CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY.

JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO EKNMAGUILAR 2018

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
ESSENTIAL PARTS OF THE CONSTITUTION
1. CONSTITUTION OF GOVERNMENT
2. CONSTITUTION OF SOVEREIGNTY
3. CONSTITUTION OF LIBERTY
Constitutional Law II primarily deals with the constitution
of liberty
The Constitution of Liberty deals with the clash between
the three inherent powers of the government and the
Constitutional Rights granted by the Constitution
Constitutional Law II therefore is a study of the
inherent powers of the state and the basic constitutional
rights
 Police Power
 Eminent Domain
 Taxation
Even in the absence of constitutional provisions
detailing such, any state can invoke these powers.
 Liberties include constitutional rights and basic
and political rights
 Constitutional Rights are not limited only in
Article III Bill of Rights in the 1987 Constitution;
it also includes, among others,
1. Right to a balanced and healthful ecology (Sec.
16, Art. II; Oposa v. Factoran)
2. Right to Vote (Art. V)
3. Right to Citizenship (Art. IV; Llamanzares-Poe
v. COMELEC)
 The rights mentioned in Article III are also
afforded to foreigners who sojourn in the
Philippines
THE BILL OF RIGHTS
“First Generation of Human Rights”
- The Philippine Bill of Rights was merely borrowed
from western legislation such as the US Bill of
Rights and Declaration of Independence.
-
I. HISTORY OF RIGHTS
Human Rights are rights which are inherent to human
beings and without which, we cannot fully live as
human beings.
Even in the absence of a law, human rights can be
invoked
In Republic v. Sandiganbayan, it was held that during
the interregnum (February 25-March 25, 1986), there
was no operative constitution because a de facto
revolutionary government is not bound to follow the
constitution of the previous regime. As such, no Bill
of Rights was operative. However, by virtue of the
Philippines’ agreement to the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights and the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, the Filipino People enjoy
the same rights in the Bill of Rights by virtue of the
ICCPR and UDHR. The declaration is an international
customary law which the Philippines has the obligation
to uphold, and that as human beings, they are proper
subjects to the rules in the covenant.

1
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO EKNMAGUILAR 2018
The Rights in Article III are negative rights because A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
they are designed to prevent abuses from the
Similarities and Differences
government. They include negative duties on the part
of government. 1. As to who can exercise:
Generally, police power is exercised by the
We are also bound to follow International Customary
legislative but can be delegated to
Law by virtue of the Incorporation Clause under Art.
administrative/executive bodies and to Local
II Sec. 2.
Government Units (Sec. 16, LGC)

Taxation can be exercised by the legislative, and

the Local Government Units, but the executive can
exercise it by imposing tariff rates

Eminent Domain involves a multitude of processes

involving different departments: it involves the
Executive in determining the purpose of the property
II. HIERARCHY OF RIGHTS taken, the judiciary to hear an expropriation
proceeding, and the legislative to pass an
HUMAN RIGHTS
appropriations law for just compensation
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
2. As to the rights affected:
CIVL/POLITICAL RIGHTS In Police Power, life, liberty and property are
SOCIO-ECONOMIC RIGHTS subject to the power of the state.
CULTURAL RIGHTS
In Eminent Domain and Taxation, property is being
subject to the power of the state.
3. As to payment:
In Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Organization v. In Eminent Domain, payment of just compensation is a
Philippine Blooming Mills, the court said that Civil sine qua non requirement as provided for in Sec. 9
Liberties are superior to Property rights because Civil of Art. III.
Liberties allow individuals to be fully-functioning
citizens of a democratic state. In taxation, the payment for property is the
improvements made on public utilities
THE THREE INHERENT POWERS OF THE STATE

