cannot be taken away. With this recognition is the
state’s duty to guarantee the continued enjoyment by the people of their rights. in other words, in
order to achieve an orderly society where there prevails a harmonious relationship between the
ruler and the ruled, the ruled must bow to the authority of the ruler and the ruler must respect the
inherent rights and fundamental freedoms of its citizens.

As guarantor of human rights, the state may be held accountable when people are deprived of
their rights by its actions or inaction.

Violations by “State actors”.

States are abstract entities, they do not act on their own. States act through their agents or “state
actors”. When a state actor violates the human rights of an individual, it is deemed a violation of
the state itself. This is the reason why demands for human rights are made against the
government when, for instance, a police officer fails to observe the Miranda warning, or makes
shortcuts in implementing the law or violates a person’s right to privacy.

Doctrine of Command responsibility.

Liability for violation of human rights, in the same manner as criminal liability under the
Revised Penal Code, may be incurred by an act or omission. The offender can be made to answer
for his act, as well as for his inaction, when such act or inaction results in human rights violation.
The failure of a superior officer to stop human rights violations committed by his subordinates,
though absent a showing that he directly ordered the commission of these acts, could also make
him liable as well for such acts.

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

1. What is United Nations?

2. What is United Nations Declaration of Human Rights?
3. What is the importance of Human rights?
4. How does a person gain human rights?
5. What is the Doctrine of Command responsibility?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

 INSTRUCTIONS: Cite an example of current human rights violations which can be
observed in the world during the present times and discuss why it is considered as human rights
violation?

LESSON II NATURE AND

CHARACTERISTICS OF HUMAN RIGHTS.

After the learning process, you will understand the nature and characteristics of human
rights and their implication with daily human lives.

What is human rights?

Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, regardless of race, sex, nationality,
ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status.

Human rights are rights we have simply because we exist as human beings - they are not
granted by any state.

What are the general classifications of rights?

1. Natural Rights- those possessed by every citizen without being granted by the State for
they are inherent to the existence of human beings.
2. Constitutional Rights- those which are conferred by the Constitution.
3. Statutory rights- those provided by laws promulgated by the lawmaking body and
consequently may be taken back by the same body.

What are the classifications of human rights?

1. Civil Rights- Civil rights are those rights which provide opportunity to each person to
lead a civilized social life. These fulfill basic needs of human life in society, Right to life,
liberty and equality are civil rights. Civil rights are protected by the state. They refer to
those rights that belong to every citizen of the state or country, or, in wider sense, to all
its inhabitants, and are not connected with the organization or administration of the
government. They include the rights of property, marriage, equal protection of the laws,
freedom of contract, etc. Or, as otherwise defined civil rights are rights appertaining to a
person by virtue of his citizenship in a state or community. Such term may also refer, in
its general sense, to rights capable of being enforced or redressed in a civil action.
2. Political rights- Political rights are those rights by virtue of which inhabitants get a share
in the political process. These allow them to take an active part in the political process.
These rights include right to vote, right to get elected, right to hold public office and right
to criticize and oppose the government. Political rights are really available to the people
in a democratic state. They refer to the right to participate, directly or indirectly, in the
establishment or administration of government, the right of suffrage, the right to hold
 public office, the right of petition and, in general, the rights appurtenant to
citizenship vis-a-vis the management of government.
3. Economic Rights- Economic rights are those rights which provide economic security to
the people. These empower all citizens to make proper use of their civil and political
rights. The basic needs of every person are related to his food, clothing, shelter, and
medical treatment. Without the fulfillment of these no person can really enjoy his civil
and political rights. It is therefore essential, that every person must get the right to work,
right to adequate wages, right to leisure and rest, and right to social security in case of
illness, physical disability and old age.
4. Social Rights- are a type of Human Rights, which unlike traditional rights, are not vested
in a single individual but belongs to all people so that all of them can collective enjoyed.
That is, they are enjoyed jointly rather than severally. Collective Rights are also called
Third Generation Rights, Solidarity Rights or New Rights. Examples of this right are
right to a safe environment, right to peace, right to development, right to self-
determination, and others.
What are the basic characteristics of human rights?

1. Inherent. Human rights are inherent because they are not granted by any person or
authority. They do not need any event for their existence. They are distinguished from
constitutional or legal rights, which are provided in state constitutions or legislative
bodies. Some examples of these rights are right to life and right to dignity as human being.
2. Fundamental. Human rights are fundamental because without them the life and the
dignity of man will be meaningless. Some examples of fundamental human rights are right
to liberty and right to security of a person.
3. Inalienable. Human rights are inalienable because they cannot be rightfully taken away
from a free individual.
4. Imprescriptible. Human rights cannot be lost even by a long passage of time. Man does
not lose his rights even if he fails to use or assert them. For example, a person who has
been arbitrarily detained does not lose his right to liberty even if he does not claim it.
5. Indivisible. Human rights are not capable of being divided. They cannot be denied to
anyone even when other rights have already been enjoyed. An example is the right to
freedom of religion and worship.
6. Universal. Human rights are universal to all human beings irrespective of origin, race,
religion, status or condition. The human rights of Asians are the same as the human rights
of Europeans and Americans. Human rights are universal because they can be enforced
beyond national borders.

What are the sources of human rights in the Philippines?

The concept and practice of human rights within the Philippines is defined by Article III
of the Philippine Constitution, as well as the United Nations' International Bill of Human
Rights, to which the Philippines is a signatory. By means of the doctrine of incorporation, the
human rights laws in the Philippines are construed to include those which are established
through International conventions, international customs, general principles of law and
Judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists.
 Doctrine of Incorporation- Under the 1987 Constitution (Article II, Section 2), the
Philippines adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of
the land. This means that the Philippines has the obligation to observe generally accepted
principles of international law not only as customary but because of the express provision of
the incorporation clause in the Constitution.

What is the scope of human rights?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as, or more specifically, the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights, suggests that the scope of human rights can be understood to
include those that relate to an individual's social, economic, cultural, political and civil
relations. It thus seems to closely identify the term to the universally accepted traits and
attributes of an individual, along with what is generally considered to be his inherent and
inalienable rights, encompassing almost all aspects of life.1

What is Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution?

Article III of the constitution is the Bill of Rights and it sets out provisions regarding the
fundamental rights and principles of the state policy that guarantees human rights and freedoms
such as the right to life and liberty, prohibition of unjust arrest and detention, prohibition of
forced labor and slavery, the privacy of home, the freedom of movement, freedom of assembly,
freedom of association, the freedom of speech and religion.

It establishes the relationship of the individual to the State and defines the rights of the individual
by limiting the lawful powers of the State. It is one of the most important political achievements
of the Filipinos.

What is the importance of the Constitution?

The 1987 Philippine Constitution is the basic and fundamental law of the land, upon which all
laws passed and would be passed by the State must conform with the principles laid down by the
constitution, otherwise the enactment will be declared null and void and will not produce any
legal effects.

Since human rights law are enshrined by no less than the Constitution, the importance of their
enforcement and protection is emphasized. This means that no law may be passed in violation or
in contravention of the tenets under the Bill of Rights that will equate to violation or suppression
of human rights.

Against whom may the provisions of Bill of Rights be invoked?

1
Brigido R. Simon v. Commission on Human Rights, G.R. No. 100150, 5 January 1994.
The liberties guaranteed by the fundamental law of the land must always be subject to protection.
But protection against whom? Protection against the state. The Bill of Rights governs the
relationship between the individual and the state. Its concern is not the relation between
individuals, between a private individual and other individuals. What the Bill of Rights does is to
declare some forbidden zones in the private sphere inaccessible to any power holder. The Bill of
Rights embodied in the Constitution is not meant to be invoked against acts of private
individuals.

“The individual citizen is but a speck of particle or molecule vis-à-vis the vast and
overwhelming powers of government. His only guarantee against oppression and tyranny are
his fundamental liberties under the Bill of Rights which shield him in times of need.”2

Your Learning Process

1. What is the doctrine of incorporation?

2. What is the Constitution?
3. What are the sources of human rights?
4. What are political rights?
5. What are the characteristics of human rights?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

Case Study: Read and prepare a digest of the case of People of the Philippines vs. Andre Marti,
G.R. No. 81561, 18 January 1991.

LESSON III. EMINENT DOMAIN

AND TAXATION

After your learning process you will discuss the different powers of the government and
their impact on human rights.

Sec. 9, Art. III. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.

What is the powers of eminent domain? The power of eminent domain is the inherent right of
the State to forcibly acquire needed property upon just compensation, in order to devote it to the
intended public use.

The exercise of the right of eminent domain, whether directly by the State or by its authorized
agents, is necessarily in derogation of private rights. The authority to condemn is to be strictly
construed in favor of the owner and against the condemnor. When the power is granted, the
extent to which it may be exercised is limited to the express terms or clear implication of the
statute in which the grant is contained [National Power Corp. v. Tarcelo, G.R. No. 198139
(2014)]

2
Secretary of Justice vs. Hon. Ralph Lantion, G.R. No. 139465, 18 January 2000.
Who may exercise the power of eminent domain? The repository of eminent domain powers is
legislature, i.e. exercised through the enactment of laws. But power may be delegated to LGUs
and other government entities (via charter); still, the delegation must be by law.

Under existing laws, the following may exercise the power of expropriation:

1. Congress
2. President
3. Local legislative bodies
4. Certain public corporations, like the National Housing Authority and water districts
[Metropolitan Cebu Water District v. J. King and Sons Company, Inc., G.R. No. 175983
(2009)].
5. Quasi-public corporations like the Philippine National Railways (PNR), PLDT, Meralco

Requisites for Valid Exercise

1. Private property
2. Genuine necessity - inherent/presumed in legislation, but when the power is delegated
(e.g. local government units), necessity must be proven.
3. For public use - Court has adopted a broad definition of “public use”
4. Payment of just compensation
5. Due process [Manapat v. CA, supra]

How exercised? Our laws require that the State's power of eminent domain shall be exercised
through expropriation proceedings in court. Whenever private property is taken for public use, it
becomes the ministerial duty of the concerned office or agency to initiate expropriation
proceedings. [Department of Transportation and Communication v. Sps. Abecina, G.R. No.
206484, (2016)].

Prior filing of an expropriation case is a condition sine qua non before the government is allowed
to enter the property being reclaimed and without which, the government’s possession over the
subject property becomes illegal [Secretary of the Department of Public Works and Highways v.
Tecson, G.R. No. 179334 (2015)].

