Constitutional Law 21

Outline
Ricardo A. Sunga III2
ricardo_sunga@yahoo.com
FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF THE STATE

A.

POLICE POWER
1.

Nature and basis

2.

Distinguished from other powers

3.

Scope
a.

generally

b.

particular aspects

I am grateful to Prof. Carmelo Sison, on whose syllabus this course outline

is based.
1

Ricardo A. Sunga III, BS ME (Ateneo de Manila University), LLB

(University of the Philippines) and LLM (University of New South Wales).
His research interests include the international human rights law on torture
and enforced disappearances. See, for example, Ricardo A. Sunga III, The
Committee on Enforced Disappearances and Its Monitoring Procedures
(2012), 17(1) Deakin Law Review 151, available at
http://www.deakin.edu.au/buslaw/law/dlr/docs/vol17-iss1/vol17-1-6.pdf , viewed 7
November 2012, ISSN 1 321-3660, Ricardo A. Sunga III, On Locating the
Rights of Lost (2012), 45(4) John Marshall Law Review 1051, available at
http://lawreview.jmls.edu/articles/show/54, viewed 22 November 2012, and Ricardo
A. Sunga III, Protecting the Children of the Lost (2012), 86(4) Philippine
Law Journal 796, available at http://plj.upd.edu.ph/protecting-the-children-of-thelost/, viewed 29 May 2013.
2

4.

(1)

public health

(2)

public morals

(3)

public safety

(4)

public welfare

Limitations
a.

general

b.

due process

c.

equal protection

Cases:
U.S. v. Toribio, 15 Phil. 85 (1910)
Fabie v. City of Manila, 21 Phil., 486 (1912)

5.

Tests for validity of exercise of police power

a.

interest of the public generally as distinguished

from a particular class

b.

means employed reasonably necessary for

accomplishment
of purpose and not unduly
oppressive
Cases:
Taxicab Operators of Metro Manila v. Board of
Transp., 119 SCRA 592
Bautista v. Juinio, 127 SCRA 329 (1984)

6.

7.

Who may exercise

1.

Legislature

2.

Executive

Cases:
Republic Planters Bank v. Ogano, 269 SCRA 1 (1997)
Telecommunications & Broadcast Attorneys of the
Phils .v. COMELEC, 189 SCRA 337 (1998)

B.

EMINENT DOMAIN

1.

Concept

2.

Who may exercise power

3.

Conditions for exercise

4.

Taking
Cases:
City of Manila v. Laguio, 455 SCRA 308 (2005)
CIR v. Central Luzon Drug Corporation, 406 SCRA 414
(2005)

5.

Public use
Case:
Maosca v. RP, 252 SCRA 412 (1997)

6.

Just compensation
Cases:
Land Bank v. Wycoco, January 13, 2004
Republic v. Lim, 462 SCRA 265 (2005)

C.

TAXATION

Art. VI, Sec. 12

Art. X, Sec. 5

1.

Nature and extent

2.

Distinguished from special assessments; license fees

3.

Limitations

4.

Double Taxation

5.

Impairment of obligation of contracts

6.

Tax exemptions
Cases:

Tan v. del Rosario, 237 SCRA 324 (1994)

Obillo v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 139 SCRA
436 (1985)

BILL OF RIGHTS

Section 1 Due process and equal protection

1.

Substantive due process

Cases:
Pilipinas Kao, Inc. v. CA, 372 SCRA 548 (2001)
Montesciaros v. COMELEC, 384 SCRA 269 (2002)

2.

Procedural due process

Judicial
Cases:
Salazar v. People, 411 SCRA 598 (2003)
People v. Bodosco, 398 SCRA 642 (2003)
Administrative
Cases:
DOH v. Camposano, 457 SCRA 438 (2005)
Antonio v. Ville, 454 SCRA 851 (2005)

3.

Notice

Taada v. Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27 (1985); 146 SCRA 446

(1986)
Dayloc v. COMELEC, 395 SCRA 742 (2003)
4.

Impartiality
People v. Tee, 395 SCRA 419 (2003)
Tumey v. Ohio 373 US 510 (1927)

5.

Certainty
Void for vagueness
Cases:
Connally v. Gen. Construction Co., 269 US 385 (1926)
Lanzetta v. New Jersey, 306 US 451 (1939)
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, Nov. 19,

2001
Overbreadth
Cases:
Shelton v. Tucker, 364 US 479 (1960)
D34
City of Manila v. Laguio, 455 SCRA 308 (2005)

6.