2
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
In police power, the payment is an intangible,
altruistic feeling of contributing for public
welfare.
4. Police Power and Taxation is strictly exercised by
the government.
In Eminent Domain, Quasi-Public Corporations may
exercise as long as it is for public welfare (i.e.
Expressways)
5. The invocation of Eminent Domain and Taxation
involves confiscation of private property is
wholesome and devoted for public use or purpose.
In police power, the confiscation involves a
property that is noxious, or intended for a noxious
purpose, and thus may be destroyed
B. DELEGABILITY OF POWERS OF THE STATE
General Rule: The Inherent Powers are primarily
exercised by the legislature.
I. POLICE POWER
Police Power may be validly delegated to the President,
to Administrative Bodies, and to Local Government Units.
However, there must be a law providing for such.
For the President, Police Power may be delegated in the
exercise of his emergency powers as provided by the
Congress in times of National Emergencies.
For Administrative Bodies, they can exercise police power
by virtue of their quasi-legislative and rule-making
3
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
functions in the creation of Implementing Rules and
Regulations.
For Local Government Units, Sec. 16 of RA 7160 (Local
Government Code of 1991) provides for the General Welfare
Clause where it provides that local legislative bodies
may enact ordinances deemed to serve the General Welfare
II. EMINENT DOMAIN
The Power of Eminent Domain may be validly delegated
to Administrative Bodies, Local Government Units and
Quasi-Public Corporations
Quasi-public Corporations are private entities who
provide for basic needs or wants. It includes
corporations which provide for electricity, water
supply, etc., including corporations who develop
expressways, etc.
For Local Government Units, Sec. 19 of the LGC
provides that:
a. There must first be an offer to the private property
owner before an expropriation proceeding may be
filed
b. Should the owner refuse, it is the only time where
an expropriation proceeding may be filed.
c. The purpose of the expropriation for Local
Government Units must strictly be for the poor and
landless, as compared to the National Government
where it requires that the purpose must merely be
for public purpose.
III. TAXATION
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
For taxation, the Implementing Rules and Regulations will
be drafted by the Bureau of Internal Revenue, which is an
administrative bodies
The power of taxation is also delegated to the President
in his power to enact tariff bills.
POLICE POWER
Police Power is the power of the state to regulate life,
liberty and property for the purpose of promoting general
or public welfare.
I. JUSTIFICATIONS OF PUBLIC WELFARE
1. Salus Populi es suprema lex (the welfare of the
people is the supreme law)
2. Sic Utere Tuo Ut Alienum Non Laedas (exercise your
rights in the manner that it will not affect the
rights of others)
This provides that rights are not absolute. There is
an abuse of rights when the exercise of a right comes
at the expense of other people’s rights.
3. Parens Patriae
It means the state as the protector of the rights of
the people, especially those who cannot protect
themselves or the vulnerable sectors which includes
Women, Children, Elderly, PWDs, and the Poor. It is
also called as Social Justice legislation
II. WHO CAN EXERCISE POLICE POWER?
General Rule and exceptions: Police Power is generally
a legislative function, however, it may be validly
4
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
delegated to the President in the exercise of
emergency powers, to Administrative Bodies in the
drafting of IRRs, and to Local Government Units under
the General Welfare Clause.
III. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF POLICE POWER
 Police power is the most pervasive, most demanding
and least limitable power of all three powers of the
state
 It is wide in coverage because it can touch almost
all human activities
 Eminent Domain may be used to implement a police
power objective
 Taxation may also be used tom implement police
power.
 Police Power prevails over a contract; and as such
it shall prevail of the non-impairment of contracts
rule under the Bill of Rights
 Police Power cannot be waived by a treaty and cannot
be bargained away by a treaty.
IV. BASIC LIMITATIONS AND REQUISITES OF POLICE POWER
LIMITATIONS
1. Should not primarily be in contravention with the
Constitution
2. Should always abide by due process and equal
protection of the laws
3. Any police power legislation is subject to the
rational basis test, compelling state interest test,
and the due process and equal protection test
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
Rational basis test involves a question of
reasonability. The means employed must be
reasonable.
Compelling state interest test involves a question
of whether or not there is a state interest involved
in a particular legislation that the state must be
able to answer/fulfill, i.e. health, morals, welfare
or national security.
Due Process and equal protection test involves a
question on whether or not Due process and equal
protection has been afforded by the subjects of the
police power legislation, especially people who are
affected by deprivation or regulation of life,
liberty and property.
REQUISITES
1. Lawful Subject
Lawful subject means that the police power
legislation must carry with it a public purpose of
promoting general or public welfare.
If there is no public purpose for which it is
intended, the exercise is not valid.
It is not necessary that a direct benefit may be
given; it is enough for as long as the is public
purpose intended.
2. Lawful Means
Lawful Means involve a reasonable necessity of the
means employed to attains such police power
objective.
5
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
It also means that it should be backed up by law or
ordinance.
In the case of Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel
Operators v. City of Manila and Dela Cruz v. Paras,
it was held that an outright prohibition and closing
of Hotels and Motels because these places are
“places of immorality” already infringes upon the
constitutional right of owners to own and utilize
their property. While public morals is a valid
subject under police power, there is now lawful
means when there is outright deprivation of property
rights. This means that the achievement of the
police power objective does not need to go to that
extent, it rather just needs mere regulation of the
exercise and use of their properties, not to totally
ban them.
In Mirasol v. DPWH, it was held that the court’s
power of inquiry is only limited to reasonability
and not on whether or not the policy is the best way
to enforce the police power objective. This means
that the court will only decide on whether or not
the policy is reasonable; because choosing among a
plethora of options to enforce a police power
objective is left to the legislature who passes and
creates laws.
EMINENT DOMAIN
Eminent Domain is the power of the state to take away
private property for public use, upon just compensation.
Eminent Domain- power of the state
Expropriation- proceeding filed by the state in courts
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
I. Constitutional Provisions justifying Eminent
Domain:
1. Sec. 9 of Art. III
“Private Property cannot be taken without just
compensation”
2. Sec. 18 of Art. XII
“The State may, in the interest of national welfare
or defense, establish and operate vital industries,
and, upon payment of just compensation, transfer to
public ownership utilities and other private
enterprises to be operated by the Government.”
3. Sec. 4 and Sec. 9 of Art. XIII
Sec. 4- On Agrarian Reform Program
Sec. 9- on Urban land reform and housing
II. Who can exercise Eminent Domain?
1. Legislative
2. LGUs
3. Quasi-Public Corporations
4. Administrative Bodies
When exercised by the Legislature, the power of eminent
domain is a political question while if it is exercised
by any delegates of the power, it is a justiciable
question.
III. Rules of Construction of the Power of Eminent
Domain
 When invoked, and in case of doubt, it shall be
liberally interpreted in favor of the private
property owner, and strictly construed against the
state
IV. What can be expropriated?
6
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
 Anything that can be a subject of legal ownership;
anything within the dominion of man
Examples: airtime (TELEBAP v. COMELEC);
advertisement space (Phil. Press Institute v.
COMELEC)
 However, like Police Power, one of the basic
limitations of Eminent Domain is the constitutional
guarantee of due process and equal protection of the
laws.
V. Elements
1. Necessity
2. Private Property
3. Taking
4. Public Use
5. Just Compensation
6. Due Process
Necessity
There must be an expedient and urgent need to
expropriate for the benefit of the public.
Private Property
Private Property should be definite.
Question: Can Public Property be further expropriated?
YES
While the Republic may not compel the PLDT to
celebrate a contract with it, the Republic may, in the
exercise of the sovereign power of eminent domain,
require the telephone company to permit
interconnection of the government telephone system and
that of the PLDT subject to just
compensation. (Republic v. PLDT)
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
Taking
Elements:
1. The expropriator must enter a private property
2. Entry must be for more than a momentary period
3. Entry must be under a warrant or color of legal
authority
4. Property must be for public use or purpose.
*The commonality is that it must have an intent to oust
the private property owner
Public Use
Any use directly available to the general public as a
matter of right
Indirect public purpose is justified as long as it is
public in nature
Just Compensation
Full and Fair equivalent of the property taken, under the
perspective of both the state and the private property
owner.
Fair
Property owner cannot, however, demand exorbitant
compensation.
When there is already Writ of Possession, (according to
Atty. Bonifacio), tendency is the private property owner
cannot anymore refuse to sell the property because
usually, the amount has already been deposited.
Fair equivalent means the basic value or price that
pareties are willing to consider in a contract of sale.
7
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
If only a portion of the property expropriated (except if
there are already improvements in the whole property i.e.
a house), the following formula is followed:
BV + (CD-CB) where:
BV= Basic Value
CD= Cost of Destruction
CB= Cost of Benefit
The payment should be paid in cash but it can also be in
the form of
Cash Bonds (Association of Small Landowbers v. Secretary
of Agrarian Reform)
Stocks (Hacienda Luisita Inc. v. PARC)
The actual value which should be considered is the value
of the property during its actual taking and is entitled
to legal interest
VI. Notable Jurisprudence
The amount of just compensation is purely a judicial
function upon the appointment of the judge in the
expropriation court of commissioners who will assess
the fair market value of the property sought to be
expropriated, and not by any fixed law (EPZA v. Dulay)
When a franchise of a government-created institution
or authority ceases at the pendency of an
expropriation proceeding, the case does not terminate
by virtue of the loss of the juridical personality of
the institution, because in expropriation proceedings,
it is the state which is deemed as the party. (Iron
and Steel Authority v. CA)
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
Only upon payment of full compensation that the
property expropriated be considered as fully owned by
the government. (Estate of Salud Jimenez v. PEZA)
Tourism purposes is considered as public use. (Heirs
of Ardona v. Reyes)
TAXATION
Taxation is a mode of raising public revenue for
public purposes; it should ultimately boil down for
public purposes.
Taxes are enforced contributions impelled by an
element of compulsion to pay such contributions.
Elements of Taxation
1. Mandatory Contribution
- The power to tax is mandatory in nature, as it is
the price we pay for a civilized society
2. Proportional
- Taxation must be based on one’s ability to pay. The
Constitution mandates a progressive system of
taxation, meaning tax increases as the tax base
increases.
3. Levied by authority of the law
- Taxation is only possible if there is a law granting
such
4. Taxes are collected in support of the Government
Lifeblood Doctrine
-Taxes are essential for the existence of the
government, thus its prompt collection is an
imperative need.
2 theories why there is a need for taxation
8
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
1. Necessity Theory
- Taxes are a need of the government; without it, it
cannot function
2. Benefits Protection Theory
- In exchange for taxes that citizens pay, citizens
can expect benefits, protection and security
provided by the state.
Inherent Limitations to the Power of Taxation
1. For a public purpose
2. Territoriality
- Taxes will only operate within the particular
territory of a state.
3. International Comity
- Foreign jurisdictions are not taxed, particularly if
it involves properties located in the Philippines
which are owned by foreign jurisdictions in pursuant
to their sovereign powers i.e. Consulates,
Embassies, etc.
- This is subject to the PIL Principle of Reciprocity
4. Exemptions
- The government itself is exempt from taxing itself
- Any Religious, Charitable and Educational purposes
are exempted from taxation, i.e. income taxes, real
property taxes
5. Delegability
- General Rule: Non-delegation
- Exceptions- President’s tariff powers, LGC
Constitutional Limitations to the Power of Taxation
1. Due Process and Equal Protection
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
CJ Marshall, US Supreme Court: “The Power to tax is
the power to destroy”
CJ Holmes, US Supreme Court: “The Power to tax is
not the power to destroy while this court sits”
This means that while taxes are burdensome in the
eyes of citizen-taxpayers, the power to tax cannot
destroy their inherent right to property and its
enjoyment thereof because the power to tax is not
absolute; it is always subject to the constitutional
limitations of Due Process and Equal Protection.
2. Uniformity or Equity
- All persons or things similarly situated shall be
treated alike
3. Non Imprisonment for non-payment of poll tax
- Poll Tax- Cedula
4. Non-impairment of obligations in contracts
5. Taxes should not offend religious freedoms
6. Taxes should not be allotted for sectarian purposes
7. Exemptions to traditional exemptees
- Religious, Charitable, Educational institutions are
exempt from income taxation Real Property Tax, as
long as such are within their respective purposes.
8. Congress can only provide tax exemptions by majority
vote of all members of congress
 Taxes are always personal to the taxpayer. Tax
liabilities cannot be inherited
 Taxation can bring in criminal liability
Tax Evasion – Tax Avoidance
Tax Avoidance are legal ways to lessen tax burdens
9
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
Tax Evasion are illegal ways to lessen or evade the
payment of taxes, which is a criminal offense.
THE BILL OF RIGHTS
SEC. 1- No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or
property without the due process of law, nor shall any
person be denied of equal protection of the law.
DUE PROCESS
Due process means that the law must hear before it
condemns.
The protected aspects of due process include life,
liberty, and property, with the exception of unlawful
items.
2 aspects of due process
a. Procedural Due Process
b. Substantive Due Process
PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS
- procedures which the government must follow or
undertake in the application of laws.
Procedural Due Process in Judicial Proceedings
Elements:
1. The Court of Tribunal Must possess judicial power
2. The Court must have jurisdiction to hear and decide
the case
3. There is an opportunity to be heard
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
4. Judgment be rendered only upon a lawful hearing or
trial
Procedural Due Process in Administrative Proceedings
- Does not necessarily require a trial-type proceeding
- Two Essential Elements: Notice and Opportunity to be
heard
Elements (Ang Tibay v. CIR)
1. Right to hearing, which includes the right to
present his own 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 used to support a finding or conclusion
should be substantial. Substantial evidence means
such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might
accept as adequate to support a conclusion.
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 must act on its 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.
7. The tribunal must render its decision in such a
manner that the parties to the proceeding can know
the various issues involved, and the reasons for the
decisions rendered.
School Disciplinary Proceeding
- The constitutional rights to due process are not
waived upon entering the school
Elements:
10
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
1. Student must be informed of the nature and cause of
the accusation against him
2. Student has the right to answer charges against him
with assistance of a counsel if desired
3. Student has the right to be informed of the evidence
against him
4. Student has the right to adduce evidence in his own
behalf
5. Evidence must be considered in totality
6. Penalty imposed must be proportionate to the offense
Proceedings without the need of formal hearing
- Thus, even without hearing, due process is not
violated
- In this case, the Police Power objective is more
important
1. Administrative Agencies exercising quasi-legislative
functions
2. Abatement of nuisance per se
3. The court’s grant of provisional remedies such as
TROs, Preliminary Injunctions, Replevin, Attachment
4. Cases of preventive suspensions
5. Cancellations of passport of a person charged with a
crime
6. Hold-departure orders
7. Suspension of a bank’s operation by the Monetary
Board
When an assistance of a counsel Is not necessary
General Rule: Right to Counsel is Recognized
Exceptions:
1. Katarungang Pambarangay Law (Reconciliation
Proceedings)
2. Alternative Dispute Resolution
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO EKNMAGUILAR 2018
The Right to a Preliminary Investigation is merely a SECTION 2. The right of the people to be secure in their
statutory right, and absence thereof is not a violation persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable
of due process searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any
purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or
Right to appeal is merely a statutory right that warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause
prescribes to be determined personally by the judge after examination
under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the
SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS
witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the
Requisites:
1. Lawful Subject place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
2. Lawful Means
Section 2 contemplates about rights against unreasonable
Reasonableness demands equity (reason and morality) searches and seizures

