E.

RIGHT TO BAIL (d) Character and reputation of the accused

(e) Health of the accused
Section 13, Art. III. All persons, except those charged with offenses (f) Strength of the evidence
punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong, (g) Probability of appearing at the trial
shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, or be (h) Forfeiture of previous bail bonds
released on recognizance as may be provided by law. The right to bail (i) Whether accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested
shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas (j) If accused is under bond in other cases
corpus is suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required.
Implicit Limitations on the Right to Bail

Bail – is security given for the release of a person in custody of law,
furnished by him or a bondsman, to guaranty his appearance before any
court as may be required
Kinds of Bail: Cash bond, Security bond
Who May Invoke? A person under detention even if no formal charges have
yet been filed (Rule 114, Rules of Court)
Who Are Entitled?
(a) Persons charged with offenses punishable by Reclusion Perpetua or
Death, when evidence of guilt is strong
(b) Persons convicted by the trial court. Bail is only discretionary
pending appeal.
(c) Persons who are members of the AFP facing a court martial.
• In Paderanga v. CA, all persons actually detained, except those
charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua or death
when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable
bu sufficient sureties.
One is under the custody of the law either when he has been arrested or has
surrendered himself to the jurisdiction of the court, as in the case where
through counsel petitioner for bail who was confined in a hospital
communicated his submission to the jurisdiction of the court.
Other Rights in Relation to Bail
• 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.
Factors in Fixing Amount of Bail
(a) Ability to post bail
(b) Nature of the offense
(c) Penalty imposed by law
(a) The person claiming the right must be in actual detention or custody
of the law.
• In People v. Donato, charged with rebellion, a bailable offense,
Salas nevertheless agreed “to remain in legal custody during the
pendency of the trial of his criminal case.” The Court held that he
does not have the right to bail, because bu his act he has waived his
right.
(b) The constitutional right is available only in criminal cases, not, e.g. in
deportation and extradition proceedings.
Note:
(a) Right to bail is not available in the military.
• In Comendador v. De Villa, soldier under court martial does not
enjoy the right to bail. It is because of the disciplinary structure
of the military and because soldiers are allowed the fiduciary
right to bear arms and can therefore cause great havoc... Nor
can appeal be made to the equal protection clause ebcause
equal protection applies only to those who are equally situated.
(b) Apart from bail, a person may attain provisional liberty through
recognizance.
• In US v. Puruganan, the Court held that extradition is not a
criminal proceeding. Hence, since bail is available only in
criminal proceedings, a respondent in an extradition proceeding
is not entitled to a bail. He should apply for a bail in the court
where he will be tried.
F. RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
Section 14, Art. III.
1. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without
due process of law.
2. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed
innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be
heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause
of the accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public
trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory
process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of
evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may proceed
notwithstanding the absence of the accused: Provided, that he has
been duly notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.
The Rights of the Accused Include
1. Criminal due process;
2. Presumption of innocence;
3. Right to be heard by himself or counsel;
4. Right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation
against him;
5. Right to speedy, impartial and public trial;
6. Right to meet the witnesses face to face;
7. Right to compulsory process to secure attendance of witnesses and
production of evidence; and
8. trial in absentia
1. Criminal Due Process
Criminal process includes
a) Investigation prior to the filing of charges
b) Preliminary examination and investigation after charges are filed
c) Period of trial
Requirements of Criminal Due Process
1. Impartial and competent court in accordance with procedure
prescribed by law;
2. Proper observance of all the rights accorded the accused under the
Constitution and the applicable statutes (example of statutory right
of the accused: right to Preliminary investigation)
• Mistrial may be declared if shown that proceedings were held under
circumstances as would prevent the accused from freely making his
defense or the judge from freely arriving at his decision.
• There is violation of due process when law not published and a
person is impleaded for violation of such law.
• There is violation of due process when appeal is permitted by law but
there is denial thereof.
2. Presumption of Innocence
• Burden of proof to establish the guilt of the accused is with the
prosecution.
• Conviction depends on the strength of prosecution, not on the
weakness of the defense
• The presumption may be overcome by contrary presumption based
on the experience of human conduct. (e.g unexplained flight may
lead to an inference of guilt, as “the wicked flee when no man
pursueth, but the righteous are as bold as a lion.”)
• The constitutional presumption will not apply as long as there is
some rational connection between the fact proved and the ultimate
fact presumed, and the inference of one fact from proof of another
shall not be so unreasonable as to be a purely arbitrary mandate. –
Cooley
• No inference of guilt may be drawn against an accused for his failure
to make a statement of any sort.