HOWEVER, Full payment of just compensation is not a prerequisite for the Government’s
effective taking of the property; When the taking of the property precedes the payment of just
compensation, the Government shall indemnify the property owner by way of interest [Republic
v. Mupas, G.R. No. 181892 (2015)].

The taking of property is different from the transfer of the property title from the private owner
to the Government.

Phases of expropriation. Under Rule 67 of the Rules of Court, there are two phases of
expropriation:
 1. the condemnation of the property after it is determined that its acquisition will be for a
public purpose or public use; and
2. the determination of just compensation to be paid for the taking of private property to be
made by the court with the assistance of not more than three commissioners [Republic v.
Mupas, supra].

Difference Between Eminent Domain (Compensable Taking) and Regulatory Taking

1. Eminent domain is an inherent power of the state based on the Constitution. Just
compensation must be paid.
2. Regulatory taking is the exercise of the state of its police power. In this case, just
compensation need not be paid.

What is just compensation? “The property’s fair market value at the time of the filing of the
complaint, or that sum of money which a person desirous to buy but not compelled to buy, and
an owner willing but not compelled to sell, would agree on as price to be given and received
therefor” [National Power Corporation v. Baguio, G.R. No. L- 15763 (2008)].

A full and fair equivalent of the property taken from the private owner by the expropriator. The
measure is not the taker’s gain but the owner’s loss. Just compensation is intended to indemnify
the owner fully for the loss he has sustained as a result of the expropriation.

What happens when the expropriator abandons the intended use? If the expropriator
(government) does not use the property for a public purpose, the property reverts to the owner in
fee simple [Heirs of Moreno v. Mactan-Cebu International Airport, G.R. No. 156273 (2005)].

In Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority v. Tudtud [G.R. No. 174012 (2008)], the Court
held that the expropriator has the obligation to reconvey property expropriated but never used, on
the condition that the landowners would return the just compensation they received, plus interest.

The Power of Taxation.

What is Taxation? It is the power by which the State raises revenue to defray the necessary
expenses of the Government. It is the enforced proportional contributions from persons and
property, levied by the State by virtue of its sovereignty, for the support of the government and
for all public needs.

What are the purposes of Taxation?

1. To raise revenue;
2. As a tool for regulation;
3. Protection/power to be alive.

Lifeblood theory and Necessity theory. Taxes are the lifeblood of the government, for without
taxes, the government can neither exist nor endure. A principal attribute of sovereignty, the
exercise of taxing power derives its source from the very existence of the state whose social
contract with its citizens obliges it to promote public interest and common good. The theory
behind the exercise of the power to tax emanates from necessity; without taxes, government
cannot fulfill its mandate of promoting the general welfare and well-being of the people. [NPC v.
Cabanatuan, G.R. No. 149110, (2003)]

Requisites for valid exercise of the power of Taxation.

1. Taxes must be uniform and equitable. Taxes should be (a) uniform, i.e: persons or
things belonging to the same class shall be taxed at the same rate; and (b) equitable, i.e:
taxes should be apportioned among the people according to their ability to pay
2. Progressive system of taxation. The rate increases as the tax base increases, with social
justice as basis Taxation here is an instrument for a more equitable distribution of wealth.
3. Valid delegation. Congress may delegate law-making authority when the Constitution
itself specifically authorizes it.

General limitations.

1. Power to tax exists for the general welfare; should be exercised only for a public purpose
2. Might be justified as for public purpose even if the immediate beneficiaries are private
individuals
3. Tax should not be confiscatory: If a tax measure is so unconscionable as to amount to
confiscation of property, the Court will invalidate it. But invalidating a tax measure must
be exercised with utmost caution, otherwise, the State’s power to legislate for the public
welfare might be seriously curtailed.
4. Taxes should be uniform and equitable.

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

1. What are the inherent powers of the State

2. What is the power of Taxation?
3. What is the power of eminent domain?
4. What are the limitations to a delegation of power?
5. What is just compensation?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

INSTRUCTIONS: Why is the power of taxation an important power of the State and
may it be taken away as additional freedom to the citizens?

LESSON IV. POLICE POWER

 After the learning process you will be able to discuss what police power is and the
elements of its valid exercise and its impact on human rights.

What is Police Power?

It is the inherent and plenary power of the state which enables it to prohibit all that is hurtful to
the comfort, safety and welfare of society. [Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators
Association, Inc. v. Mayor of Manila, G.R. No. L-24693 (1967)]

The police power of the state is a power coextensive with self-protection, and is not inaptly
termed the “law of the overruling necessity” [Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, G.R. No. L-
14078 (1919)]

Police power, while incapable of an exact definition, has been purposely veiled in general terms
to underscore its comprehensiveness to meet all exigencies and provide enough room for an
efficient and flexible response as the conditions warrant” [White Light Corporation v. City of
Manila, G.R. No. 122846 (2009)].

Scope and limitations.

“The state in order to promote the general welfare, may interfere with personal liberty, with
property, and with business and occupations. Persons may be subjected to all kinds of restraints
and burdens, in order to secure the general [Link], health and prosperity of the state and to this
fundamental aim of our Government, the rights of the individual are subordinated” [Ortigas and
Co., Limited Partnership v. Feati Bank and Trust Co., G.R. No. L- 24670 (1979)].

As police power derives its existence from the very existence of the State itself, it does not need
to be expressed or defined in its scope. [Ichong v. Hernandez, G.R. No. L-7995 (1957)].

Police power has been characterized as the most essential, insistent, and the least limitable of
powers, extending as it does to all the great public needs [Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel
Operators Association, Inc. v. Mayor of Manila, supra)].

Despite the awesome nature of police power, such right of the state is not absolute. It is
circumscribed by no less than Article III, Sec. 1 of the Philippine Constitution which mandates
that “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor any
person be denied the equal protection of the laws.”

This constitutional mandate on due process is a safeguard against the arbitrary and despotic
wielding of police power by the government.

What are the tests to determine validity of exercise of police power? Jurisprudence is replete
with cases which laid down the test to determine the validity of the exercise of police power as
follows: (1) the interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular class,
requires its exercise; and (2) the means employed are reasonably necessary for the
accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly oppressive upon individuals [National
Development Company v. Philippine Veterans Bank, 192 SCRA 257]. This is otherwise known
as the lawful subject and lawful means test.

If the governmental act does not satisfy the lawful subject and lawful means test, then the act is
struck down as unconstitutional. Thus, such governmental acts were held unlawful and
unconstitutional by the Philippine Supreme Court: city ordinance prohibiting the operation of
beerhouses, cabarets and saunas [City of Manila vs. Laguio, 455 SCRA 308], ordinance banning
short-time admission rates in motels [White Light Corporation vs. City of Manila, G.R. No.
122846, 20 January 2009], among others.

Taxation and Eminent Domain as Implements on Police Power.

Taxation may be used as an implement of police power [Lutz v. Araneta, G.R. No. L-7859
(1955)].

Eminent domain may be used as an implement to attain the police objective. [Association of
Small Landowners v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform, G.R. No. 78742, (1989)]

Who may exercise police power? Generally it is exercised by the legislative branch of the
government.

To whom may the exercise of the power be delegated

1. President;
2. Administrative bodies;
3. Law-making bodies of the Local Government units under the general welfare clause.

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

1. What is police power?

2. Who can exercise police power?
3. What is taking in the context of police power?
4. When can the power of police power be delegated?
5. To whom may police power be delegated?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

INSTRUCTIONS: Distinguish between the taking in the context of eminent domain and
police power.
 LESSON V. DUES PROCESS

After the learning process, you will familiarize yourself with the principle of due process
and how it is enforced.

Article III Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty and property without due
process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of laws.

What is Due Process?

Due process evades a precise definition. The purpose of the guaranty is to
prevent arbitrary governmental encroachment against the life, liberty and
property of individuals. It ensures persons fair and public trial before a competent tribunal, the
right to be present at the trial, and the right to be heard in his or her own defense. Due process
includes both the right to a fair trial and the right to an effective remedy. a law which hears
before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgment only after trial." Due
process "contemplates notice and opportunity to be heard before judgment is rendered affecting
one’s person or property.

The due process requirement entails the opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in
a meaningful manner.

Due process is essentially a limitation on the state’s exercise of its police power which is the
power of the State to regulate liberty and property for the promotion of the general welfare.

What is meant by “Person’s life, liberty and property.”

The subject of due process of law is limited to a person’s life, liberty, or property which the State
commits to protect against potential abuse of its agents.

“Person” is taken to mean every natural or juridical being susceptible of rights and obligations
or of being the subject of legal relations. However, with respect to juridical or artificial persons,
the constitutional guarantee extends only to their property rights considering that their life and
liberty are created by law and therefore subject to regulation of the legislature.

“Life” is the whole state of being of a person which begins from conception and birth, and ends
with death. It also refers to the existence of a person wherein all or any of his bodily organs are
capable of performing all or any of their functions.

“Liberty” means the freedom from any arbitrary and unreasonable restraint upon a person,
physically or otherwise, or on his ability to act according to his own will.
The term is deemed to embrace the right of man to enjoy the facilities with which he has been
endowed by his Creator, subject only to such restraint as are necessary for the common welfare. 3
“Property” generally refers to anything which is or may be the object of appropriation. They are
considered to either be immovable or movable property. It covers anything that is within the
commerce of men and can come under the right of ownership and be the subject of a contract.
3
Morfe v. Mutuc, G.R. No. L-20387, 31 January 1968, 22 SCRA 424
Conditions for application of due process.
In order to fall within the aegis of due process provision of the Constitution, two conditions must
concur:
a. There is deprivation of life, liberty or property; and
b. Such deprivation is done without the proper observance of due process.
What constitutes Deprivation?
To deprive is to take away forcibly, to prevent from possessing, enjoying or using something. As
applied to due process, deprivation connotes denial of the right to life, liberty or property.
deprivation per se is not necessarily unconstitutional or in violation of human rights. what is
prohibited is deprivation of life, liberty or property without due process of law.
1. Deprivation of life - the loss of any of the various physical and mental attributes that man
must have to live as a human being. It is the very foundation of human rights.
2. Deprivation of liberty – when one is duly prevented from acting as he wishes within the
bounds of law.
3. Deprivation of property - when its value is destroyed or its adaptability to some legislation
should be treated alike under circumstances and conditions both in the privileges conferred and
liabilities imposed.

Components of Due Process

Due Process is comprised of two components: (1) substantive due process which requires the
intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with the rights of the person to his life, liberty, or
property; and (2) procedural due process which consists of the two basic rights of notice and
hearing, as well as the guarantee of being heard by an impartial and competent tribunal.