Equal Protection
Cases:
Beltran v. Secretary of Health, 476 SCRA 168 (2005)
City of Manila v. Laguio, 455 SCRA 308 (2005)

Section 2 Security in their persons, houses, papers, and effects

1.

Arrests, searches & seizures

1.1 Warrantless arrest (Rule 113, Sec. 5, 2000 Rules of

Criminal Procedure)
Cases:
People v. Tudtud, 412 SCRA 142 (2003)
People v. Kimura, 428 SCRA 51 (2004)

1.2 Arrest under warrant

Cases:
Amarga v. Abbas, 98 Phil. 739 (1956)
Soliven v. Makasiar, 167 SCRA 393 (1988)
1.3 Determination of probable cause
Cases:
Albenson Enterprises Corp. v. CA, 217 SCRA 17 (1993)
People v. Vinecario, 420 SCRA 280 (2004)
1.4 Power of Municipal Trial Judge
Cases:
Placer v. Villanueva, 126 SCRA 463 (1983)
Pilapil v. Sandiganbayan, 221 SCRA 349 (1993)
1.5 What constitutes searching questions
Case:
Luna v. Plaza, 26 SCRA 310 (1968)

1.6 Issuance of arrest warrant

Cases:
Samulde v. Salvani, Jr., 165 SCRA 734 (1988)
Uy v. Mercado, 154 SCRA 567 (1987)
1.7 RTC Judges need not personally examine complainant
Cases:
Amarga v. Abbas, 98 Phil. 739 (1956)
Soliven v. Makasiar, 167 SCRA 393 (1988)
Allado & Mendoza v. Hon. Diokno, 232 SCRA 192
(1994)
2.

Administrative warrant
Cases:
Harvey v. Defensor-Santiago, 162 SCRA 840 (1988)
Lucien Tran Van Nghia v. Liwag, 175 SCRA 318 (1989)
Jackson v. Macalino, G.R. No. 139255, November 24,

2003
3.

Conditions for issuance of search warrant

Cases:
Pasion Vda. de Garcia v. Locsin, 65 Phil. 689 (1938)
Olaes v. People, 155 SCRA 486 (1987)

3.1 Procedure to determine probable cause to search

Cases:
Nala v. Barroso, 408 SCRA 529 (2003)
Chu v. Tamin, 410 SCRA 53 (2003)

3.2 Particular description of things to be seized

Cases:
People v. Tiu Won Chua, 405 SCRA 529 (2003)
Nala v. Barroso, 408 SCRA 529 (2003)
4.

Warrantless search
Incident to lawful arrest
Cases:
People v. Pangilinan, 410 SCRA 394 (2003)
People v. Estella, 395 SCRA 553 (2003)
Routinary searches at airports
People v. Johnson, GR No 138881, December 18, 2000
People v. Canton, GR No 148825, December 27, 2002
Moving vehicles
Asuncion v. CA, 302 SCRA 490 (1999)
Caballes v. CA, 373 SCRA 221 (2002)
Stop and Frisk
People v. Binad Sy Chua, 396 SCRA 657 (2003)
R
Objects in Plain View
People v. Simbahon, 401 SCRA 94 (2003)
People v. Go, 411 SCRA 81 (2003)

5.

What may be seized

Rule 126, Sec. 2, Rules of Court

Exclusionary rule
Art. III, Sec. 3(2)
Case:
Stonehill v. Diokno, 20 SCRA 383 (1967)
Republic v. Sandiganbayan, 407 SCRA 10 (2003)
6.

Civil action for damages

Cases:
Forbes v. Chuoco Tiaco and Crossfield, 16 Phil. 534
(1910)
Chuoco Tiaco v. Forbes, 40 Phil. 1122 (1913)
Aberca v. Ver, 160 SCRA 590 (1988)

Section 3 Privacy of communication and correspondence

Valmonte v. De Villa, 178 SCRA 211 (1989)
Alejano v. Cabuay, 468 SCRA 188 (2005)

Section 4 Freedom of expression

1.

Freedom of speech and press

a.
b.

Meaning and scope

Aspects

c.

Forms of abridgment

1.
2.

Prior restraint concept and kinds

Subsequent Punishment concept and

kinds
d.