• In Dumlao v. Comelec, for the purposes of disqualification in an
election, section 4 of BP Blg. 52 says that” the filing of charges for
the commission of such crimes before civil court or military tribunal
after preliminary investigation shall be prima facie evidence of such
fact (disqualification).” The Court held that this provision violates the
guarantee of presumption of innocence. Although filing of charges is
only prima facie evidence and may be rebutted, the proximity of
elections and consequent risk of not having time to rebut the prima
facie evidence already in effect make him suffer as though guilty
even before trial.
Equipoise Rule – evidence of both sides are equally balanced, in which
case the constitutional presumption of innocence should tilt the scales in
favor of the accused.
3. Right to be Heard by Himself and Counsel
• Indispensable in any criminal prosecution where the stakes are the
liberty or even the life of the accused
• Assistance of counsel begins from the time a person is taken into
custody and placed under investigation for the commission of a
crime.
▪ This is not subject to waiver.
• Right to counsel means the right to effective representation.
 • If the accused appears at arraignment without counsel, the judge (b) Length of delay involved
must: (c) Reasons for the delay
(d) Assertion or non-assertion of the right by the accused
(a) Inform the accused that he has a right to a counsel before (e) Prejudice caused to the defendant.
arraignment;
(b) Ask the accused if he desires the aid of counsel; • Effect of dismissal based on violation of this right: it amounts to
(c) If the accused desires counsel, but cannot afford one, a an acquittal and can be used as basis to claim double jeopardy. This
counsel de oficio must be appointed; would be the effect even if the dismissal was made with the consent
(d) If the accused desires to obtain his own counsel, the court of the accused
must give him a reasonable time to get one.
Remedy if the Right is Violated
4. Nature and Cause of Accusation
(1) He can move for the dismissal of the case;
(2) If he is detained, he can file a petition for the issuance of writ of
Purpose for the Right to be informed of the Nature and Cause of
habeas corpus.
Accusation
Speedy trial -
(1) To furnish the accused with a description of the charge against him
1. Free from vexatious, capricious and oppressive delays
as will enable him to make his defenses;
2. To relieve the accused from needless anxieties before sentence
(2) To avail himself of his conviction or acquittal against a further
is pronounced upon him
prosecution for the same cause;
(3) To inform the court of the facts alleged.
Impartial trial – the accused is entitled to the “cold neutrality of an impartial
judge”. It is an element of due process.
• The description and not the designation of the offense is controlling
(The real nature of the crime charged is determined from the recital
• Public trial: The attendance at the trial is open to all irrespective of
of facts in the information. It is not determined based on the caption
their relationship to the accused. However, if the evidence to be
or preamble thereof nor from the specification of the provision of law
adduced is “offensive to decency or public morals”, the public may be
allegedly violated.)
excluded.
• The right of the accused to a public trial is not violated if the hearings
• If the information fails to allege the material elements of the offense,
are conducted on Saturdays, either with the consent of the accused
the accused cannot be convicted thereof even if the prosecution is
or if failed to object thereto.
able to present evidence during the trial with respect to such
elements. • The right to be present covers the period from arraignment to
promulgation of sentence.
Void for Vagueness Rule – accused is denied the right to be informed of the
charge against him and to due process as well, where the statute itself is • General Rule: the accused may waive the right to be present at the
couched in such indefinite language that it is not possible for men of ordinary trial by not showing up. However, the court can still compel the
intelligence to determine therefrom what acts or omissions are punished and attendance of the accused if necessary for identification purposes.
hence, shall be avoided.
• In Estrada vs Sandiganbayan, the Court held that the Void for ▪ Exception: If the accused, after arraignment, has stipulated
Vagueness Doctrine merely requires a reasonable degree of that he is indeed the person charged with the offense and
certainty and not absolute precision or mathematical exactitude. named in the information, and that any time a witness refers
to a name by which he is known, the witness is to be
5. The Trial understood as referring to him.

Factors in Determining Whether There Is Violation • Trial in Absentia is mandatory upon the court whenever the accused
(a) Time expired from the filing of the information has been arraigned.
 • There is also Promulgation in Absentia
• While the accused is entitled to be present during promulgation of
judgment, the absence of his counsel during such promulgation does
not affect its validity
• The trial in absentia does not abrogate the provisions of the Rules of
Court regarding forfeiture of bail bond if the accused fails to appear
at his trial.
• A court has the power to prohibit a person admitted to bail from
leaving the Philippines as this is a necessary consequence of the
nature and function of a bail bond
6. The Right to Meet the Witnesses Face to Face
Purposes of the Right to Meet the Witnesses Face to Face
(1) To afford the accused an opportunity to cross-examine the witness
(2) To allow the judge the opportunity to observe the deportment of the
witness
Principal Exceptions to this Right
(1) The admissibility of “dying declarations”
(2) Trial in absentia under Section 14(2)
• With respect to child testimony
• Testimony of witness who was not cross-examined is not
admissible as evidence for being hearsay.