VOID FOR VAGUENESS RULE Purpose of the Article:

- If the law is not clear, its constitutionality may
be challenged.
Requisites for vagueness.
1. It lacks comprehensible standards
2. Men of ordinary intelligence must not guess of its
meaning
3. There is no uniformity in its application
EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW
- Equality before the law/legal equality
- Persons or things under like circumstances shall be
treated alike both as to privileges conferred and
liabilities imposed
Requisites:
1. Substantial Distinction
2. Germane to the Purpose of the law
3. Must not be limited to existing conditions only
4. Must apply equally to all members of the same class
Castle Doctrine
- Right to the zones of privacy which includes the
home, body of a person, thoughts, religion and
personal relationships, which are matters that
cannot be intruded by the state.
General Rule: THERE MUST BE A DOCUMENT OR A SEARCH
WARRANT
Exception (which must be construed in strictest terms):
VALID WARRANTLESS ARRESTS/SEARCHES
SEARCHES WITH A WARRANT
When is this right violated?
1. Search and seizure with a warrant is unreasonable
2. When search and seizure with a warrant is not
founded on judicially determined probable cause
What is a search warrant?
Sec. 1 of Rule 126 of the Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure:

11
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
An order in writing issued in the name of the People of
the Philippines, signed by the judge, directed to a peace
officer, commanding him to search for personal property
described therein and bring it before the court.
Search warrants are only issued in a judicial proceeding,
upon criminal cases, which include pending cases and
cases about to be filed.
CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF A SEARCH WARRANT
1. Particularity of the person to be searched
2. Particularity of the place to be searched
3. Particularity of the things to be seized
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS OF A SEARCH WARRANT
1. Only a judge can issue a search warrant in the place
where the crime is committed. The search warrant is
territorial in nature, and to avoid forum-shopping.
If judge is not available within that particular
jurisdiction, any court within the same judicial
region shall suffice.
Exception: In Continuing crimes, a search warrant
may be applied in the place where the case has been
filed
2. Searching Questions to be conducted by the judge;
witnesses must be personally examined by the judge
3. Determine Probable Cause
- Established by searching inquiries
- Probable Cause “such facts and circumstances which
would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to
believe that an offense has been committed and that
the object sought in connection with the offense are
in the place sought to be searched.
12
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
Address is controlling in the execution of a search
warrant.
How to Determine if Search Warrant is Valid
1. If there is probable cause
2. Whether or not the signatory is a judge
3. The affidavit of the applicant must be under oath
4. Warrant must particularly provide the place to be
searched and the persons/things to be seized
- Will a Jon Doe warrant valid?
- Yes, provided that the person with unknown identity
may be particularly described by the complainant.
5. Warrant must be issued in connection with a specific
offense.
Common Rules in order to avoid the abuse of Search
Warrants
1. A Search Warrant is valid only for 10 days
2. While there is no law providing the time of search,
daytime search is preferred
3. Knock and Announce Rule
4. Witness to search rule
(2-witness rule, if the person who owns the house is
not present, coordination with the community is also
preferred)
5. Conduct and inventory of the things seized.
6. Miranda Rights
7. Report to the court what happened, and give the
seized items to the court or evidence custodian.
Victims of violations against this right can invoke the
exclusionary rule or the Doctrine of the Fruit of the
Poisonous Tree
WARRANTLESS SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
1. Probable case-oriented searches
a. Warrantless searches incidental to lawful arrest
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
b. Plain View Doctrine
c. Automobile Search
d. Searches during emergency situations
2. Regulatory-oriented searches
a. Stop and frisk search
b. Customs and airport searches
c. Checkpoints
d. Inspections of structures and buildings for fire,
sanitary, tax and environmental regulations
3. Consensual Search
PROBABLE CAUSE ORIENTED SEARCHES
Warrantless Searches incidental to lawful arrest
Examples:
a. There should be a lawful arrest followed by a search
(i.e. caught in flagrante delicto) + search
b. Escapee of a penal/psychiatric institution + search
c. Hot Pursuit- a crime has just been committed and
arresting officer has probable cause in personal
knowledge that the person to be arrested has
committed the crime
Plain View Doctrine
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
- The search is valid as long as there is anything
that would incite suspicion by means of ascertaining
configurations, etc.
Automobile Search
Carroll Doctrine (Carroll v. US)
There is no necessity that the automobile is moving,
engine must only be on to justify warrantless search.
“The guaranty of freedom from unreasonable searches and
seizures is construed as recognizing a necessary
difference between a search of a dwelling house or other
structure in respect of which a warrant may readily be
obtained and a search of a ship, motorboat, wagon, or
automobile for contraband goods, where it is not
practicable to secure a warrant, because the vehicle can
be quickly moved out of the locality or jurisdiction in
which a warrant must be sought.”
Qualifications:
1. Must be moving/engine must be on and there is an
opportunity to stop
2. Limited to visual search/ flash and point search,
and may not open compartments