Tests
1.
2.
3.

e.

Dangerous tendency
Clear and present danger
Balancing of interests

Prior restraint

Cases:
MTRCB v. ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation, 448
SCRA 575 (2005)
U.S. v. OBrien 391 US 367 (1968)
f.

Subsequent punishment

Cases:
Gitlow v. People of New York, 268 US 652 (1924)
Dennis v. United States, 341 US 494 (1950)
New York Times Co. V. Sullivan, 376 US 254 (1964)
Espuelas v. People, 90 Phil. 524 (1951)
g.

Freedom of expression and libel

Cases:
Philippine Journalists v. Thoen, 477 SCRA 482 (2005)
Reno v. ACLU, 521 US 844 (1997)
h.

Freedom of expression and administration of

justice
Cases:

People v. Godoy, 243 SCRA 64 (1995)

In re: Emil P. Jurado, 243 SCRA 299 (1995)
In re: Atty.Leonard de Vera, A.M. No. 01-12-03-SC, July
29, 2002
i.

Freedom of expression and obscenity

P.D. 1986 (1985)

Cases:
Roth v. United States, 354 US 476 (1957)
D55
Ginsberg v. New York, 390 US 629 (1968)
Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 SCRA 503 (1969)
Miller v. California, 413 US 15, 37 L Ed 2d 419, 93 S Ct
2607 (1972)
Pita v. Court of Appeals, 178 SCRA 362 (1989)
j.

Freedom of expression and radio broadcasts

Case:
Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica
Foundation, 438 US 726, 57 L Ed 2d 1073, 98 S Ct
3026 (1978)
2.

Freedom of assembly and petition

B.P. Blg. 880 (22 Oct. 1985) Public Assembly Act of

1985
Cases:
Subayco v. Sandiganbayan, 260 SCRA 798 (1996)
Bangalisan v. CA, 276 SCRA 619 (1997)
Acosta v. CA, 334 SCRA 486 (2000)

Section 5 Freedom of religion

1.

Non-establishment of religion
Art. VI, Sec. 28(3)
Art. VI, Sec. 1(2)
Art. IV, Sec. 14(3)
Cases:
Garces v. Estenzo, 104 SCRA 510 (1981)
Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 US 601 (1971)
Board of Education v. Allen, 392 US 236 (1968)

2.

Free exercise of religion

Cases:
Estrada v. Escritor, 408 SCRA 1 (2003) see also: June
22, 2006 decision
Taruc v. De la Cruz, 453 SCRA 123 (2005)
In Re: Request of Muslim Employees in the Different
Court of Iligan City, 477 SCRA 648 (2005)

Section 6 Liberty of abode and right to travel

Cases:
Villavicencio v. Lukban, 39 Phil. 778 (1919)
Marcos v. Manglapus, 177 SCRA 668 (1989)
Marcos v. Sandiganbayan 247 SCRA 127
Yap v. CA, GR No141529, June 6, 2001
Section 7 Right to information

Cases:
Gonzales v. Narvasa, 337 SCRA 732 (2001)
Chavez v. PEA, 384 SCRA 152 (2002)

Section 8 Freedom of association

Cases:
Scales v. U.S., 367 US 203 (1961)
NAACP v. Button, 371 US 415 (1963)
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 47A (1965)
Padcom Condominium Association v. Ortigas Center
Association, Inc, 382 SCRA 222 (2002)

Section 9 Just compensation

Taking
Cases:
City of Manila v. Laguio, 455 SCRA 308 (2005)
CIR v. Central Luzon Drug Corporation, 406 SCRA 414
(2005)
Public use
Case:
Maosca v. RP, 252 SCRA 412 (1997)
Just compensation
Cases:
Land Bank v. Wycoco, 13 January 2004
Republic v. Lim, 462 SCRA 265 (2005)

Section 10 Non-impairment of the obligation of contracts

Cases:
Ortigas & Company, Ltd. V. CA, GR No 126102, 4
December 2000
Republic v. Rosemoor Mining and Development
Corporation, 426 SCRA 517 (2004)
Hospicio de San Jose de Barili v. DAR, 470 SCRA 609
(2005)

Section 11 Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies

and adequate legal assistance

Section 12 Rights under investigation

1.