• If a prosecution witness dies before his cross-examination
can be completed, his direct testimony cannot be stricken
off the record, provided the material points of his direct
testimony had been covered on cross.
• The right to confrontation may be waived.
7. Compulsory Process
• The accused is entitled to the issuance of subpoena ad
testificandum (court summons to appear and give oral testimony for
use at a hearing or trial. ) and subpoena duces tecum (court
summons ordering a named party to appear before the court and
produce documents or other tangible evidence for use at a hearing
or trial)for the purpose of compelling the attendance of witness and
the production of evidence that he may need for his defense.
• Failure to obey – punishable as contempt of court.
• There are exceptional circumstances when the defendant may ask
for conditional examination, provided the expected testimony is
material of any witness under circumstances that would make him
unavailable from attending the trial.
8. Trial in Absentia
Trial in Absentia May Only Be Allowed If the Following Requisites Are
Met:
(1) the accused has been validly arraigned;
(2) Accused has already been arraigned;
(3) Accused has been duly notified of the trial; and
(4) His failure to appear is unjustifiable.
G. HABEAS CORPUS
Section 15, Art. III. 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.
Writ of Habeas Corpus – is a written order issued by a court, directed to a
person detaining another, commanding him to produce the body of the
prisoner at a designated time and place with the day and cause of his caption
and detention.
Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus – the right to have an immediate
determination of the legality of the deprivation of physical liberty.
The President may suspend the privilege:
(1) in cases of invasion or rebellion
(2) when public safety requires it.
• Habeas corpus lies only where the restraint of a person's liberty has
been judicially adjudged to be illegal or unlawful (In re: Sumulong)
• The writ is a prerogative writ employed to test the validity of
detention
• To secure the detainee’s release
• The action shall take precedence in the calendar of the court and
must be acted upon immediately
When available (enumeration not exclusive)
 restoration of liberty of an individual subjected to physical restraint
 may be availed of where, as a consequence of a judicial proceeding:
1. there has been deprivation of a constitutional right resulting
in the restraint of the person
2. the court has no jurisdiction to impose the sentence, or
3. an excessive penalty has been imposed, since such
 sentence is void as to the excess.
 May be extended to cases by which rightful custody of any person is
withheld from the person entitled thereto
 When moral restraint is exerted (Caunca vs Salazar)
 Right was accorded a person was sentenced to a longer penalty
than was subsequently meted out to another person convicted of the
same offense. (Gumabon vs Director of Prisons)
 Unlawful denial of bail
When not available (enumeration not exclusive)
 the person alleged to be restrained is in the custody of an officer
under a process issued by the court which has jurisdiction to do so
 desaparecidos (disappeared persons) – persons could not be found;
remedy is to refer the matter to Commission on Human Rights
Procedure: Need to comply with writ; disobedience thereof constitutes
contempt
Who may suspend the privilege: The President
Grounds for Suspension of the privilege
1. invasion or rebellion
2. when public safety requires it
Section 18, Art. VII. The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed
forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out
such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or
rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he
may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law.
Within forty-eight hours from the proclamation of martial law or the suspension
of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the President shall submit a report
in person or in writing to the Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote
of at least a majority of all its Members in regular or special session, may
revoke such proclamation or suspension, which revocation shall not be set
aside by the President. Upon the initiative of the President, the Congress may,
in the same manner, extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to be
determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public
safety requires it.
The Congress, if not in session, shall, within twenty-four hours following such
proclamation or suspension, convene in accordance with its rules without need
of a call.
The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding filed by any
citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or
the suspension of the privilege of the writ or the extension thereof, and must
promulgate its decision thereon within thirty days from its filing.
A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor
supplant the functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies, nor
authorize the conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over
civilians where civil courts are able to function, nor automatically suspend the
privilege of the writ.
The suspension of the privilege of the writ shall apply only to persons judicially
charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly connected with
invasion.
During the suspension of the privilege of the writ, any person thus arrested or
detained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be
released.
Lansang doctrine (Lansang vs Garcia): SC has the power to inquire into
the factual basis of the suspension of the privilege of the writ. It is written in
Article VII, Sec. 18 of the Constitution.
H. WRIT OF AMPARO A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC, (25 September 2007)
THE RULE ON THE WRIT OF AMPARO
SECTION 1. Petition. The petition for a writ of amparo is a remedy available to any
person whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or threatened with violation
by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private
individual or entity.