Elements: Searches made on emergency circumstances

a. Private intrusion
b. Evidence was inadvertently discovered
c. Person was not purposely looking for evidence
d. Evidence must be immediately apparent to be evidence
of a crime
e. Seizure of evidence will be justified with
conducting further search
- Must be premised upon genuine necessity and exigency
REGULATORY-ORIENTED SEARCHES
Intrusion of Privacy as a violation of this right may
only be committed by state agents, not private
individuals (People v. Marti)

13
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
Exception: Zulueta v. CA where husbands and wives outside
the family home may violate privacy. Marriage does not
dissolve one’s right to privacy outside the family home.
Stop and Frisk Search
(Patty Search and Arrest/Terry Search and Arrest, based
in Terry v. Ohio)
Purpose is to prevent harm, i.e. against armed and
dangerous person.
People v. Solayao
A civilian wearing a camouflage outfit is a reasonable
suspicion to justify stop and frisk search
Manalili v. CA
A suspicion of having red and wobbling eyes is a
reasonable suspicion to justify stop and frisk search
Malacat v. CA
There should be actual imminent danger on the life of the
police officer to justify arrest
Checkpoints
- No bags/compartments may be opened.
- Limited to flashlight searches/flash and point
searches
- Police and Military Checkpoints included, in the
interest of public security.
- Compartments may only be searched with clear consent
Customs and Airport Searches
- Purpose is to prevent the smuggling and imposition
of customs and tariff laws
14
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
Compliance with fire/sanitation/tax/environmental
standards
- Administrative searches, in the guise of police
power
CONSENSUAL SEARCHES
- Personal right to refuse
- Consent should be categorical and clear
- Mere silence cannot be automatically construed as
consent
Requisites:
1. The Right exists
2. Person had actual knowledge about the existence of
his right
3. Person had actual intention to relinquish the right
The constitutional immunity against unreasonable searches
and seizures is a personal right which may be waived. The
waiver may be either express or implied. No express
waiver has been made in the case before us. It is urged,
however, that there has been a waiver by implication. It
is well-settled that to constitute a waiver of a
constitutional right, it must appear, first, that the
right exists; secondly, that the person involved had
knowledge, either actual or constructive, of the
existence of such right; and, lastly, that said person
had an actual intention to relinquish the right. The
constitutional Immunity from unreasonable searches and
seizures, being a personal one, cannot be waived by
anyone except the person whose rights are invaded or one
who is expressly authorized to do so in his or her
behalf. Garcia vs. Locsin., 65 Phil. 689, No. 45950 June
20, 1938
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
The failure on the part of the petitioner and her
bookkeeper to resist or object to the execution of the
warrant does not constitute an implied waiver of
constitutional right. It is but a submission to the
authority of the law. As the constitutional guaranty is
not dependent upon any affirmative act of the citizen,
the courts do not place the citizen in the position of
either contesting an officer's authority by force, or
waiving his constitutional rights; but instead they hold
that a peaceful submission to a search or seizure is not
a consent or an invitation thereto, but is merely a
demonstration of regard for the supremacy of the law.
Garcia vs. Locsin., 65 Phil. 689, No. 45950 June 20, 1938
However, it must be seen that the consent to the search
was voluntary in order to validate an otherwise illegal
detention and search, i.e., the consent was unequivocal,
specific, and intelligently given, uncontaminated by any
duress or coercion. The consent to a search is not to be
lightly inferred, but must be shown by clear and
convincing evidence. People vs. Nuevas, 516 SCRA 463,
G.R. No. 170233 February 22, 2007
Neither can it be presumed that there was a waiver, or
that consent was given by the accused to be searched
simply because he failed to object. To constitute a
waiver, it must appear first that the right exists;
secondly, that the person involved had knowledge, actual
or constructive, of the existence of such a right; and
lastly, that said person had an actual intention to
relinquish the right (Pasion Vda. de Garcia v. Locsin, 65
Phil. 689). The fact that the accused failed to object to
the entry into his house does not amount to a permission
to make a search therein (Magoncia v. Palacio, 80 Phil.
770). People vs. Burgos, 144 SCRA 1, No. L-68955
September 4, 1986
15
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
SECTION 3. (1) The privacy of communication and
correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful
order of the court, or when public safety or order
requires otherwise as prescribed by law.
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the
preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose
in any proceeding
Zones of Privacy
1. Personal Privacy- “personal space”
2. Psychological Privacy- includes what you feel
3. Informational Privacy- includes those which are
considered privileged communication i.e. Atty-Client
Relationship, Marital Disqualification, priest-
penitent privilege, doctor-patient communication,
media privilege, voters’ privilege, industrial/trade
secrets.
4. Decisional Privacy- includes important decisions in
life.
When can the right to privacy be impaired: 1) upon lawful
order of the court 2) when public safety or order
requires otherwise as prescribed by law
Exclusionary Rule: Evidence obtained in violation of this
[right to privacy] or the preceding article [right
against illegal searches and seizures] shall be
inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding
Writ of Habeas Data:
Ephemeral Communications- Electronic Communications, also
covered by the right to privacy.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
In Disini v. Secretary of Justice, the Supreme Court said
that, “Computer data may refer to entire programs or lines
of code, including malware, as well as files that contain
texts, images, audio, or video recordings. Without having
to go into a lengthy discussion of property rights in the
digital space, it is indisputable that computer data,
produced or created by their writers or authors may
constitute personal property. Consequently, they are
protected from unreasonable searches and seizures, whether
while stored in their personal computers or in the service
provider’s systems”.
In People v. Enojas, the Supreme Court ruled that “As to
the admissibility of the text messages, the RTC admitted
them in conformity with the Court’s earlier Resolution
applying the Rules on Electronic Evidence to criminal
actions. Text messages are to be proved by the testimony
of a person who was a party to the same or has personal
knowledge of them.” Even if the text messages were lamented
to be inadmissible because of the lack of a search warrant,
the police, nevertheless, had the personal knowledge about
the crime that was committed.
In relation to this, US Jurisprudence laid down in Riley
v. California, “Cell phones, however, place vast quantities
of personal information literally in the hands of Court
individuals. A search of the information on a cell phone
bears little resemblance to the type of brief physical
search considered in Robinson. We therefore decline to
extend Robinson to searches of data on cell phones, and
hold instead that officers must generally secure a warrant
before conducting such a search.”
Privacy in Government Computers is expected when such
computer is of personal use to an employee. But if it is
communal, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy.
16
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
US v. Jones The Government obtained a search warrant
permitting it to install a Global-Positioning-System (GPS)
tracking device on a vehicle registered to respondent
Jones’s wife. The warrant authorized installation in the
District of Columbia and within 10 days, but agents
installed the device on the 11th day and in Maryland. The
Government then tracked the vehicle’s movements for 28
days. It subsequently secured an indictment of Jones and
others on drug trafficking conspiracy charges. The District
Court suppressed the GPS data obtained while the vehicle
was parked at Jones’s residence, but held the remaining
data admissible because Jones had no reasonable expectation
of privacy when the vehicle was on public streets. Jones
was convicted. Held: A search warrant is necessary;
tracking vehicles still constitute a search.
Kyllo v. US Suspicious that marijuana was being grown in
petitioner Kyllo's home in a triplex, agents used a
thermal-imaging device to scan the triplex to determine if
the amount of heat emanating from it was consistent with
the high-intensity lamps typically used for indoor
marijuana growth. The scan showed that Kyllo's garage roof
and a side wall were relatively hot compared to the rest
of his home and substantially warmer than the neighboring
units. Based in part on the thermal imaging, a Federal
Magistrate Judge issued a warrant to search Kyllo's home,
where the agents found marijuana growing. After Kyllo was
indicted on a federal drug charge, he unsuccessfully moved
to suppress the evidence seized from his home and then
entered a conditional guilty plea. The Ninth Circuit
ultimately affirmed, upholding the thermal imaging on the
ground that Kyllo had shown no subjective expectation of
privacy because he had made no attempt to conceal the heat
escaping from his home. Even if he had, ruled the court,
there was no objectively reasonable expectation of privacy
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO EKNMAGUILAR 2018
because the thermal imager did not expose any intimate What is Protected Speech? It includes every form of
details of Kyllo's life, only amorphous hot spots on his expression
home's exterior. Held: Where, as here, the Government uses
a device that is not in general public use, to explore Qualifications:
details of a private home that would previously have been 1. Prohibition against Prior Restraint
unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is 2. Prohibition against Subsequent Punishment
a Fourth Amendment "search," and is presumptively
unreasonable without a warrant.
Prior Restraint
The [Anti-Wiretapping] law refers to a “tap” of a wire or Governmental restrictions on the press or other forms of
cable or the use of a “deviee or arrangement” for the expression in advance of actual publication or
purpose of secretly overhearing, intercepting, or dissemination.
recording the communication. There must be either a
physical interruption through a wiretap or the deliberate Example: Movie Censorship
installation of a device or arrangement in order to In movie censorship, absolute censorship is not
overhear, intercept, or record the spoken words. An allowed per se because it is a lawful trade, except
extension telephone cannot be placed in the same category obscenity.
as a dictaphone, dictagraph or the other devices enumerated MTRCB Regulation is enough.
in Section 1 of RA No. 4200 as the use thereof cannot be Except during times of war, where absolute censorship
considered as “tapping” the wire or cable of a telephone may be implemented due to a compelling state interest
line. The telephone extension in this case was not to protect national security.
installed for that purpose. It just happened to be there
for ordinary office use. Gaanan vs. Intermediate Appellate Subsequent Punishment
Court, 145 SCRA 112, No. L-69809 October 16, 1986 Freedom of speech includes freedom after speech. Without
this assurance, the citizen would hesitate to speak for
The Compelling State Interest Test is used to determine fear he might be provoking the vengeance of the officials
whether or not there is an interest of the public that the he has criticized [UP Reviewer].
state ought to protect over private interest in order to
justify an intrusion to the right to privacy. Different Tests