Right to silence, to counsel, and to warnings

Cases:
People v. Besonia, 422 SCRA 710 (2004)
Uy v. Phela Trading Company, 451 SCRA 124 (2005)
1.1 Prosecutions burden to prove warnings
Case:
People v. Nicandro, 141 SCRA 289 (1986)
R
1.2 Police line-up
Case:
People v. Escordial, 373 SCRA 585 (2002)
People v Piedad, GR No 131923, December 5, 2002
1.3 Requirements for warnings to be valid

Cases:
People v. Obrero, 332 SCRA 190 (2000)
People v. Alberto, GR No 132374, 22 August 2002
2.

Tests of waiver of Miranda rights

2.1 Art. III, Sec. 12(1)

Cases:
People v. Albofera, 152 SCRA 123 (1987)
Olaes v. People, 96 SCRA 624 (1980)
2.2 Waiver of right to remain silent and to counsel,
but not to be given warnings
Exclusionary rule
Art. III, Sec. 12(3)
Cases:
Harris v. New York, 401 US 222 (1971)
New York v. Quarles, 104 S. Ct. 2626 (1984)
i)

Confession secured by deceit

Cases:
People v. Patungan, 354 SCRA 413 (2001)
People v. Ochate, GR No 127154, 30 July 2002
ii)

Confession secured by deceit

People v. Formentera, 130 SCRA 114 (1984)

iii)

Confession obtained by torture

People v. Ortilla, 129 SCRA 250 (1984)

iv)

Trial confession in non-custodial setting

Cases:
People v. Encipido, 146 SCRA 478 (1988)
People v. Moises Marcos, 147 SCRA 204 (1987)
v)

Right to counsel in administrative investigation

Galman v. Pamaran, 138 SCRA 294 (1985)

Remolona v. Civil Service Commission, GR No 137473,
August 2, 2001
vi) Right to counsel before officer conducting
preliminary investigation
People v. Abano, 145 SCRA 555 (1986)
vii) Right to counsel during identification
confrontation
U.S. v. Wade, 388 US 218 (1967)
People v. Usman Hassan, 157 SCRA 261 (1988)
vii) Uncounselled confession inadmissible
People v. Avendano, 395 SCRA 309 (2003)
People v. Janson, 400 SCRA 584 (2003)

3.

Privilege against self-incrimination

3.1 Signing receipts not self-incriminatory

Cases:
People v. Rualo, 152 SCRA 635 (1987)
People v. Policarpio, 158 SCRA 85 (1988)

Section 13 Right to bail

5.1 Application for bail moots habeas corpus
Cases:
Ariba v. People, 107 SCRA 191 (1981)
Bagcal v. Villaraza, 120 SCRA 525 (1983)
5.2 Meaning of capital offense
Cases:
Bravo, Jr. v. Borja, 134 SCRA 466 (1985)
People v. Parba, 142 SCRA 158 (1986)
Restriction of provisional liberty as bail
Case:
Manotok, Jr. v. C.A., 142 SCRA 149 (1986)
5.3 When right may be invoked
Cases:
People v. San Diego, 26 SCRA 522 (1968)
Lavides v. CA, 324 SCRA 321 (2000)
5.4 When right may not be invoked

Case:
Government of the U.S.A. v. Purganan, G.R. No.
148571, Sept. 25, 2002
5.5 Standards for fixing bail
Rule 114 Sec. 10
Cases:
Cabanero v. Canon, A.M. No. MTJ-01-369, September
20, 2001
Magsucang v. Balgos, 398 SCRA 158 (2003)

Section 14 Criminal due process

1.

Impartial tribunal
Cases:
People v. Tuazon, 159 SCRA 315 (1988)
Cojuangco v. PCGG, 190 SCRA 226 (1990)

2.

Presumption of innocence
Cases:
Delgado v. CA, 145 SCRA 357 (1986)
Ong v. Sandiganbayan, 470 SCRA 7 (2005)
Rule 119, Sec. 3(e)
Case:
People v. Quintal, 125 SCRA 734 (1983)

3.

Right to be heard personally or by counsel

Case:
People v. Macarang, 424 SCRA 18 (2004)
Crisostomo v. Sandiganbayan, 456 SCRA 45 (2005)
4.
Filing of demurrer to evidence is a waiver of right
to be heard (Rule 119, Sec. 5)
Case:
People v. Donesa, 49 SCRA 281 (1973)
Abriol v. Homeres, 84 Phil.525 (1949)
Rule 119, Sec. 15
Right to be informed of nature and cause of accusation
Cases:
People v. Sanchez, 411 SCRA 288 (2003)
People v. Ting Lan Uy, 457 SCRA 248 (2005)
5.