1. Substantive Due Process- pertains to the reason and justification for the denial or
restriction on life, liberty, or property. It raises the question of whether such was
necessary and fair to all parties involved. It essentially addresses the query: “does the
Government or State have the right to carry out the act of deprivation in the first place?”

Tests to determine substantive due process:

Substantive due process into the justness or fairness of the law. Jurisprudence has
developed several tests to determine whether a law is just or fair, depending on the
government act, the rights impeded by the act and the means used by the government to
perform the act. The tests are:

a. The rational basis test. Under this test, laws or ordinances affecting the life, liberty
or property or persons are generally considered valid so long as it rationally advances
a legitimate government interest.
b. The heightened or immediate scrutiny test. Under this test, the law or ordinance is
considered valid only after the government interest has been extensively examined,
and the available less restrictive means of furthering it have been considered.
c. The strict scrutiny test. Under this test, there must be a compelling government
interest and there must be no other less restrictive means to enforce it.
 2. Procedural Due Process- refers to the procedure that the government must follow before
it deprives a person of life, liberty, or property. Procedural due process concerns itself
with government action adhering to the established process when it makes
an intrusion into the private sphere. Simply put, it answers the question: “Is the process
fair to the person subject of the act of deprivation?”

Procedural due process may further be classified as Judicial due process or administrative
dues process.

a. Judicial due process.

The following are requirements for procedural due process for proceedings taken
before the courts of law, whether civil or criminal cases:

1. There must be an impartial court or tribunal clothed with judicial power to hear and
determine the matter before it;
2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant and over the
property which is the subject matter of the proceeding;
3. The defendant/accused must be given an opportunity to be heard; and
4. Judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing.

b. Administrative due process.

On the other hand, the following are the requisites for administrative due process
observed in proceedings before administrative agencies exercising quasi-judicial
functions:

1. The right to a hearing, which includes the right to present one’s case and submit evidence
in support thereof;
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented;
3. The decision must have something to support itself;
4. The evidence must be substantial;
5. The decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing, or at least
contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected;
6. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its own or his own independent
consideration of the law and facts of the controversy and not simply accept the views of a
subordinate in arriving at a decision; and
7. The board or body should, in all controversial questions, render its decision in such a
manner that the parties to the proceeding can know the various issues involved, and the
reason for the decision rendered4.

4
Ang Tibay v. CIR, 69 Phil. 635.
 “To be heard” does not only mean verbal arguments in court; one may be heard also thru
pleadings. Where the “opportunity to be heard” either through oral arguments or pleadings, is
accorded, there is no denial of due process.5

Your Learning Process:

1. What is meant by due process of law?

2. What is deprivation?
3. What are the requisites of judicial due process?
4. What are the requisites of administrative due process?
5. What are the tests used to determine substantive due process?

Your Learning Outcome Activity:

Do you think the people was deprived of their liberty without due process of law when during
the pandemic, almost everyone was not allowed to go out of their houses? Why or why not?

LESSON VI. EQUAL PROTECTION

After the learning process, you will discuss the concept of equal protection of the laws
and apply this to proper situations.

EQUAL PROTECTION of the laws is embraced in the concept of due process, as every unfair
discrimination offends the requirements of justice and fair play. Despite the seeming
interconnection, the concept of equal protection of the laws is an equally important and distinct
fundamental human rights protected by the Constitution. Under Article III Section 1 of the
Constitution, equal protection is provided under a separate clause in order to provide for a more
specific guaranty against any form of undue favoritism or hostility from the government.

Like the due process clause, equal protection clause is also couched in indefinite language. This
is because the guaranty is also dynamic. The purpose of the intentional ambiguity is the same as
in due process, i.e: to provide for more adjustability to swiftly moving facts of our changing
society.

The equal protection clause is directed principally against undue favor and individual or class
privilege. It is not intended to prohibit legislation which is limited to the object to which it is
directed or by the territory in which it is to operate. It does not require absolute equality, but
merely that all persons be treated alike under like conditions both as to privileges conferred and
liabilities imposed.6

5
Salonga v. CA, G.R. No. 111478, 13 March 1997.
6
JMM Promotion and Management, Inc., v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 120095, 5 August
1996.
Persons protected- the equal protection clause is available to all persons, natural as well as
juridical. Artificial persons, however, are entitled to the protection only insofar as their property
is concerned.

Also, by constitutional reservation, certain rights are enjoyable only by citizens and not by
foreigners such as the right to vote, hold public office, exploit natural resources and operate
public utilities.

Classification. Defined as the grouping of persons or things similar to each other in certain
particulars and different from all others in these same particulars. The equal protection clause
does not require the universal application of the laws, that is, that it operate on all the people
without distinction. Such an effect may in fact sometimes result in unequal protection. For
example, a law requiring military service of all citizens which, while valid as to the able-bodied,
would be oppressive to those unable to bear arms, like the sick and the old.

The law, in other words, is not required to provide for equality among all persons if they are not
similarly situated. What the constitution requires is equality among equals. Accordingly, the
legislature is allowed to classify the subjects of legislation. If the classification is reasonable, the
law may operate only on some and not all of the people without violating the equal protection
clause.

Requisites for valid classification. It is not enough that the members of a group have the
characteristics that distinguish them from others. The classification must, as an indispensable
requisite, not be arbitrary. And classification to be reasonable must conform to the following
requirements:
1. It must be based upon substantial distinctions.
2. It must be germane to the purpose of the law.
3. It must not be limited to existing conditions only.
4. It must apply equally to all members of a class.

Substantial distinctions. Superficial differences do not make for a valid classification. The
distinction, to be valid, must be substantial. As a general statement only, the law cannot validly
distinguish on the basis of the attire of women, or color of vehicles, or the source of native
products, or the emotions of persons, or the length of their hair.

But certain physical differences of persons can, in some instances, be the basis of a valid
classification. For example, women, being weaker physically than men, may be treated more
tenderly by the law compared to men in, for example, specifying working conditions, height and
weight requirement for purposes of some public employments such as the police force or military
service.

In the case of Garcia v. Drilon7 the Supreme Court declared that RA 9262 of the “Act Defining
Violence Against Women and their Children” or the Anti-VAWC Law is not violative of the
equal protection clause and stressed that the law does not favor women over men as victims of
violence and abuse to whom the State extends it protection because of the fact that women are
7
G.R. No. 179267, 25 June 2013.
more likely than men to become victims of violence and the widespread gender bias and
prejudice against women all make for real differences justifying the classification under the law.

Relevance to the purpose of the law. The classification, even if based on substantial
distinctions, will still be invalid if it is not germane to the purpose of the law. One class may be
treated differently from another where the groupings are based on reasonable and real
distinctions. If classification is germane to the purpose of the law, concerns of all members of the
class, and applies equally to present and future conditions, the classification does not violate the
equal protection clause.

Duration. By the third requirement is meant that the classification must be enforced not only for
the present but as long as the problem sought to be corrected continues to exist.

Applicability to all. The classification will be regarded as invalid if all the members of the class
are not similarly treated, both as to rights conferred and obligations imposed. It is not necessary
that the classification be made with absolute symmetry, in the sense that the members of the class
should possess the same characteristics in equal degree.

Rule on Aliens

General Rule: A legislative act may not validly classify the citizens of the State on the basis of
their origin, race or parentage.

Exceptions:
a) In times of great and imminent danger, such as a threatened invasion or
war, such a classification is permitted by the Constitution when the facts so
warrant (e.g. discriminatory legislation against Japanese citizens during
WWII).
b) The political rights of aliens do not enjoy the same protection as that of
citizens.
c) Statutes may validly limit to citizens exclusively the enjoyment of rights or
privileges connected with the public domain, the public works, or the natural
resources of the State. The rights and interests of the state in these things
are not simply political but also proprietary in nature; and so the citizens
may lawfully be.

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

1. What is meant by equal protection of the law?

2. What is substantial distinction?
3. When is classification valid?
 4. What is the rational basis test?
5. When may aliens be treated differently from citizens?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

INSTRUCTIONS: What is meant by equality among equals and cite a sample situation
where this principle is applied.

LESSON VII. EX POST FACTO LAW

and BILL OF ATTAINDER

After your learning process, you will discuss the distinctions between ex post facto law and bill
of attainder and discuss their implications on human rights.

Section 22, Article III. “No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.”

Ex post facto law. The Latin translation of ex post facto is “from a thing done afterward.” In a
legal context, ex post facto is most typically used to refer to a criminal statute that punishes
actions retroactively, thereby criminalizing conduct that was legal when originally performed.

An ex post facto law operates retroactively to affect antecedent acts. An "ex post facto law" is
defined as a law which provides for the infliction of punishment upon a person for an act done
which, when it was committed, was innocent; a law which aggravates a crime or makes it greater
than when it was committed; a law that changes the punishment or inflicts a greater punishment
than the law annexed to the crime when it was committed; a law that changes the rules of
evidence and receives less or different testimony than was required at the time of the commission
of the offense in order to convict the offender; a law which, assuming to regulate civil rights and
remedies only, in effect imposes a penalty or the deprivation of a right which, when done, was
lawful; a law which deprives persons accused of crime of some lawful protection to which they
have become entitled, such as the protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or of the
proclamation of amnesty; every law which, in relation to the offense or its consequences, alters
the situation of a person to his disadvantage.

Why is it prohibited? An ex post facto law makes criminal an act which was not a crime when
committed. It is prohibited because it violates human rights as it imposes a insecurity towards
people who will have to live in fear of being prosecuted for some acts done in the past which
were innocent when done.

What are the kinds of ex post facto law? An ex post facto law is a law that either:

1. makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law that was innocent when done,
and punishes such act;
2. aggravates a crime, or makes the crime greater than it was when committed;
 3. changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to the
crime when it was committed;
4. alters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes conviction upon less or different
testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense;
5. assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only, but in effect imposes a penalty or
deprivation of a right for an act that was lawful when done; or
6. 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 of ex post facto law.

a) Refers to criminal matters;

b) Retroactive in its application; and
c) To the prejudice of the accused.

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.

What is the principle of non-retroactivity of laws? As a general rule, laws shall have only a
prospective effect and must not be applied retroactively in such a way as to apply to pending
disputes and cases. This is expressed in the familiar legal maxim lex prospicit, non respicit (the
law looks forward and not backward). The principle of non-retroactivity finds application in
various aspects of the legal system. Thus, the rule is that the jurisdiction of a court depends on
the law existing at the time an action is filed; a statute continues to be in force with regard to all
rights that had accrued prior to its amendment; a new doctrine laid down by the Supreme Court
overturning an existing doctrine is to be applied prospectively, and not to parties relying on the
old doctrine and acting on the faith thereof; and many others.