SECTION 4. No Law shall be passed abridging the freedom of 1. Dangerous Tendency Test
speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of Consider whether or not there is a rational connection
the people peaceably to assemble and petition the between the speech and the evil sought to be
government for redress of grievances. apprehended.
2. Clear and Present Danger Test

17
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
There should be clear and present danger that the
words used are in such nature as to create a clear
and present danger that bring about the substantive
evils that the state has a right to prevent. This test
is oftenly used.
3. Balancing of Interest Test
Courts should balance public interest and freedom of
speech, as to what bears the greater weight
Core Expressions- Political Ideas, Rights, Religious
Speech; they are given maximum protection because they are
at the core of democratic exercise.
Commercial Speeches do not enjoy automatic protection. In
Order to enjoy protection, they must:
1. Not be false or misleading
2. Should not propose illegal transaction.
Basis of Regulation of Commercial Speeches
1. Government has the substantial interest to protect
2. Regulation directly advances interest of the state
3. Regulation promotes public welfare.
2 kinds of Unprotected Speech
1. Libel- written defamation
2. Obscenity
Obscenity (Miller Test)
1. When the work appeals to prurient interest
2. Depicts/describes sexual conduct in a patently
offensive way
3. Lacks serious, literary, artistic, political or
scientific value.
This right is protected because the media is said to be
the third estate and is a necessary check and balance, to
freely report the conduct of public officials and the
government.
18
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
Right to Peaceably Assemble
There is a right to peaceably assemble as long as a permit
is secured for the rally. However, according to Pros.
Sagsago, no permit is needed in designated Freedom Parks.
SECTION 5. No Law shall be made respecting an establishment
of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The
free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and
worship, without discrimination or preference, shall
forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required
for the exercise of civil of political rights.
*note: this part is sooo cases-based so read the cases
Components of the Freedom of Religion
1. Non-establishment Clause
2. Free Exercise Clause
3. Right to believe or not to believe.
NON-ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE
This clause prohibits excessive government entanglement
with, endorsement or disapproval of religion.
Doctrine of Benevolent Neutrality
There exists a legal wall separating the church and state.
Religion should not be justification in the pursuit of a
government policy, and the state shall neither promote nor
inhibit in religious matters.
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
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
exercise their religion without hindrance. The purpose of
accommodations is to remove a burden on, or facilitate the
exercise of, a person’s or institution’s religion. As
Justice Brennan explained, the “government [may] take
religion into account . . . to exempt, when possible, from
generally applicable governmental regulation individuals
whose religious beliefs and practices would otherwise
thereby be infringed, or to create without state
involvement an atmosphere in which voluntary religious
exercise may flourish.” In the ideal world, the legislature
would recognize the religions and their practices and would
consider them, when practical, in enacting laws of general
application. But when the legislature fails to do so,
religions that are threatened and burdened may turn to the
courts for protection. Thus, what is sought under the
theory of accommodation is not a declaration of
unconstitutionality of a facially neutral law, but an
exemption from its application or its “burdensome effect,”
whether by the legislature or the courts. Estrada vs.
Escritor, 492 SCRA 1, A.M. No. P-02-1651 June 22, 2006
Justice Cruz: 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 respective 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."
To disallow the holding of religious rituals within halls
of justice would set a dangerous precedent and commence a
domino effect. Strict separation, rather than benevolent
neutrality/accommodation, would be the norm. Thus, the
establishment of Shari'a courts, the National Commission
19
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
for Muslim Filipinos, and the exception of Muslims from
the provisions of the RPC relative to the crime of bigamy
would all be rendered nugatory because of strict
separation. The exception of members of Iglesia ni
Cristo from joining a union or the non-compulsion
recognized in favor of members of the Jehovah's Witnesses
from doing certain gestures during the flag ceremony, will
all go down the drain simply because we insist on strict
separation.
That the holding of masses at the basement of the QC Hall
of Justice may offend non-Catholics is no reason to
proscribe it. Our Constitution ensures and mandates an
unconditional tolerance, without regard to whether those
who seek to profess their faith belong to the majority or
to the minority. It is emphatic in saying that "the free
exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship
shall be without discrimination or preference." Otherwise,
accommodation or tolerance would just be mere lip service.
In Re: Letter of Tony Valenciano March 7, 2017
FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE
It affords absolute protection to individual religious
convictions. However, the government is able to regulate
the times, places and manner of its exercise.
The amendments of the constitution, restatement of articles
of religion and abandonment of faith or abjuration alleged
by appellant, having to do with faith, practice, doctrine,
form of worship, ecclesiastical law, custom and rule of a
church and having reference to the power of excluding from
the church those allegedly unworthy of membership, are
unquestionably ecclesiastical matters which are outside
the province of the civil courts. Taruc vs. De la Cruz,
453 SCRA 123, G.R. No. 144801 March 10, 2005
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
Doctrine of Conscientious Objector
In case of conflict between the religious beliefs and moral
convictions of individuals, on one hand, and the interest
of the State, on the other, to provide access and
information on reproductive health products, services,
procedures and methods to enable the people to determine
the timing, number and spacing of the birth of their
children, the Court is of the strong view that the
religious freedom of health providers, whether public or
private, should be accorded primacy. Accordingly, a
conscientious objector should be exempt from compliance
with the mandates of the RH Law. If he would be compelled
to act contrary to his religious belief and conviction, it
would be violative of “the principle of non-coercion”
enshrined in the constitutional right to free exercise of
religion. Imbong vs. Ochoa Jr., 721 SCRA 146, G.R. No.
207563 April 8, 2014
Exemption may be accorded to the Jehovah's Witnesses with
regard to the observance of the flag ceremony out of
respect for their religious beliefs, however "bizarre"
those beliefs may seem to others. Nevertheless, their right
not to participate in the flag ceremony does not give them
a right to disrupt such patriotic exercises. Paraphrasing
the warning cited by this Court in Non vs. Dames II, 185
SCRA 523, 535, while the highest regard must be afforded
their right to the free exercise of their religion, "this
should not be taken to mean that school authorities are
powerless to discipline them" if they should commit
breaches of the peace by actions that offend the
sensibilities, both religious and patriotic, of other
persons. If they quietly stand at attention during the flag
ceremony while their classmates and teachers salute the
flag, sing the national anthem and recite the patriotic
pledge, we do not see how such conduct may possibly disturb
the peace, or pose "a grave and present danger of a serious
20
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
evil to public safety, public morals, public health or any
other legitimate public interest that the State has a right
(and duty) to prevent" Ebralinag vs. The Division
Superintendent of Schools of Cebu, 219 SCRA 256, G.R. No.
95770, G.R. No. 95887 March 1, 1993
SECTION 6. The Liberty of Abode and of changing the same
within the limits prescribed by law shall not be impaired
except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the
right to travel be impaired except in the interest of
national security, public safety, or public health, as may
be provided by law.
Liberty and Travel and Abode
- People have the right to go wherever they want to go
as they please.
Limitations
Liberty of Abode- upon lawful order of the court
Who may impair- courts, within the limits prescribed by
law.
The forcible taking of these women from Manila by officials
of that city, who handed them over to other parties, who
deposited them in a distant region, deprived these women
of freedom of locomotion just as effectively as if they
had been imprisoned. The restraint of liberty which began
in Manila continued until the aggrieved parties were
returned to Manila and released or until they freely and
truly waived this right. Villavicencio vs. Lukban., 39
Phil., 778, No. 14639 March 25, 1919
Liberty of Travel- in the interest of national security,
public safety, or public health as may be provided by law
Who may impair- courts, or by the appropriate executive
officer (such as the DOJ or DOH) as provided by law.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
Bail as provisional liberty
- Bail is a necessary restriction of liberty in order
to assure that the accused in a criminal case attends
the criminal proceeding he is facing. As such, a hold-
departure order and watch list order may be justified
at this instance.
Statutory Limitations in the Liberty of Travel [Cruz]
1. Human Security Act
2. Philippine Passport Act
3. Anti-Trafficking of Persons Act
4. Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act
5. VAWC
6. Inter-country Adoption Act
Right to return to one’s country
The right to return to one’s country is not among the
rights specifically guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, which
treats only of the liberty of abode and the right to travel,
but it is our well considered view that the right to return
may be considered, as a generally accepted principle of
international law and, under our Constitution, is part of
the law of the land [Art. II, Sec. 2 of the Constitution].
However, it is distinct and separate from the right to
