Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
How would u know the extent of the interference that violates the bill of right?
- depends on the nature of the right and the purpose of the interference
- The essence of due process is the removal of arbitrary interference in life, liberty and property. Thus, due process
contemplates of a law which hears it before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgement only after
trial.
ON PROPERTY RIGHTS
1. A person cannot claim property right over a public office; but the discharge of a public office by a lawful occupant is a
protected right.
2. Government cannot interfere with one’s profession arbitrarily.
3. Juridical entities are covered with due process in so far as their properties are covered
DUE PROCESS
1. Substantive – serves as a restriction on the law-making and rule-making power of the government.
a) The law itself, not merely the procedures by which the law would be enforced, should be fair, reasonable and just.
It guarantees against arbitrary power even when exercised according to proper forms and procedure.
b) Police Power is the least limitable, it is plane plenary.
c) Disini Case- substantive due process does not have to be imposed against u, it can be violative of common rights.
2. Procedural – serves as a restriction on actions of judicial and quasi-judicial agencies of the government. It refers to the
method or manner by which law is enforce.
a) With respect of processes there is the Rules of Court by virtue of Article 8 of the Consti.
b) The rules of court is a supplementary law
KINDS OF EX PARTE:
1. NO NOTICE- The other party does not know when is the hearing
2. WITHOUT PARTICIPATION- Knows about the hearing but was not allowed to present evidence even if u want to present
evidence.
CECISTA: for me public office is a property right bec the salary is directly given to u
> public office is not a property right bec the relationship is between public and trust, nonetheless due process must be
observed
Substantive due process (Secretary of Justice v. Lantion, GR 139465)- Due process is comprised of 2 components -
Substantive due process which requires the intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with the rights of the person to his life,
liberty, or property. It fundamentally requires the concurrence of general welfare, lawful subject and lawful means.
A. CRIMINAL CASE: (case b/w the state and the accused and the complainant becomes a witness)
Procedure:
I. Filing of affidavit in the prosecutor
II. Determining probable cause by the prosecutor (prosecutor under DOJ, SC under Judiciary
III. Arraignment
- under criminal cases, in accordance with the due process of law, the accused should be under the jurisdiction of the
court through arraignment.
- when does the court acquires jurisdiction?
> once it filed before the court, arraignment will come wherein the accused will be asked “are u guilty or not” and
the accused will appear and answer the question, then the court have jurisdiction over the accused.
- can a lawyer appear in an arraignment and not be under the jurisdiction of the court?
> yes, just appear there and contest the jurisdiction of the court. The court cannot compel u to have jurisdiction
over u.
B. CIVIL CASE (Private matters between private persons) directly go to court and not fiscal bec the state have no
interest
Summons- is a pleading filed in court, like a counter affidavit. The answer of the other party in a pleading form for due
process filed in court not fiscal.
a) If the person to be summoned indicates a wrong address the court can issue summons through publications
and published it abroad or the persons last known address
b) If the person did not answer, the court will not have jurisdiction over the person but still have jurisdiction
over property of the person, which is more important.
c) U can easily run from a civil case but if u go to another country the court can go after u there, by publishing
summons even abroad.
d) The tribunal must have jurisdiction over the person and property but only in civil cases
Labor arbiter is a quasi-judicial body that is attach to the court
C. ADMIN CASES
GR: must have notice of hearing duly accepted by a person (applicable to non-governmental agencies)
e.g school- there is due process
EXC:
OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD
X hires A to be his counsel on multiple lawsuit against Y. RTC, X lost, believing that there was grave abuse of discretion, A filed
a certiorari in the SC. Meanwhile the reglementary period for appeal is running. SC dismissed the certiorari for violating
hierarchy of courts and for being a wrong remedy. X fired A and hired C. C then filed an appeal but was denied due to
prescription. C argued that X should not be bound for the negligence of counsel bec that denies X’s due process.
DE LIMA vs REYES
- de lima issued the creation of panel prosecutors to investigate and later on ordered re-investigation moto proprio, SC said
no violation of due process bec all these prosecutors are under the command of the SOJ and the latter can over turn their
decision.
EQUAL PROTECTION
- requires all things similarly situated to be treated alike both as to rights conferred and responsibilities imposed.
- Req:
1. Substantial distinction- makes real differences
E.g imposing higher penalty to crim using ICT (considered as an aggravating circumstance), SC said that vast potential and
benefits
2. Germane to the purpose of the law
3. not limited to existing conditions
4. must apply to the same class
Disini vs SOJ
- cyber crime is an aggravating circumstance. With the use of cyberspace can fraud a lot of people across different borders
- the vast potential
VIVARES VS STC
- SC said that u can only expect privacy on FB if u limit the privacy to urself.
Bello-henares vs guevarra
- argument that he/she limited the privacy in FB to his/her friends only is dumb, it does not guarantee absolute protection
from the prying eyes of another user who does not belong to one’s circle of friends. The user’s own Facebook friend can
share said content or tag his or her own Facebook friend thereto, regardless of whether the user tagged by the latter is
Facebook friends or not with the former. Also, when the post is shared or when a person is tagged, the respective Facebook
friends of the person who shared the post or who was tagged can view the post, the privacy setting of which was set at
“Friends.”
Section 7 of HSA- only the CA can issue an interception order but must be reference to judicially declared outlawed assoc or
persons suspected of the crime terrorism, that surveillance, interception and recording of communications between lawyers
and clients, doctors and patients, journalists and their sources and confidential business correspondence shall not be
authorized.
Rule 126: Sect 1- search warrant- an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the Philippines, signed by a judge
and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for personal property described therein and bring it before the
court
2nd problem:
- DOJ Secretary cannot make buot buot the judges how the latter will find probable cause bec it should be through
personal determination by the judge and DOJ Sec is from another department.
2. Particularity in description of the person to be arrested/things to be searched/ seized
1st problem: Ppl vs Tee
- not specifying what kind of thing to be seized does not amount to invalidity of the warrant while it is true to particularly
describe the thing to be seized or person to be arrested but the technical description of the thing to be seized is not required.
- vallejo vs CA- technical description is not required
SCATTERSHOT WARRANT- Arrest warrants are those that include 2 or more offenses a once, deemed to be void bec for each
warrant of arrest must be issued for one offense only.
RA 6235 section 9 Every ticket issued to a passenger by the airline or air carrier concerned shall contain among others the
following condition printed thereon: "Holder hereof and his hand-carried luggage(s) are subject to search for, and seizure of,
prohibited materials or substances. Holder refusing to be searched shall not be allowed to board the aircraft," which shall
constitute a part of the contract between the passenger and the air carrier
WARRANTLESS ARRESTS
1. In flagrante delicto requires:
a) As a police officer, in ur presence, a person committed, actually committing or attempting to commit a crime
b) Inn attempting to commit a crime- Must have probable cause, information is not enough, there must be overt acts
Ppl vs Aminodin
- alleged carrying marijuana, police arrested and frisk him and found out that there is indeed marijuana. No probable cause,
no valid warrantless arrest. Therefore, no valid warrantless search bec a valid warrantless search follows a valid warrantless
arrest.
2. Hot pursuit - u did not see the offense happened. The offense was just committed. Hot pursuit is continuous.
a) Probable cause
b) Based on personal knowledge
3. Escapee
Entrapment- mind of the accused must be criminal from the beginning. Well prepared, police officers, already plotted
everything and paved the way for the criminal to ask criminal q’s
Instigation- law enforcers were the ones who initiated he criminal design