When may laws be given retroactive effect?

In the following instances, laws may be given retroactive effects:

1. If the law itself provides for retroactivity (Art. 4, Civil Code), but in no case may an ex
post facto law be passed, such as one that criminalizes an act done before the passing of
the law and which was innocent when done. A law is considered retroactive if it is clearly
expressed in the language of the statute. The existence of an effectivity clause defining
when the law shall take effect militates conclusively against the retroactivity of such law.
2. If the law is remedial in nature, since there are no vested rights in rules of procedure.
3. If the statute is penal in nature, provided it is favorable to the accused/convict and the
latter is not a habitual delinquent as defined under the Revised Penal Code.
4. If the law is of an emergency nature and are authorized by the police power of the
government.
5. If the law is curative, provided it does not impair vested rights nor affect final judgments.
6. If a substantive right is to be declared for the first time, unless vested rights are impaired.
Remedial laws may be given retroactive effect and may be made to apply to actions pending at
the time of their passage because remedial laws are only matters of procedure and do not create
rights or take away any vested right.

Bill of Attainder. A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without
judicial trial, its essence being the substitution of legislative fiat for a judicial determination of
guilt. 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 a judicial trial. It is
obviously in violation of the fundamental rights of people to due process.

LESSON VIII. SEARCHES AND SEIZURES

After the learning process, you will discuss the requisites for a valid search and seizure and their
application in certain cases.

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.

Scope of protection. The rights against unreasonable searches and seizures and to the privacy of
communications and correspondence are available to all persons, including aliens, whether
accused of crime or not. Artificial persons, like corporations, are also entitled to the guaranty,
although they may be required to open their books of accounts for examination by the State in
the exercise of police power or the power of taxation. As a rule however, their premises may not
be searched nor may their papers and effects seized except by virtue of a valid warrant.

The right against unreasonable searches and seizures is personal and may be invoked only by the
person entitled to it.

May the right be invoked against private persons? If the search or seizure will be made by the
government through is agents, a warrant must generally be secured first. But if the search or
seizure is made at the behest of a private person, the right is not violated even if it is done so
without a warrant. The Supreme Court declared that the Bill of Rights does not govern
relationships between individuals, thus, it cannot be invoked against the acts of a private
individual.

In People v. Marti8, the Court admitted as evidence that which was not procured by the state
acting through its police officers or authorized government agencies but by the representative of

8
G.R. No. 81561, 18 January 1991.
a private forwarding and shipping company who, following a standard operating procedure,
opened a package from the accused and discovered that it contained dried marijuana leaves.

Who may issue a search warrant or warranty of arrest?

Requisites of a valid warrant.

1. It must be based upon probable cause;
2. The probable cause must be determined personally by the judge;
3. The determination must be made after examination under oath or affirmation of the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce; and
4. It must particularly describe the place to be searched and the persons or things to be
seized.

Probable Cause. Probable cause has been defined as referring to such facts and circumstances
antecedent to the issuance of the warrant that in themselves are sufficient to induce a cautious
man to rely on them and act in pursuance thereof.

It consists of a reasonable ground of suspicion supported by sufficiently strong in themselves to

warrant a cautious man in believing accused to be committing the offense or to be guilty of the
offense.

What is a general warrant? It is defined as a search or arrest warrant that is not particular as to
the person to be arrested or the property to be seized. It is one that allows the seizure of one thing
under a warrant that describes another and gives the officer executing the warrant the discretion
over which items to take. A warrant of this kind is in violation of the right against unreasonable
searches and seizure for not complying with the fourth requisite of a valid warrant.

What is the period of validity of a search warrant? A search warrant is valid only for ten (10)
days. Thereafter, it shall be void. On the other hand, a warrant of arrest does not expire and may
be executed anywhere within the Philippines.

What is the effect of illegal search and seizure? Articles seized or procured from an illegal
search and seizure are not admissible as evidence in any proceedings. Such evidence is the “fruit
of the poisonous tree.”

In Luz v. People9 the Supreme Court acquitted an accused charged with illegal possession of
dangerous drugs due to the inadmissibility of the evidence seized from him after what the court
considered to be an unlawful warrantless search which was conducted after he was stopped for a
traffic violation for driving a motorcycle without a helmet. When the driver was flagged down
for committing a traffic violation, he was not, ipso facto, arrested. Accordingly, there being no
valid warrantless arrest, the warrantless search that resulted from it was likewise illegal.

Warrantless searches and seizures.

9
G.R. No. 197788, 29 February 2012.
There are instances when a search or seizure may be validly made notwithstanding
noncompliance with the requisites discussed above.

1. Consented searches;
2. Search incident to a lawful arrest;
3. Searches of vessels and aircraft for violation of immigration, customs, and drug laws;
4. Searches of moving vehicles;
5. Where the prohibited articles is in plain view;
6. Stop and frisk or the Terry search

Consented search. When one voluntarily submits to a search or consents to have it made of his
person or premises, he is precluded from later complaining. However, the consent, in order to
validate an otherwise invalid search, must be voluntary, unequivocal, specific and intelligently
given by the person to be searched and must not be tainted with duress or coercion.
- Read the case of People v. Dequina

What are the requisites for a valid consent or waiver of constitutional right against
obtrusive searches?
1. The right exists;
2. That the person involved had knowledge, either actual or constructive, of the existence of
such right; and
3. The said person had an actual intention to relinquish the right.

In flagrante delicto. In arrests in flagrante delicto, the accused is apprehended at the very
moment he is committing or attempting to commit or has just committed an offense in the
presence of the apprehending officer. To constitue in flagrante delicto arrest, the following
requisite must concur:
1. The person to be arrested must execute an overt act indicating that he has just committed,
is actually committing, or is attempting to commit a crime; and
2. Such overt act is done in the presence or within the view of the arresting officer.
- Reap People vs Aruta
- Reyes vs People, G.R. No. 229380, 6 June 2018

Stop-and-frisk or the Terry search. A stop-and-frisk search is a limited protective search of

outer clothing for weapons. While probable cause is not required to conduct a stop-and-frisk
search, it nevertheless holds that mere suspicion or a hunch will not validate the search. There
must be a genuine reason in light of the police officer’s experience and the surrounding
conditions to warrant the belief that the person to be frisked may have weapons concealed.
- Read People vs. Cogaed and People vs. Comprado
- Court of Appeals and People vs. Manalili, G.R. No. 113447

What is the plain view doctrine? The plain view doctrine applies when the following requisites
concur:
1. The law enforcement officer in search of the evidence has a prior justification for an
intrusion or is in a position from which he can view a particular area;
2. The discovery of the evidence in plain view is inadvertent;
 3. It is immediately apparent to the officer that the item he observes may be evidence of a
crime, contraband or otherwise subject to seizure.

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

1. What is inflagrante delicto?

2. What is meant by hot pursuit?
3. What is meant by fruit of the poisonous tree?
4. What is the Terry search?
5. What is a warrant?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

INSTRUCTIONS: What are the instances when a warrantless search may be allowed
and distinguish them from each other.

LESSON IX. ARREST

After your learning process, you will discuss what arrest means and when warrantless arrest
mauy be allowed.

What constitutes an arrest? Arrest is defined under Section 1 Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure as the taking of a person in custody in order that he or she may be bound to
answer for the commission of an offense. A person is arrested when there is an actual restraint of
the person arrested or by that person’s voluntary submission to the custody of the one making the
arrest.

Who issues a warrant of arrest? An arrest warrant is a legal document issued by a judge or a
court that authorizes the arrest or detention of a person. A warrant of arrest is issued after the
judge of the court where a criminal complaint or information has been filed has determined that
there is probable cause.

What is probable cause in the context of arrest? It means the existence of such facts and
circumstances that would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent person to believe that an offense
has been committed by the person sought to be arrested. This involves the judge being satisfied
that based on the evidence presented, a crime has indeed been committed and that the person to
be arrested is probably guilty of the crime.

Manner of execution. Arrest warrants must be executed with respect to the person's rights. Law
enforcement officers are required to present the warrant at the time of arrest, and the arrest
should be made at a reasonable time and manner, usually during daytime unless the arrestee is
engaged in criminal activity at night.

Requisites for a Valid Search Warrant or Warrant of Arrest

1. Issued upon probable cause.
2. The probable cause must be determined personally by the judge himself.
3. Such determination of the existence of probable cause must be made after examination by
the judge of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce.
4. Must particularly describe the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

When arrest may be made without a warrant? A person may be arrested without a warrant in
the following instances:

Section 5, Rule 113, Rules of Court. A police officer or a private person may, without a warrant,
arrest a person:
1. When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or
is attempting to commit an offense;
2. When an offense has in fact just been committed and has been personal knowledge of
facts indicating that a person to be arrested has committed it;
3. When a person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment
where he is serving final judgment or temporarily confined while his case is pending, or
has escaped while being transferred.

What is the doctrine of hot pursuit? For a hot pursuit arrest to be valid, police officers must
have personal knowledge of facts, based on their observation, that the person sought to be
arrested has just committed a crime. Equally important is the required element of immediacy
from the time the crime is committed up to the point of arrest.

Requisites of valid hot pursuit.

1. Offense had just been committed; The person must be immediately arrested after the
commission of the offense [People v. Manlulu, supra].
2. Person making the arrest has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of
the facts and circumstances.

How long can a person be detained without being charged? The Constitution stipulates that
any person detained must be delivered to the proper judicial authorities within 3 days or 72 hours
for common crimes, and specific laws provide different periods for other offenses.

What happens if an warrantless arrest is deemed invalid? The invalidity of an arrest leads to
several consequences among which are:
(a) the failure to acquire jurisdiction over the person of an accused;
(b) criminal liability of law enforcers for illegal arrest; and
(c) any search incident to the arrest becomes invalid thus rendering the evidence acquired as
constitutionally inadmissible.
Buy-Bust. A buy-bust operation is a valid in flagrante arrest. The subsequent search of the
person arrested and the premises within his immediate control is valid as an incident to a lawful
arrest [People v. Hindoy, G.R. No. 132662 (2001)].

When is buy-bust not proper? Instead of arresting the suspect after the sale in a buy-bust
operation, the officer returned to the police headquarters and filed his report. It was only in the
evening that he, without warrant, arrested the suspect at his house where dried marijuana leaves
were found and seized. This is unlawful arrest [People v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. 138987 (1992)].