travel and enjoys a different protection under the
International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights,
i.e.,against being “arbitrarily deprived” thereof [Art. 12
(4)]. Marcos vs. Manglapus, 177 SCRA 668, G.R. No. 88211
September 15, 1989
Writ of Habeas Corpus is the proper remedy in violation of
this right.
SECTION 7. The right of the people to information on
matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access to
21
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
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.
Right to Information
Who may avail of this right? – Only Filipino Citizens
(Bernas, Cruz)
Exception: If the documents directly pertain to them.
Limitations:
1. National Security Matters
2. Trade Secrets
3. Banking Transactions
4. Diplomatic Correspondence
5. Executive Sessions by Congress
6. Supreme Court Deliberations
Like all the constitutional guarantees, the right to
information is not absolute. The people’s right to
information is limited to “matters of public concern,” and
is further “subject to such limitations as may be provided
by law.” Similarly, the State’s policy of full disclosure
is limited to “transactions involving public interest,”
and is “subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by
law.” The Court has always grappled with the meanings of
the terms “public interest” and “public concern.” x x x a
particular information is of public concern there is no
rigid test which can be applied. “Public concern” like
“public interest” is a term that eludes exact definition.
Both terms 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. In
the final analysis, it is for the courts to determine on a
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
case by case basis whether the matter at issue is of
interest or importance, as it relates to or affects the
public. We have also recognized the need to preserve a
measure of confidentiality on some matters, such as
national security, trade secrets and banking transactions,
criminal matters, and other confidential matters. Antolin
vs. Domondon, 623 SCRA 163, G.R. No. 165036 July 5, 2010
SECTION 8. The right of the people, including those
employed in the public and private sectors, to form unions,
associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to
law shall not be abridged.
Right to Association
- Foreigners may form associations in the Philippines
as long as it is not contrary to law, or aimed to
contravene the law.
Q: Public Employees join associations?
A: Yes, but does not include the right to strike. Resort
to the intent of the framers of the organic law becomes
helpful in understanding the meaning of these provisions.
A reading of the proceedings of the Constitutional
Commission that drafted the 1987 Constitution would show
that in recognizing the right of government employees to
organize, the commissioners intended to limit the right to
the formation of unions or associations only, without
including the right to strike. Social Security System
Employees Association (SSSEA) vs. Court of Appeals, 175
SCRA 686, G.R. No. 85279 July 28, 1989
SECTION 9. Private property shall not be taken for public
use without just compensation. [Constitutional Basis of
Eminent Domain]
22
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
SECTION 10. No law impairing the obligation of contracts
shall be passed.
Contracts Clause
- Stems from the “Autonomy of Contracts”
- Entering to a contract is a necessary exercise of the
right to liberty.
- Only protects valid contracts
When is a contract impaired?
1. Law changes the terms/conditions of the contract
and contrary to the agreement of the parties
2. Law changes the time/mode/performance of
obligations
3. Law will impose new conditions not agreed upon
4. Law will disregard conditions imposed upon by
parties
5. Law will allow satisfaction of an obligation
different from that provided in the contract.
Police Power and National Economy and Patrimony prevails
over Section 10.
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
The Rights of the accused are precisely crafted to protect
the innocent. Sections 11-21 are precisely crafted as such.
18 RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
1. Right to adequate legal assistance
2. Right to be informed of Miranda rights
3. Right against torture, force, violence, threat,
intimidation or any means which vitiate the free will
4. Right against secret, incommunicado, or similar forms
of detention facilities
5. Right to bail and right against excessive bail
6. Right to criminal due process
7. Right to be presumed innocent
8. Right to be heard by himself or his counsel
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO EKNMAGUILAR 2018
9. Right to be informed of the nature and cause of SECTION 12. (1) Any person under investigation for the
accusation against him commission of an offense shall have the right to be
10. Right to speedy, impartial and public trial informed of his right to remain silent, and to have
11. Right to meet witnesses against him face to face competent and independent counsel preferably of his own
12. Right to compulsory process to secure attendance choice. If the person cannot afford the services of
of witnesses and production of evidence counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights
13. Right against self-incrimination cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence
14. Right against detention for political of counsel.
beliefs/aspirations
15. Right against excessive fines Section 12 has to parts:
16. Right against cruel, degrading, or inhumane 1. Miranda Warnings
punishment 2. Rights of the Accused in a Custodial Investigation
17. Right against death penalty, except if the crime
is serious/heinous Miranda Warnings
18. Right against double jeopardy From Miranda v. Arizona (1964)
Why are there so many rights in favor of the accused? Upon arrest, the accused must be informed of these
1. A criminal proceeding is an uneven contest between rights:
the state and the accused, where the resources of the 1. Right to remain silent
state will be used by the prosecutors to convict the 2. Right to Competent and Independent Counsel,
accused preferably of his own choice
2. Seriousness of Criminal Proceedings, and its chilling 3. Right to be informed of these rights
effect
3. To protect the innocent People v. Mahinay- expanded Miranda Rights
SECTION 11. Free access to courts and quasi-judicial *according to Atty. Bonifacio, no need to memorize;
bodies and adequate legal assistance shall not be denied isapuso lang
to any person by reason of poverty.
1. The person arrested, detained, invited or under
Free Access to Courts and adequate legal assistance custodial investigation must be informed in a language
shall not be denied by reason of poverty. known to and understood by him of the reason for the
arrest and he must be shown the warrant of arrest, if
A right to counsel is an inherent right in all types of any; Every other warnings, information or communication
proceedings, except in Katarungang Pambarangay Law. must be in a language known to and understood by said
A de oficio counsel may be provided for indigent and person;
pauper litigants. It is a collective responsibility of
lawyers to make legal services available.
23
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
2. He must be warned that he has a right to remain silent
and that any statement he makes may be used as evidence
against him;
3. He must be informed that he has the right to be
assisted at all times and have the presence of an
independent and competent lawyer, preferably of his own
choice;
4. He must be informed that if he has no lawyer or cannot
afford the services of a lawyer, one will be provided
for him; and that a lawyer may also be engaged by any
person in his behalf, or may be appointed by the court
upon petition of the person arrested or one acting in
his behalf;
5. That whether or not the person arrested has a lawyer,
he must be informed that no custodial investigation in
any form shall be conducted except in the presence of
his counsel or after a valid waiver has been made;
6. The person arrested must be informed that, at any
time, he has the right to communicate or confer by the
most expedient means—telephone, radio, letter or
messenger—with his lawyer (either retained or
appointed), any member of his immediate family, or any
medical doctor, priest or minister chosen by him or by
any one from his immediate family or by his counsel, or
be visited by/confer with duly accredited national or
international non-government organization. It shall be
the responsibility of the officer to ensure that this is
accomplished;
7. He must be informed that he has the right to waive
any of said rights provided it is made voluntarily,
knowingly and intelligently and ensure that he
understood the same;
24
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
8. In addition, if the person arrested waives his right
to a lawyer, he must be informed that it must be done in
writing AND in the presence of counsel, otherwise, he
must be warned that the waiver is void even if he insist
on his waiver and chooses to speak;
9. That the person arrested must be informed that he may
indicate in any manner at any time or stage of the
process that he does not wish to be questioned with
warning that once he makes such indication, the police
may not interrogate him if the same had not yet
commenced, or the interrogation must cease if it has
already begun;
10. The person arrested must be informed that his initial
waiver of his right to remain silent, the right to
counsel or any of his rights does not bar him from
invoking it at any time during the process, regardless
of whether he may have answered some questions or
volunteered some statements;
11. He must also be informed that any statement or
evidence, as the case may be, obtained in violation of
any of the foregoing, whether inculpatory or
exculpatory, in whole or in part, shall be inadmissible
in evidence. People vs. Mahinay, 302 SCRA 455, G.R. No.
122485 February 1, 1999
When are these rights available?
During Custodial Investigation; when law enforcers start
asking incriminatory questions to the accused; when in
the mind of the law enforcement, the accused is the
possible suspect of the crime; when the questioning
ceases to be a general inquiry of an offense.
CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
When the investigation is no longer a general inquiry
unto an unsolved crime but has begun to focus on a
particular suspect, as when the suspect has been taken
into police custody and the police carries out a process
of interrogation that leads itself to eliciting
incriminating statement.
Who may conduct custodial investigation?
Primarily by state agents- public officials trained to
conduct investigations.
Hence, in Custodial Investigation, an accused has the
right to remain silent, right to counsel and right to be