Right to speedy, impartial and public trial

5.1 speedy Yulo v. People 452 SCRA 205 (2005)
Caballes v. CA, 452 SCRA 312 (2005)

5.2 public Garcia v. Domingo, 52 SCRA 143 (1973)

5.3 impartial trial Tumey v. Ohio, 273 US 511 (1927)

6.

Right to personal confrontation

Admission of hearsay violates right to confrontation
People v. Escote, 400 SCRA 603 (2003)
People v. Montenegro, G.R. No. 157933, August 10,

2004
7.

Right to secure attendance of witnesses

8.

Trial in absentia
Rule 115, Sec. 1(c)
Cases:
People v. Salas, 143 SCRA 163 (1986)
Jimenez v. Nazareno, 160 SCRA 1 (1988)

9.

When presence of accused a duty

Rule 116, Sec. 1(b)
9.1 arraignment Rule 116, Sec. 1(b)
9.2 during trial for identification

Cases:
Aquino, Jr. v. Military Commission No. 2, 63 SCRA 546
(1975)

Section 15 Habeas corpus

Cases:
Moncupa v. Ponce Enrile, 141 SCRA 233 (1986)

Gumabon v. Director of the Bureau of Prisons, 37 SCRA

420 (1971)

Section 16 Right to a speedy disposition of cases

Cases:
Valencia v. Sandiganbayan, 433 SCRA 88 (2004)
Republic v. Desierto, 468 SCRA 458 (2005)

Section 17 Right against self-incrimination

Scope
Cases:
Villaflor v. Summers, 41 Phil. 62 (1920)
People v. Otadora, 86 Phil. 244 (1950)
Proceedings where available
Cases:
Pascual, Jr. v. Board of Medical Examiners, 28 SCRA
344 (1969)
Use immunity v. transactional immunity
Art. XIII Sec. 18(8) - (Use & fruit immunity)
Rep. Act. No. 1379, Sec. 8 (Transactional immunity)
Exclusionary rule
Art. III, Sec. 12(b)
Effect of denial of privilege by Court

Case:
Chavez v. CA, 24 SCRA 663 (1968)

Section 18 Political beliefs and aspirations

Section 19 Cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment

People v. Borja, 91 SCRA 340 (1979)
Lim v. People, G.R. No. 149276, 27 September, 2002

Section 20 Non imprisonment for debt or non-payment of a poll

tax
Vergara v. Gedorio, 402 SCRA 520 (2003)
Arceta v. Mangrobing, 432 SCRA 136 (2004)

Section 21 Double jeopardy

People v. Astudillo, 401 SCRa 723 (2003)
Vincoy v. CA, 423 SCRA 605 (2004)
i)
Prosecution for supervening death even after
earlier conviction for physical injuries
Melo v. People, 85 Phil. 766 (1950)
People v. City Court of Manila, Br. XI, 121 SCRA 637
(1983)
ii)

Retrial after unjustified dismissal allowed

People v. Jardin, 124 SCRA 167 (1983)

People v. Tagle, 176 SCRA 809 (1989)
iii)

Double jeopardy for same act

Yap v. Lutero, 105 Phil. 1307 (1959)

People v. Relova, 148 SCRA 292 (1987)

iv)

Dismissal on motion to quash prevents jeopardy

Caisa v. People, 159 SCRA 16 (1988)

People v. Quizada, 160 SCRA 516 (1988)
v)

Double jeopardy after dismissal on demurrer

People v. Francisco, 128 SCRA 110 (1984)

People v. Mogol, 131 SCRA 296 (1984)
vi)

Absence of jurisdiction prevents jeopardy

Zapatos v. People, 411 SCRA 148 (2003)

People v. Tac-an, 398 SCRA 373 (2003)

Section 22 Ex post facto law or bill of attainder

Cases:
Ople v. Torres, 293 SCRA 141 (1998)
Recuerdo v. People, G.R. No. 133036, January 22, 2003

PRESCRIBED REFERENCE

Bernas, Joaquin. The Constitution of the Republic of the

Philippines: A Commentary (2009).