What is the remedy available to a person who was invalidly arrested? The person arrested
may file a petition for writ of habeas corpus.

Writ of habeas corpus. The writ of habeas corpus is an order issued by a court of competent
jurisdiction, directed to the person detaining another, commanding him to produce the body of
the prisoner at a designated time and place and to show sufficient cause for holding custody of
the individual so detained.

The high prerogative writ of habeas corpus is a speedy and effectual remedy to relieve persons
from unlawful restraint. It secures to a prisoner the right to have the cause of his detention
examined and determined by a court of justice and to have it ascertained whether he is held
under lawful authority.

Broadly speaking, the writ of habeas corpus extends to all cases of illegal confinement or
detention by which any person is deprived of his liberty, or by which the rightful custody of any
person is withheld from the person entitled thereto. Thus, the most basic criterion for the
issuance of the writ is that the individual seeking such relief be illegally deprived of his freedom
of movement or placed under some form of illegal restraint.

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

1. What is arrest?
2. What is meant by hot pursuit?
3. What is meant by fruit of the poisonous tree?
4. What is the Terry search?
5. What is a habeas corpus?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

INSTRUCTIONS: What are the instances when a warrantless arrest may be allowed and
distinguish them from each other.
 LESSON X. RIGHTS OF PERSONS ARRESTED, DETAINED
OR UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION

After your learning process, you will discuss the different rights of a detained person and a
person under custodial investigation.

Section 12 of Article III of the 1987 Constitution embodies the mandatory protection afforded a
person under investigation for the commission of a crime and the correlative duty of the State
and its agencies to enforce such mandate. It states:

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.

Republic Act No. 743822 (R.A. No. 7438) has reinforced the constitutional mandate protecting
the rights of persons under custodial investigation. The pertinent provisions read:

Section 2. Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or under Custodial Investigation; Duties of

Public Officers. –

(a) Any person arrested, detained or under custodial investigation shall at all times be assisted
by counsel.

(b) Any public officer or employee, or anyone acting under his order or his place, who arrests,
detains or investigates any person for the commission of an offense shall inform the latter, in a
language known to and understood by him, of his rights to remain silent and to have competent
and independent counsel, preferably of his own choice, who shall at all times be allowed to
confer privately with the person arrested, detained or under custodial investigation. If such
person cannot afford the services of his own counsel, he must be provided with a competent and
independent counsel by the investigating officer.
(c) The custodial investigation report shall be reduced to writing by the investigating officer,
provided that before such report is signed, or thumbmarked if the person arrested or detained
does not know how to read and write, it shall be read and adequately explained to him by his
counsel or by the assisting counsel provided by the investigating officer in the language or
dialect known to such arrested or detained person, otherwise, such investigation report shall be
null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

(d) Any extrajudicial confession made by a person arrested, detained or under custodial
investigation shall be in writing and signed by such person in the presence of his counsel or in
the latter's absence, upon a valid waiver, and in the presence of any of the parents, elder
brothers and sisters, his spouse, the municipal mayor, the municipal judge, district school
supervisor, or priest or minister of the gospel as chosen by him; otherwise, such extrajudicial
confession shall be inadmissible as evidence in any proceeding.

(e) Any waiver by a person arrested or detained under the provisions of Article 125 of the
Revised Penal Code, or under custodial investigation, shall be in writing and signed by such
person in the presence of his counsel; otherwise the waiver shall be null and void and of no
effect.

(f) Any person arrested or detained or under custodial investigation shall be allowed visits by or
conferences with any member of his immediate family, or any medical doctor or priest or
religious minister chosen by him or by any member of his immediate family or by his counsel, or
by any national non-governmental organization duly accredited by the Commission on Human
Rights of by any international non-governmental organization duly accredited by the Office of
the President. The person's "immediate family" shall include his or her spouse, fiancé or fiancée,
parent or child, brother or sister, grandparent or grandchild, uncle or aunt, nephew or niece, and
guardian or ward.

As used in this Act, "custodial investigation" shall include the practice of issuing an "invitation"
to a person who is investigated in connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed,
without prejudice to the liability of the "inviting" officer for any violation of law.

Assisting counsel. Assisting counsel is any lawyer, except those directly affected by the case,
those charged with conducting preliminary investigation or those charged with the prosecution of
crimes. In the absence of any lawyer, no custodial investigation shall be conducted and the
suspected person can only be detained by the investigating officer in accordance with the
provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code.

What is extrajudicial confession? It is a confession made by a person outside of court

proceedings.

What are the requisites of a valid extrajudicial confession? To be acceptable, extrajudicial

confession must conform to the constitutional requirements. An extrajudicial confession is not
valid and inadmissible in evidence when the same is obtained in violation of any of the following
rights of an accused during custodial investigation: (1) to remain silent (2) to have an
independent and competent counsel preferably of his choice, (3) to be provided with such
counsel, if unable to secure one, (4) to be assisted by one in case of waiver, which should be in
writing, of the foregoing, and (5) to be informed of all such rights and of the fact that anything he
says can and will be used against him.

An extrajudicial confession must meet the foregoing requirements. Otherwise, it is disregarded in

accordance with the cold objectivity of the exclusionary rule. This exclusionary rule sprang from
the recognition that police interrogatory procedures lay fertile grounds for coercion, physical and
psychological of the suspect to admit responsibility for the crime under investigation. Its purpose
is not to discourage the accused from confessing guilt, if he voluntarily and intelligently so
desires, but to preclude the slightest coercion as would lead the accused to admit something
false.

It must appear clearly that the accused have been beforehand accorded his right to be informed of
such rights. Let it be underscored that law enforcement agencies are required to genuinely and
concretely communicate the rights of a person under investigation and to insure that it is fully
understood by him. The right of a person under custodial investigation to be informed of his
rights entails an effective communication that results in an understanding thereof. Any effort
falling short of this standard is a denial of such right.

What is the Miranda Doctrine? The Miranda doctrine requires that:

(a) any person under custodial investigation has the right to remain silent;

(b) anything he says can and will be used against him in a court of law;

(c) he has the right to talk to an attorney before being questioned and to have his counsel present
when being questioned; and

(d) if he cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided before any questioning if he so desires.

The said rights are guaranteed to preclude the slightest use of coercion by the State as would lead
the accused to admit something false, not to prevent him from freely and voluntarily telling the
truth.

When does a custodial investigation begin? Custodial investigation commences when a person
is taken into custody and is singled out as a suspect in the commission of a crime under
investigation and the police officers begin to ask questions on the suspect's participation therein
and which tend to elicit an admission.

Custodial investigation involves any 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. It is only after the investigation ceases to be a general inquiry into an unsolved
crime and begins to focus on a particular suspect, the suspect is taken into custody, and the
police carries out a process of interrogations that lends itself to eliciting incriminating
statements that the rule begins to operate.10
10
People vs. Marra, 306 Phil 586 (1994)
Meaning of Bail – Bail bond is the security required by a court and given for the provisional or
temporary release of a person who is in the custody of the law conditioned upon his appearance
before any court as required under the conditions specified.

What is the purpose of bail bond? The purpose of requiring bail is to relieve the accused from
imprisonment until his conviction and yet secure his appearance at the trials. It may be in the
form of a cash deposit, property bond, bond secured from a surety company, or recognizance.

When is bail available? Under section 13 of the Bill of Rights, bail is available to all persons,
before conviction, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when
evidence of guilt is strong.

What are the forms of bail?

1. Corporate surety
2. Property bond
3. Cash
4. Recognizance

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

1. What is Bail?
2. What is detention?
3. What is meant by custodial investigation?
4. What is the Miranda doctrine?
5. What is an extrajudicial confession?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

INSTRUCTIONS: What are the effects of non-compliance to the Miranda doctrine?

Explain why?

LESSON XI. RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED Part 1

After the learning process you will discuss the rights of an accused and how they are enforced.

More than half of the provisions of the Bill of Rights deals with the protection of a person facing
criminal investigation of prosecution. In addition to other human rights laws, a person accused of
a crime is entitled to specific safeguards against arbitrary prosecution. These are necessary
safeguards because prosecution of an offense is essentially a function of the state and an
individual stands helpless against it if the rights are not afforded to him/her.

1. Criminal Due Process

Section 14, Article III, 1987 Constitution

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.

Article III, Section 1 refers to due process in general while Section 14 refers specifically to the
due process which should be observed in prosecution of offenses or trying an accused.

Criminal due process requires that the procedure established by law or the rules to be followed
to assure that the State makes no mistake in taking the life or liberty except that of the guilty. All
the necessary measures must be taken to guarantee procedural due process throughout all stages
of criminal prosecution- from the inception of custodial investigation until rendition of judgment.

Criminal due process requires that the accused be tried by an impartial and competent court in
accordance with the procedure prescribed by the law and with proper observance of all the rights
accorded the accused under the Constitution and applicable statutes.

Preliminary Investigation. Preliminary investigation is an inquiry or proceeding to determine

whether there is sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been
committed and the respondent is probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial.

2. Presumption of innocence.

Presumption of Innocence. Accusation is not synonymous with guilt. In this jurisdiction, the
accused is presumed innocent until the contrary is proved. It is the responsibility of the
prosecution to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt, otherwise he is entitled to
acquittal. Conviction will depend not on the weakness of the defense but on the strength of the
prosecution.

What is meant by proof beyond reasonable doubt? Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not
mean such degree of proof as to exclude the possibility of error and produce absolute certainty.
Only moral certainty is required or that degree of proof which produces conviction in an
unprejudiced mind.

Presumption of regularity. This means that the performance of official duty is presumed to
have been done regularly or properly in accordance with the established standards and
procedures. The presumption of regularity in the performance of official duties is an aid to the
effective and unhampered administration of government functions. Without such benefit, every
official action could be negated with minimal effort from litigants, irrespective of merit or
sufficiency of evidence to support such challenge. To this end, our body of jurisprudence has
been consistent in requiring nothing short of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary to
overthrow such presumption.11

Presumption of regularity vs presumption of innocence. In case of conflict between the

presumption of regularity of police officers and the presumption of innocence of the accused, the
latter must prevail as the law imposes upon the prosecution the highest degree of proof of
evidence to sustain conviction.12 The presumption of regularity in the performance of official
functions cannot by itself affect the constitutional presumption of innocence enjoyed by the
accused, particularly when the prosecution’s evidence is weak. It has however been held that
presumption of innocence may be overturned by presumption of regularity when the latter is
accompanied by strong evidence supporting the guilt of the accused.

Equipoise Rule

The presumption of innocence has given rise to a jurisprudential rule referred to as the equipoise
rule.