informed of these rights.
Exceptions:
1. Police Line-Up or Show-Up
Generally, in an out-of-court identification such as
a police line-up, the right to counsel is not
necessary. However, if the identification already
becomes accusatory where investigators already tend
to elicit admissions or confessions, right to counsel
is already necessary.
2. Mechanical Acts
Miranda Rights are not necessarily available in
Mechanical acts; they are generally available to
testimonial evidence compulsion. However, in a case
of falsification, and a signature sample is being
asked, even if it is a mechanical act, such act must
be accompanied by a counsel.
Right to Remain Silent
There can be no adverse inference or conclusion if an
accused remains silent, especially when these rights were
explained to him.
25
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
Who is a Competent and Independent Counsel?
There is no hard and fast rule in identifying such, but
these are generally considered:
1. That there is no collusion between law enforcers and
the counsel
2. There is clear consent coming from the accused that
he wants to be represented by the lawyer
3. Experience of the lawyer
Waiver of the Miranda Rights
If the Miranda Rights are explained, these rights may be
waived. The waiver must be express.
Requisites:
1. Must be in writing
2. Must be in the presence of a counsel.
However, the right to be informed of such rights may not
be waived.
The waiver, however, may be revoked anytime.
Extra-Judicial Confessions
It is the admission of a crime made out of court.
Generally, Extra-Judicial Confessions must be in writing
and in the presence of a counsel in order to be admissible,
if these confessions are made to state agents/authorities.
Exceptions:
1. Media Confessions- if there are confessions made in
the media/media interviews, such are admissible even
if they are not in writing or executed with the
presence of a counsel
2. Confessions made to a private person- admissible
3. Confessions made to the mayor- admissible
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
*note= it is only admissible when the accused, prior to
his/her confession to a private individual, was informed
of his/her Miranda Rights
SECTION 13. All persons, except those charged with offenses
punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is
strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient
sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be provided
by law. The right to bail shall not be impaired even when
the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended.
Excessive bail shall not be required.
What is bail?
Security given by the accused to the courts to ensure
attendance in a criminal case particularly when his
presence is needed or mandatory
When can there be no Trial in Absentia?
1. Arraignment Process- referring to the official stand
of the accused in the criminal case
2. Identification Process- referring to the
identification of the witnesses of the prosecution on
who the accused is.
3. Promulgation of the decision- if the accused is absent
on the promulgation of the decision, the right to bail
and the right to appeal is forfeited.
Types of Bail
1. Recognizance- for minor offenses
2. Property Bail
3. Cash Bail
4. Surety Bail
When is an accused entitled to bail?
26
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
General Rule: All persons before conviction under the
custody of law are entitled to bail. At this point bail is
a matter of right.
Exception: If punishable by Reclusion Perpetua, Life
Imprisonment or death, bail is not available, especially
if the evidence of guilt is strong.
Exception to the Exception: Even if the crime is punishable
by reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or death, bail
may be available if the evidence of guilt is not strong.
This is not a right, but a matter of discretion of the
courts.
Bail on Appeal is also a matter of discretion.
A bail does not waive the challenge to the
constitutionality of the arrest.
However, the Enrile case is odd: He was given the right to
bail even if his crime is plunder and evidence of guilt is
strong because according to the Supreme Court:
1. There are instances in his life in the past where the
senator exercised respect to the courts, and being a
statesman
2. Due to health/humanitarian reasons.
(Question to myself: can this be a valid precedent?)
Factors to consider in bail
Excessive bail shall not be required.
Rule 114 Sec. 9 states- Amount of bail; guidelines- The
judge who issued the warrant or granted application shall
fix a reasonable amount of bail considering, primarily,
but not limited to, the following factors:
(a) Financial liability of the accused to give bail;
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
(b) Nature and circumstance of the offense;
(c) Penalty for the offense charged;
(d) Character and reputation of the accused;
(e) Age and health of the accused;
(f) Weight of the evidence against the accused;
(g) Probability of the accused appearing at the trial;
(h) Forfeiture of other bail;
(i) The fact that the accused was a fugitive from justice
when arrested; and
(j) Pendency of other cases where the accused is on bail.
Excessive bail shall not be required.
> Bail may only be posted when the court has already
acquired jurisdiction upon 1) arrest of the accused or 2)
upon voluntary surrender
SECTION 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a
criminal offense without due process of law.
(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be
presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall
enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be
informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against
him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial, to meet
the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process
to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production
of evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment,
trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the
27
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
accused provided that he has been duly notified and his
failure to appear is unjustifiable.
Components:
1. Right to Due Process
2. Presumption of Innocence
3. Right to be Head
4. Informed of nature and cause of accusation
5. Speedy, Impartial and Public Trial
6. Meet the witnesses face to face
7. Secure the attendance of witnesses
Due Process- conviction may only be given if the accused
is tried under established rules of procedure.
Right against a Bill of Attainder- a law that bestows
conviction even without the benefit of a trial.
Due process must include the consideration of all attendant
circumstances, examination of the plea of guilt, and the
establishment of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Presumption of Innocence
The Presumption of innocence is a rebuttable presumption
that will be rebutted by proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Q: Do presumptions (such as presumption of malversation)
violate the presumption of innocence?
A: No. Congress may lay down presumptions as long as they
are not conclusive.
Demurrer to Evidence- a motion in court to be filed by a
defendant arguing that the prosecution failed to prove the
guilt of the accused by the insufficiency of evidence.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO
This must be filed With Leave of Court, because if the
demurrer is filed without leave of court, the defense
waives its right to present evidence.
Right to be heard
The counsel representing the defendant/accused must be
competent and independent so as to assure that he is given
his day in court. An incompetent counsel may be construed
as a ground for lack of due process if counsel is proven
to be grossly negligent so as to deprive the person’s right
to his day in court.
Right to Speedy, Impartial and Public Trial
Constitutionally, a decision must be rendered in 90 days.
Because “Justice delayed is justice denied.” It also
creates a placebo effect in the distrust of the courts if
justice is denied.
Impartiality means the cold neutrality of an impartial
judge. He must be a disinterested person without hostility
towards parties.
Public Trial means the trial must be open for
attendance of the public.
Q: Are recordings allowed in public trials
A: Yes, as long as there is permission from Clerk of Court
of the Judge.
Right to meet witnesses face to face
This presupposes the right to cross-examine the witnesses.
Direct Examination- establish the facts as narrated by the
witness of own party.
Cross-Examination- destroy the theory of the case, and done
consecutively. Such is demandable during trial.
EKNMAGUILAR 2018
Q: Can there be a right to cross-examination during a
preliminary investigation?
A: No, because a Preliminary Investigation is not yet the
actual criminal proceeding. It may be waived as well.
Generally, there is no right to cross-examination in
administrative cases.
SECTION 15. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
shall not be suspended except in cases of invasion or
rebellion when the public safety requires it.
Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus
A court proceeding requiring a person to produce a person
arrested or detained and to justify before the courts the
reason for the arrest or detention of a person.
Requisites:
1. Rebellion, invasion, lawless violence
2. Public Safety requires it.
SECTION 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy
the disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-
judicial, or administrative bodies
All types of cases should afford the right to speedy
disposition of cases.
Delay
Vexatious or capricious such as unjustified postponements.
These are unreasonable delays.
SECTION 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness
against himself.
Right against self-incrimination
What is Incrimination?
28
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO EKNMAGUILAR 2018
- Compulsion to be a witness against himself, in all shall the death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling
types of proceedings, including legislative inquiries reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter
provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall
When is a question incriminating? be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
- When it will tie a person to a criminal act or act
prohibited by law. (2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading
punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of
It covers testimonial compulsions, not physical acts, substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman
excluding the crime of falsification/forgery when conditions shall be dealt with by law.
compelled to give a sample of signature.
The accused cannot be compelled to take the witness stand. Right against Cruel, Degrading and Inhumane Punishment