Where the evidence adduced by the parties is evenly balanced, the constitutional presumption of
innocence should tilt the balance in favor of the accused [Corpuz v. People, G.R. No. 180016
(1991)].

The application of the equipoise rule is triggered by a situation where:

a. the court is faced with conflicting versions of the prosecution and the defense; and
b. the evidence, facts, and circumstances are capable of two or more explanations, one of
which is consistent with the innocence of the accused and the other consistent with his
guilt.

3. Right to be heard.

Also enshrined under paragraph 2 of Section 14, Article III is the right of the accused to be
heard. This is already implicit in his right to due process. This right is indispensable in any
criminal prosecution where at stake is the liberty of the of the accused who must for this reason
must be given chance to defend himself.

This constitutional right includes the right to present evidence in one’s defense, as well as the
right to be present and defend oneself in person at every stage of the proceedings. Stripping the
accused of all his pre-assigned trial dates constitutes a patent denial of the constitutionally
guaranteed right to due process.

a. Assistance of a counsel. The right to be assisted by a counsel is an indispensable

component of due process in criminal prosecution. As such, the right to counsel is one of
the most sacrosanct rights available to the accused. A deprivation of the right to counsel
strips the accused of an equality in arms resulting in the denial of a level playing field.
11
Susan Yap v. Elizabeth Lagtapon, G.R. No. 196347, 23 January 2017.
12
People vs. Gatlabayan, G.R. No. 186467, 13 July 2011.
 Simply put, an accused without counsel is essentially deprived of a fair hearing which is
tantamount to a grave denial of due process. This right is immutable and cannot be
waived.

The counsel must be a member of the bar and if the accused is not represented by a
counsel or could not afford the services of a counsel during the hearing, the State shall
appoint a counsel de officio to assist him during the trial of his case.

b. Accused must be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. The accused is
entitled to know the nature and cause of the accusation against him so he can adequately
prepare for his defense. Obviously, the accused cannot do this if he has to guess at the
charge that has been levelled against him because of the ambiguous language of the
complaint or information.

A complaint or information is sufficient if its states the name of the accused; the
designation of the offense given by the statute; the acts or omission complained of as
constituting the offense; the name of the offended party; the approximate date of the
commission of the offense; and the place where the offense was committed.13

c. To have a speedy, impartial and public trial. A speedy trial has been defined as one
free from vexatious, capricious and oppressive delays and is intended to relieve the
accused of needless anxieties and inconvenience before sentenced is pronounced upon
him.

The requirement for an impartial trial calls for no less than the cold neutrality of an
impartial judge to insure that justice is done to the defendant. Part of this requirement is
that judge must not only be impartial but must also appear impartial.

Publicity of the trial is necessary to prevent abuses that may be committed by the court to
the prejudice of the defendant. The people have the right to attend the proceedings not
only because of their interests therein but also so they can see whether or not the
constitutional safeguards for the benefits of the accused are being observed. The accused
is also entitled to be accompanied by his relatives and friends to give him the moral
support he needs during his ordeal.

Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt. Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a degree
of proof, excluding possibility of error, produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is
required, or that degree of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind [Sec. 2,
Rule 133, ROC].

Trial in Absentia. The right of the accused to be present in the trial is a personal right and as
such it may be waived. This means that the trial of the case may proceed notwithstanding the
absence of the accused as long as he has been notified and his absence is unjustified.

13
People vs. Feliciano, G.R. No. 196735, 5 May 2014.
 d. The right of confrontation. This is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the
Constitution to a person facing criminal prosecution who should know who his accusers
are and must be given a chance to cross-examine them on the charges. The chief purpose
of the right of confrontation is to secure the opportunity for cross-examination.

e. Right to compulsory process. The accused is entitled under the Constitution to the
issuance of subpoena ad testificandum and subpoena duces tecum for the purpose of
compelling the attendance of witnesses and 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.

subpoena ad testificandum- is an order of the Court to compel a person to appear in

court to testify.
subpoena duces tecum- is an order compelling the production or presentation before the
court books, documents and other papers specified in the order.

4. Right against prohibited punishments.

Section 19, Article III.

1. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment
inflicted. Neither shall 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.

The old prohibition against cruel or unusual punishment has been rewritten to cover cruel,
degrading or inhuman punishment to make the provision more comprehensive in line with
the emphasis on the protection of human rights.

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

1. What is meant by proof beyond reasonable doubt?

2. What is trial in absentia?
3. When is trial in absentia allowed?
4. What is meant by confrontation?
5. What is the equipoise rule?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

INSTRUCTIONS: What is the importance of the Constitutional principle of

presumption of innocence? Do you think this is a basic human right?
 LESSON XII. RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED Part 2

After this learning process you will discuss the right against double jeopardy and the
right to speedy disposition of criminal cases.

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.

Double Jeopardy. The right against double jeopardy prohibits anyone from being prosecuted
twice for substantially the same crime. The objective is to set the effects of the first prosecution
forever at rest, assuring the accused that he shall not thereafter be subjected to the dangers and
anxiety of a second charge against him for the same offense.

What are the requisites for double jeopardy? As a general rule, the following requisites must
be present for double jeopardy to attach:

a) a valid indictment,
b) before a court of competent jurisdiction,
c) the arraignment of the accused,
d) a valid plea entered by him,
e) and the acquittal or conviction of the accused, or the dismissal or termination of the case
against him without his express consent.

What are the exceptions?

a) when there is insufficiency of evidence to support the charge against him; and
b) where there has been an unreasonable delay in the proceedings, in violation of the
accused's right to speedy trial.

What is jurisdiction? Jurisdiction is defined as the authority to hear and determine a cause or
the right to act in a case.

What are the different aspects of jurisdiction in criminal procedures?

1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter or the offense. Jurisdiction over the subject
matter or offense in a judicial proceeding is conferred by the sovereign authority which
organizes the court - it is given only by law and in the manner prescribed by law. It is the
power to hear and determine the general class to which the proceedings in question
belong.
2. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused
is acquired upon his or her: (1) arrest or apprehension, with or without a warrant; or
(2) voluntary appearance or submission to the jurisdiction of the court. It allows the
court to render a decision that is binding on the accused.
 3. Territorial jurisdiction. It is a fundamental rule that for jurisdiction to be acquired by
courts in criminal cases the offense should have been committed or any one of its
essential ingredients took place within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. Territorial
jurisdiction in criminal cases is the territory where the court has jurisdiction to take
cognizance or to try the offense allegedly committed therein by the accused. Thus, it
cannot take jurisdiction over a person charged with an offense allegedly committed
outside of that limited territory.

Doctrine of supervening event. Under this doctrine, the accused may be prosecuted for another
offense if the subsequent development changes the character of the first indictment under which
he may have already been charged or convicted. For example, a person convicted of physical
injuries may still be prosecuted for homicide if the victim later on dies.

Inseparable offenses. Where one offense is inseparable from another and proceeds from the
same act, they cannot be the subject of separate prosecution, thus a person who steal several
things from the same person on the same occasion can only be charged only one crime of theft.

Right against self-incrimination.

Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.

It is founded on grounds of:

a) Public Policy, because if the party is thus required to testify he would be placed under the
strongest temptation to commit the crime of perjury; and
b) Humanity, because it prevents the extortion of confession by duress.

The constitutional guarantee protects as well the right of the accused to silence, and his silence,
meaning, his failure or refusal to testify may not be used as presumption of guilt or taken as
evidence against him.

The right against self-incrimination has 2 aspects namely:

1. the right to refuse to take the witness stand; and

2. the right to refuse to answer an incriminatory question.

The first right, namely the right to refuse to take the witness stand, is available only to an
accused in a criminal case. Thus, an accused, cannot be compelled, even through a subpoena or
court order, to testify and be a witness. Kindly note that in certain administrative investigations
which are similar to adversary proceedings or partake of a nature of a criminal proceeding, the
Supreme Court has allowed the party to invoke the right akin to that of an accused. In Cabal vs.
Kapunan [G.R. No. L-19052, 29 December 1962], the right was made available to a person
charged administratively for graft because of the nature of the penalty that may be imposed by
the administrative body, the hearing partakes of the nature of a criminal proceedings. The same
right was accorded to a person charged before a Board of Medical Examiners for alleged
immorality in the case of Pascual vs. Board of Medical Examiners [G.R. No. L-25018, 26 May
1969] because the person’s license is at stake.

The second right, namely, the right to refuse to answer an incriminatory question is available to
both the accused and any witness. In Rosete vs. Lim [G.R. No. 136051, 08 June 2006], the
Supreme Court ruled that this right “secures to a witness, whether he be a party or not, the right
to refuse to answer any particular incriminatory question, i.e., one the answer to which has a
tendency to incriminate him for some crime. However, the right can be claimed only when the
specific question, incriminatory in character, is actually put to the witness. It cannot be claimed
at any other time. It does not give a witness the right to disregard a subpoena, decline to appear
before the court at the time appointed, or to refuse to testify altogether. The witness receiving a
subpoena must obey it, appear as required, take the stand, be sworn and answer questions”. This
right may be waived. If not claimed by or in behalf of the witness, the protection does not come
into play [People vs. Ayson, G.R. No. 85215, 07 July 1989].

Scope of Guarantee

The right against self-incrimination applies in criminal cases as well as in civil, administrative,
and legislative proceedings where the fact asked for is a criminal one. It protects one whether he
is a party or a witness.

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

1. What is double jeopardy?

2. What are the kinds of self-incrimination?
3. What are the elements of double jeopardy?
4. What is meant by competent jurisdiction
5. What are the exceptions to double jeopardy?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

INSTRUCTIONS: Why is the right against self-incrimination important?

LESSON XIII. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS part 1

After the learning process, you discuss about the different fundamental rights of people.

Liberty of abode and travel.

Section 6. The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by Jaw
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.
Purpose of the right. The purpose of the guaranty is to further emphasize the individual’s
liberty as safeguarded in general terms by the due process clause. Liberty under that clause
includes the right to choose one’s residence, to leave it whenever he pleases, and to travel
wherever he wills. Section 6 is a specific safeguard of these rights and is intended to underline
their importance in a free society.

Limitations. The liberty of abode and of travel is , however, subject to specific restrictions under
the same Constitutional provision. According to Section 6, the liberty of abode can be limited
“upon lawful order of the court” and the right to travel by the requirements of “national
security, public safety or public health as may be provided by law”.

Thus, a person facing criminal charges may be restrained by the court from leaving the country
or, if abroad, compelled to return. A lessee may be judicially ejected for violation of contractual
duties. The judge may prevent a person from entering some premises under dispute or declared
off-limits by the proper authorities.

Read the case of Villavicencio v. Lukban, 39 Phil. 778

Freedom of religion.

The right to worship is one of the basic liberties of man that has been the subject of official
repression and punishment since the beginning of recorded government. Secular and spiritual
matters were in the past directed by the same authorities, where the religious leader, as high
priest, performing an influential and even predominant role in the determination of official
policies. As civilizations thrived, the dynamics of government eventually changed and the
principle of separation of church and state has surely taken its place. The liberty guarantees the
boundaries between faith and politics by giving the people the liberty to live according to his or
her beliefs while being a part of a regular community.

What is religion? Religion may be defined as any specific system of belief, worship, conduct,
and others often involving a code of ethics and philosophy. In Aglipay vs. Ruiz 14, the court
defined religion as a profession of faith to an active power that binds and elevates man to his
creator.

In the context of the constitutional provision, religion also includes the rejection of any religion,
a refusal to believe in a hereafter or in the supremacy of a supernatural person with powers over
life and earth. One man’s religion may instruct him that there is God while another’s may tell
him that there is no God; and both of them, under the Constitution, are entitled to their respective
beliefs. In other words, religion embraces matters of faith and dogma, as well as doubt,
agnosticism and atheism.

Separation of church and state. The separation of church and state was originally and quite
adequately, expressed in the first sentence of Article III, Section 5, providing that “no law shall
be made respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” It is

14
64 Phil. 201.
now rendered more emphatic by Article II, Section 6, which says that the separation shall be
“inviolable.”

The rationale of the rule is summed up in the familiar saying, “Strong fences make good
neighbors.” The idea is to delineate the boundaries between the two institutions and thus avoid
encroachments by one against the other because of a misunderstanding of the limits of their
exclusive jurisdictions. The demarcation line calls on the entities to “render therefore unto
Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s.”

Th doctrine cuts both ways. It is not only the State that is prohibited from interfering in purely
ecclesiastical affairs; the Church is likewise barred from meddling in purely secular matters. And
the reason is plain, a union of Church and State tends to destroy government and to degrade the
religion. It is likely to result in conspiracy, well night irresistible because of its composite
strength against the individual’s right to worship.

Free exercise clause. The Free Exercise Clause affords absolute protection to individual
religious convictions. However, the government is able to regulate the times, places, and manner
of its exercise. Under the Free Exercise Clause, religious belief is absolutely protected, religious
speech and proselytizing are highly protected but subject to restraints applicable to non-religious
speech, and unconventional religious practice receives less protection; nevertheless conduct,
even if it violates the law, could be accorded protection.

The concept of religious accommodation. What is prohibited is the establishment of religion by

the state or the government and not accommodation. It is the recognition of the reality that some
governmental measures may not be imposed on a certain portion of the population for the
reasons that these measures are contrary to their religious beliefs. As long as it can be shown that
the exercise of right does not impair the public welfare, the attempt of the State to regulate or
prohibit such right would be an unconstitutional encroachment.

The doctrine of benevolent neutrality. The benevolent neutrality theory believes that with
respect to these governmental actions, accommodation of religion may be allowed, not to
promote the government's favored form of religion, but to allow individuals and groups to
exercise their religion without hindrance.

Read Valmores v. Achacoso, G.R. No. 217453, 19 June 2017.

Freedom of information.

Sec. 7, Art. III: The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be
recognized. Access to official records, and to documents and papers pertaining to official acts,
transactions, or decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for policy
development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be provided by law.

Sec. 28, Art. II: Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the State adopts and
implements a policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest.
Sec. 10, Art. XVI: The State shall provide the policy environment for the full development of
Filipino capability and the emergence of communication structures suitable to the needs and
aspirations of the nation and the balanced flow of information into, out of, and across the
country, in accordance with a policy that respects the freedom of speech and of the press.

Policy of Full Public Disclosure

 Covers all transactions involving public interest, including any matter contained in
official communications and public documents of the government agency.
 Does not require demand
 Pertains to duty to disclose of the government, pursuant to the policy of full public
disclosure.

Public concern. No exact definition and adjudicated by the courts on a case-by-case basis.
“Public concern” like “public interest” embrace a broad spectrum of subjects which the public
may want to know, either because these directly affect their lives, or simply because such matters
naturally arouse the interest of an ordinary citizen.

Right to Information covers matters of public concern, e.g.:

1. Official records;
2. Documents pertaining to official acts;
3. Government research date used as basis for policy development

Limitations. The right of the people to information must be balanced against other genuine
interests necessary for the proper functioning of the government.

Exempted information

1. Privileged information rooted in separation of powers

2. Information of military and diplomatic secrets
3. Information affecting national and economic security
4. Information on investigations of crimes by law enforcers before prosecution

Access to court records. Court personnel shall not disclose to any unauthorized person any
confidential information acquired by them while employed in the judiciary, whether such
information came from authorized or unauthorized sources.

Confidential information means information not yet made a matter of public record relating to
pending cases, as well as information not yet made public concerning the work of any justice or
judge relating to pending cases, including notes, drafts, research papers, internal discussions,
internal memoranda, records of internal deliberations and similar papers.

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

 1. What is considered as confidential information?
2. When may the right to information be invoked?
3. What is Free exercise clause?
4. What is meant by religion?
5. When is meant by the non-establishment clause?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

INSTRUCTIONS: Why do you think is it important that the Church and State be
separated? How would the non-separation affect human rights?

LESSON XIV. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS part 2

After the learning process, you will discuss the different fundamental rights of individuals.

Privacy communications and correspondence.

Sec. 3, Art. III. (1) The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except
upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed
by law.

(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for
any purpose in any proceeding.

Concept of the protection.

Our Bill of Rights, enshrined in Article III of the Constitution, provides at least two guarantees
that explicitly create zones of privacy. It highlights a person's "right to be let alone" or the "right
to determine what, how much, to whom and when information about himself shall be disclosed."

While Section 2 guarantees "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”;
Section 3, on the other hand, renders inviolable the "privacy of communication and
correspondence" and further cautions that "any evidence obtained in violation of this or the
preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding." [Sabio v. Gordon,
G.R. No. 174340, October 17, 2006]

Three strands of the right to privacy.

1. Decisional privacy - Liberty in the constitutional sense must mean more than freedom
from unlawful governmental restraint; it must include privacy as well, if it is to be a
repository of freedom. The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all
freedom...The concept of liberty would be emasculated if it does not likewise compel
 respect for his personality as a unique individual whose claim to privacy and interference
demands respect [Morfe v. Mutuc, supra]
2. Informational privacy - right of an individual not to have private information about
himself disclosed; and the right of an individual to live freely without surveillance and
intrusion [Whalen v. Roe, 429 US 589, (1977)]
3. Locational or situational privacy - privacy that is felt in physical space, such as that
which may be violated by trespass or unwarranted searches and seizure [Vivares v. St.
Therese College, G.R. No. 202666 (2014)]

Requisites of the existence of the right to privacy:

1. Subjective: A person has exhibited an actual expectation of privacy; and

2. Objective: The expectation be one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable
[Pollo v. Constantino-David, G.R. No. 181881 (2011)].

Forms of correspondence and communication covered:

1. Letters
2. Messages
3. Telephone calls
4. Telegrams
5. Others analogous to the foregoing

Intrusion, when and how allowed?

General rule: An encroachment on the right to privacy is invalid when: There is a reasonable
expectation of privacy; and if there is no compelling state interest.

When allowed:

1. By lawful order of the court. Probable cause in Sec. 2, Art. III should be followed for
the court to allow intrusion. Particularity of description is needed for written
correspondence, but if the intrusion is done through wire-taps and the like, there is no
need to describe the content. However, identity of the person or persons whose
communication is to be intercepted, and the offense or offenses sought to be prevented,
and the period of the authorization given should be specified.
2. When public safety or public order requires otherwise as may be provided by law
In Ayer Productions Pty. Ltd. v. Capulong [supra] it was held that the right to be let
alone is not an absolute right. A limited intrusion to a person’s privacy has long been
regarded as permissible where that person is a public figure and the information sought to
be elicited from him or to be published about him constitute matters of public character.
The interest sought to be protected by the right to privacy is the right to be free from
unwarranted publicity, from the wrongful publicizing of the private affairs and activities
of an individual which are outside the realm of legitimate public concern.
Intrusion in the workplace. An intrusion into the privacy of workplaces is valid if it conforms
to the standard of reasonableness. Under this standard, both inception and scope of intrusion
must be reasonable. It is justified at inception if there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that
it will turn up evidence that the employee is guilty of work- related misconduct. Scope of
intrusion is reasonable if measures used in the search are reasonably related to the search’s
objectives, and it is not highly intrusive [Pollo v. Constantino-David, supra].

Intrusion by the spouse. Right may be invoked against the wife who went to the clinic of her
husband and there took documents consisting of private communications between her husband
and his alleged paramour [Zulueta v. CA, G.R. No. 107383 (1996)].

Public figure. A limited intrusion into a person’s privacy is permissible where that person is a
public figure and the information sought to be elicited from him or to be published about him
constitute matters of a public character. A public figure is a person who, by his
accomplishments, fame, or mode of living, or by adopting a profession or calling which gives the
public a legitimate interest in his doing, his affairs and his character, has become public
personage.

Exclusionary rule.

Any evidence obtained in violation of Secs. 2 or 3, Art. III shall be inadmissible for any purpose
in any proceeding. [Section 3(2), Article III].

This applies not only to testimonial evidence but also to documentary and object evidence.

Anti-Wire Tapping Act (RA 4200), clearly and unequivocally makes it illegal for any person, not
authorized by all the parties to any private communication, to secretly record such
communications by means of a tape recorder. The law does not make any distinction [Ramirez v.
CA, G.R. No. 93833 (1995)]. An extension telephone is not among the devices enumerated in
Sec.1 of RA 4200. There must be either a physical interruption through a wiretap or the
deliberate installation of a device or arrangement in order to overhear, intercept, or record the
spoken words. The telephone extension in this case was not installed for that purpose. It just
happened to be there for ordinary office use [Ganaan v. IAC, G.R. No. L- 69809 (1986)].

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

1. What is locational privacy?

2. What is decisional privacy?
3. What is informational privacy?
4. What is meant by religion?
5. What are the communications covered by the liberty?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

 INSTRUCTIONS: In what instances may the State intrude on an individual’s right to
privacy? Do you think the right to privacy is a basic human right?

LESSON XV. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS part 3

After the learning process, you will discuss the different fundamental rights of an individual.