If a the accused takes the witness stand, questions should
only be related to the crime charged, but if it is an
ordinary witness, no limitation.
SECTION 18. (1) No person shall be detained solely by
reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.
This right is against punishment that offends human dignity
and self-worth. It includes punishments that prolong human
suffering and unnecessary embarrassment.
Q: Is death penalty violative of this right?

(2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except A: No. “Now it is well-settled in jurisprudence that the
as punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been death penalty per se is not a cruel, degrading or inhuman
duly convicted. punishment. In the oft-cited case of Harden v. Director of
Prisons, this Court held that “[p]unishments are cruel when
they involve torture or a lingering death; but the
Right against involuntary servitude punishment of death is not cruel, within the meaning of
that word as used in the constitution. It implies there
- Slavery and involuntary servitude, together with something inhuman and barbarous, something more than the
their corollary peonage, all denote a “condition of mere extinguishment of life.” Would the lack in
enforced, compulsory service of one to another.” particularity then as to the details involved in the
Exceptions: execution by lethal injection render said law “cruel,
degrading or inhuman?” The Court believes not. Echegaray
- Punishment for a crime vs. Secretary of Justice, 297 SCRA 754, G.R. No. 132601
- Compulsory Military service if national security October 12, 1998”
requires it
SECTION 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-
SECTION 19. (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor payment of poll tax.
cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither
29
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO EKNMAGUILAR 2018
Non-imprisonment for debt Form: all elements of the crime charged is alleged, the
date, time, place, the means to identify the accused,
A person may be held civilly liable for a debt, but not signed by the same authorities, and filed before a court
criminally liable. of competent jurisdiction.

This presupposes that the only liability is the debt, and IMPT: THERE IS ONLY FIRST JEOPARDY WHEN THE ACCUSED ALREADY
that the debt is not tainted with fraud, unless it becomes VALIDLY EXECUTED A PLEA IN ARRAIGNMENT
estafa.
2. Termination of the First Jeopardy
Poll Tax
Ways of termination:
Tax imposed on adults regardless whether or not they are
employed e.g. community tax (cedula) 1. Acquittal
2. Conviction
This provision prevents a tax law that would allow 3. Dismissal of the case without the express consent of
imprisonment for non-payment of such. the accused (because if with express consent, it is
merely provisional dismissal, which does not
This is different from Tax evasion where there is terminate the case)
deliberate and willful intent not to pay taxes. 4. Demurrer to Evidence
5. Motion to Quash
SECTION 21. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of - questions the validity of the information, before
punishment for the same offense. If an act is punished by arraignment. In this case, no termination of first
a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under jeopardy.
either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for 6. Withdrawal of the information
the same act. - within the prerogative of the prosecutor. If
prosecutor will ask before arraignment, no
Right against double jeopardy- a person/accused cannot be termination of first jeopardy. If withdrawn w/o
vexed twice in a criminal case. consent, after arraignment, there is attachment of
fist jeopardy.
Elements of a Double Jeopardy
3. Existence of the second jeopardy
1. First Jeopardy
- A new information was filed, and there is exact
A valid criminal information or complaint sufficient in identity of the first and second jeopardy.
form and substance.

30
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II ATTY. JOSE ADRIAN BONIFACIO EKNMAGUILAR 2018
- There is same identity if there is the same accused, ###
same charge, same facts, or that the offense is
necessarily included in the new information/
- There is second jeopardy when: 1st case- rape,
terminated, 2nd case- acts of lasciviousness or 1st
case: homicide, terminated, 2nd case- attempted
homicide.

General Rule: No Appeal on Acquittal

Exception: When there is an appeal by the state through
the Solicitor General grounded on Grave Abuse of
Discretion. The OSG will be the one who will issue
certiorari.

SECTION 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall

be enacted.

Ex Post Facto Laws

1. Makes an act criminal although it was not criminal

when it was committed
2. Aggravates the crime or makes it greater than when it
was committed
3. Changes the punishment or inflicts greater punishment
that that which the law prescribes when it was
committed
4. Changes the rules on evidence to secure easier
conviction
5. Calls for the retroactive application of penal laws
6. Prohibits remedies like probation, parole or amnesty

Bill of Attainder

- A legislative act which inflicts punishment without

the benefit of a trial. It violates due process.

31