Non-Impairment of contracts.

Sec. 10, Art. III. No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.

The non-impairment clause is limited in application to laws that derogate from prior acts or
contracts by enlarging, abridging or in any manner changing the intention of the parties
[PADPAO v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 223505 (2017)].

What is non-impairment? This provision prohibits the passing of a law that changes the terms
of an already existing contract which:
1. Changes the terms of a contract between the parties;
2. Imposes new conditions;
3. Dispenses with those agreed upon; and
4. Withdraws remedies for the enforcement of the rights of the parties.

Substantial impairment is a law which changes 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, is
law which impairs the obligation of a contract and is therefore null and void [Lepanto
Consolidated Mining Co. v. WMC Resources Int'l. Pty. Ltd., G.R. No. 162331 (2006)].

Non-imprisonment for non-payment of debt.

Sec 20, Art III. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax.

Debt. Any civil obligation arising from a contract. It includes even debts obtained through fraud
since no distinction is made in the Constitution [Ganaway v. Quillen, G.R. No. L-18619 (1922)].

Right against involuntary servitude.

Sec. 18, Art. III.

No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.

No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a crime whereof the
party shall have been duly convicted.
Involuntary Servitude 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. [RA 9208 as amended by RA 10364]

A private person who contracts obligations of rendering services in a civil capacity to the Army
as an employee in its offices cannot, by law, either civil or military, be compelled to fulfill them
by imprisonment and deportation from his place of residence. [In Re Brooks, G.R. No. 507
(1901)].

Domestic services are always to be remunerated, and no agreement may subsist in law in which
it is stipulated that any domestic service shall be absolutely gratuitous. [De los Reyes v. Alojado,
G.R. No. L-5671 (1910)].

Exceptions to the Prohibition against Involuntary Servitude

1. If punishment is for a crime after conviction;

2. In the interest of national defense, all citizens may be compelled by law to render
personal military or civil service;
3. A return to work order. A worker must obey the order if he wants to retain his work even
if his inclination is to strike.

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

1. What is meant by non-impairment?

2. What is involuntary servitude?
3. What is debt?
4. What is substantial impairment?
5. What are the exceptions to prohibition of involuntary servitude?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

INSTRUCTIONS: Do you think people should be imprisoned for non-payment of debt?

Why or why not?

LESSON XVI. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

After the learning process, you will dis the fundamental right of freedom of expression and its
role in nation building.
Freedom of expression.

Article III, 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.”

Freedom of expression has gained recognition as a fundamental principle of every democratic

government, and given a preferred right that stands on a higher level than substantive economic
freedom or other liberties. The cognate rights codified by Article III, Section 4 of the
Constitution, copied almost verbatim from the First Amendment of the U.S. Bill of Rights, were
considered the necessary consequence of republican institutions and the complement of free
speech. This preferred status of free speech has also been codified at the international level, its
recognition now enshrined in international law as a customary norm that binds all nations.

Scope of the freedom. The scope of freedom of expression is so broad that it extends protection
to nearly all forms of communication. It protects speech, print and assembly regarding secular as
well as political causes, and is not confined to any particular field of human interest. The
protection covers myriad matters of public interest or concern embracing all issues, about which
information is needed or appropriate, so as to enable members of society to cope with the
exigencies of their period. The constitutional protection assures the broadest possible exercise of
free speech and free press for religious, political, economic, scientific, news, or informational
ends, inasmuch as the Constitution's basic guarantee of freedom to advocate ideas is not confined
to the expression of ideas that are conventional or shared by a majority.15

Limitations. From the language of the specific constitutional provision, it would appear that the
right to free speech and a free press is not susceptible of any limitation. But the realities of life in
a complex society preclude a literal interpretation of the provision prohibiting the passage of a
law that would abridge such freedom. For freedom of expression is not an absolute, nor is it an
"unbridled license that gives immunity for every possible use of language and prevents the
punishment of those who abuse this freedom."16

Thus, all speech are not treated the same. Some types of speech may be subjected to some
regulation by the State under its pervasive police power, in order that it may not be injurious to
the equal right of others or those of the community or society. The difference in treatment is
expected because the relevant interests of one type of speech, e.g., political speech, may vary
from those of another, e.g., obscene speech. Distinctions have therefore been made in the
treatment, analysis, and evaluation of the permissible scope of restrictions on various categories
of speech. It has been ruled, for example, that in our jurisdiction slander or libel, lewd and
obscene speech, as well as "fighting words" are not entitled to constitutional protection and may
be penalized.17

Kinds of regulation:

15
Chavez v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 168338, 15 February 2008.
16
Ibid.
17
Ibid.
 1. Prior restraint or censorship; and
2. Subsequent punishment.

Prior restraint. Refers to official governmental restrictions on the press or other forms of
expression in advance of actual publication or dissemination. Restraint upon the freedom of
expression may either be content-based or content-neutral.

Content-based regulation or censorship is based on the subject matter of the utterance or speech.
It is aimed at the content or the idea of the expression. Content-neutral regulation on the other
hand is merely concerned with the incidents of the speech or one that merely controls the time,
place or manner and other standards.

Subsequent punishment. Freedom of speech includes freedom after the speech. Without this
assurance, the citizen would hesitate to speak for fear he might be provoking the vengeance of
the officials he has criticized.

Nevertheless, freedom of expression is not absolute notwithstanding that the language of the
guaranty, unlike some of the provisions in the Bill of Rights, is unqualified. Like all rights, it is
subject to the police power and may properly be regulated in the interest of the public. It has
been held that freedom of expression does not cover ideas offensive to the public order or
decency or the reputation of persons, which are all entitled to protection by the state. Thus, the
lewd word, the slanderous word, cannot be considered as free speech that will enjoy immunity
from prohibition and punishment.

Exceptions.

a) Fair comment on matters of public interest – Fair comment is that which is true or, if
false, expresses the real opinion of the author based upon reasonable degree of care and
on reasonable grounds.
b) Criticism of official conduct. The guarantees of freedom of speech and press prohibit a
public official or public figure from recovering damages for a defamatory falsehood
relating to his official conduct unless he proves that the statement was made with actual
malice, i.e., with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was
false or not.

What criticisms are allowed by the court?

Criticisms made in good faith. Courts and judges are not sacrosanct. They should and expect
critical evaluation of their performance. For like the executive and the legislative branches, the
judiciary is rooted in the soil of democratic society, nourished by the periodic appraisal of the
citizen whom it is expected to serve.

Incitement and advocacy

Criticism of the government, no matter how severe, is within the range of liberty of speech,
unless the intention and effect be seditious.
When may a person be held liable for his or her expression? To determine the liability of the
individual for ideas expressed by him, three major criteria have been applied:

1. The clear and present danger rule.

2. The danger tendency doctrine; and
3. The balancing test

The clear and present danger rule. The question in every case is whether the words used are
used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that
they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of
proximity and degree.

The evil consequence of the comment or utterance must be “extremely serious and the degree of
imminence extremely high” before the utterance can be punished. The danger to be guarded
against is the “substantive evil” sought to be prevented. And this evil is primarily the “disorderly
and unfair administration of justice.” Under this rule, the advocacy of ideas cannot
constitutionally be abridged unless there is a clear and present danger that such advocacy will
harm the administration of justice.

Danger tendency test. In each case, courts must ask whether the gravity of the “evil”,
discounted by its improbability, justifies such invasion of free speech as is necessary to avoid the
danger. Under this test, the question is whether the words will create a dangerous tendency that
the state has a right to prevent. It looks at the probability that a substantive evil will result, and it
is not necessary that some definite or immediate acts of force, violence, or unlawfulness be
advocated

Balancing Of Interests Test. When a particular conduct is regulated in the interest of public
order, and the regulation results in an indirect, conditional and partial abridgement of speech, the
duty of the courts is to determine which of the two conflicting interests demands greater
protection. The test is applied when two legitimate values not involving national security crimes
compete

What is libel? Libel is not constitutionally protected speech. The government has an obligation
to protect individuals from defamation
The onus of proving malice shifts to the plaintiff, who must prove that the defendants were
actuated by ill will in what they caused to be published, with a design to injure the plaintiff.

What is group libel? Where the defamation is alleged to have been directed at a group or class,
it is essential that the statement must be so sweeping or all- embracing as to apply to every
individual in that group or class, or sufficiently specific so that each individual in the class or
group can prove that the defamatory statement specifically pointed to him, so that he can bring
the action separately, if need be.

Political Speech. Political speech is pure and protected speech. The government is required to
prove a “true threat”, it cannot punish mere political hyperbole [Watts v. US, 394 U.S. 705
(1969)].
A tarpaulin that expresses a political opinion constitutes political speech. Speech that promotes
dialogue on public affairs, or airs out grievances and political discontent, should be protected and
encouraged.

Parliamentary immunity guarantees the members of Congress the freedom of expression

without fear of being held responsible in criminal or civil actions before courts or fora outside of
Congress, but this does not protect them from being held responsible by the legislative body. The
members may nevertheless be questioned in Congress itself.

Freedom of assembly.

The right to peacefully assemble comprises the right to freely choose the location and the timing
of the assembly, including public streets, roads and squares.

The right to peaceably assemble and petition for redress of grievances is, together with freedom
of speech, of expression, and of the press, a right that enjoys primacy in the realm of
constitutional protection. For these rights constitute the very basis of a functional democratic
polity, without which all the other rights would be meaningless and unprotected.

Freedom of association.

Our Constitution likewise recognizes the freedom to form associations for purposes not contrary
to law.

How should the limitation “for purposes not contrary to law” be interpreted? Unless an
association or society could be shown to create an imminent danger to public safety, there is no
justification for abridging the right to form associations. The government must comply with the
heavy burden of showing that the organization in fact presents a clear and present danger of
substantive evil which the State has the right to protect.

Scope of freedom of association.

The right is recognized as belonging to people whether employed or unemployed, and whether in
the government or in the private sector. It includes the right to unionize.

The State does not infringe on the fundamental right to form lawful associations when it leaves
to citizens the power and liberty to affiliate or not affiliate with labor unions.

Your Learning Process

After reading the springboard, answer the following items.

1. What is libel?
2. What is meant by freedom of expression?
3. What is freedom of the press?
4. What is a political speech
 5. What is the balancing of interest test?

Your Learning Outcome Activity

INSTRUCTIONS: Do you think individuals should be given the unbridled right to

criticize the government? Why or why not?

References:
1. 2020 UP BOC Political Law Reviewer
2. Constitutional Law II, Isagani Cruz and Carlo Cruz, 2024.