The writ shall cover extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats
thereof.
SEC. 2. Who May File. The petition may be filed by the aggrieved party or by any
qualified person or entity in the following order:
1. Any member of the immediate family, namely: the spouse, children
and parents of the aggrieved party;
2. Any ascendant, descendant or collateral relative of the aggrieved
party within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity, in
default of those mentioned in the preceding paragraph; or
3. Any concerned citizen, organization, association or institution, if
there is no known member of the immediate family or relative of the
aggrieved party.
The filing of a petition by the aggrieved party suspends the right of all other
authorized parties to file similar petitions. Likewise, the filing of the petition by an
authorized party on behalf of the aggrieved party suspends the right of all others,
observing the order established herein.
SEC. 3. Where to File. The petition may be filed on any day and at any time with the
Regional Trial Court of the place where the threat, act or omission was committed or
any of its elements occurred, or with the Sandiganbayan, the Court of Appeals, the
Supreme Court, or any justice of such courts. The writ shall be enforceable anywhere
in the Philippines.
When issued by a Regional Trial Court or any judge thereof, the writ shall be
returnable before such court or judge.
When issued by the Sandiganbayan or the Court of Appeals or any of their justices, it
may be returnable before such court or any justice thereof, or to any Regional Trial
Court of the place where the threat, act or omission was committed or any of its
elements occurred.
When issued by the Supreme Court or any of its justices, it may be returnable before
such Court or any justice thereof, or before the Sandiganbayan or the Court of
Appeals or any of their justices, or to any Regional Trial Court of the place where the
threat, act or omission was committed or any of its elements occurred.
SEC. 4. No Docket Fees. The petitioner shall be exempted from the payment of the
docket and other lawful fees when filing the petition. The court, justice or judge shall
docket the petition and act upon it immediately.
SEC. 5. Contents of Petition. The petition shall be signed and verified and shall
allege the following:
1. The personal circumstances of the petitioner;
2. The name and personal circumstances of the respondent
responsible for the threat, act or omission, or, if the name is
unknown or uncertain, the respondent may be described by an
assumed appellation;
3. The right to life, liberty and security of the aggrieved party violated
or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of the
respondent, and how such threat or violation is committed with the
attendant circumstances detailed in supporting affidavits;
4. The investigation conducted, if any, specifying the names, personal
circumstances, and addresses of the investigating authority or
individuals, as well as the manner and conduct of the investigation,
together with any report;
5. The actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to determine the
fate or whereabouts of the aggrieved party and the identity of the
person responsible for the threat, act or omission; and
6. The relief prayed for.
The petition may include a general prayer for other just and equitable reliefs.
SEC. 6. Issuance of the Writ. Upon the filing of the petition, the court, justice or
judge shall immediately order the issuance of the writ if on its face it ought to issue.
The clerk of court shall issue the writ under the seal of the court; or in case of urgent
necessity, the justice or the judge may issue the writ under his or her own hand, and
may deputize any officer or person to serve it.
The writ shall also set the date and time for summary hearing of the petition which
shall not be later than seven (7) days from the date of its issuance.
SEC. 7. Penalty for Refusing to Issue or Serve the Writ. A clerk of court who
refuses to issue the writ after its allowance, or a deputized person who refuses to
serve the same, shall be punished by the court, justice or judge for contempt without
prejudice to other disciplinary actions.
SEC. 8. How the Writ is Served. The writ shall be served upon the respondent by a
judicial officer or by a person deputized by the court, justice or judge who shall retain
a copy on which to make a return of service. In case the writ cannot be served
personally on the respondent, the rules on substituted service shall apply.
SEC. 9. Return; Contents. Within seventy-two (72) hours after service of the writ,
the respondent shall file a verified written return together with supporting affidavits
which shall, among other things, contain the following:
1. The lawful defenses to show that the respondent did not violate or
threaten with violation the right to life, liberty and security of the
aggrieved party, through any act or omission;
2. The steps or actions taken by the respondent to determine the fate
or whereabouts of the aggrieved party and the person or persons
responsible for the threat, act or omission;
3. All relevant information in the possession of the respondent
pertaining to the threat, act or omission against the aggrieved party;
and
4. If the respondent is a public official or employee, the return shall
further state the actions that have been or will still be taken:
i. to verify the identity of the aggrieved party;
ii. to recover and preserve evidence related to the death or
disappearance of the person identified in the petition which may aid
in the prosecution of the person or persons responsible;
iii. to identify witnesses and obtain statements from them concerning
the death or disappearance;
iv. to determine the cause, manner, location and time of death or
disappearance as well as any pattern or practice that may have
brought about the death or disappearance;
 v. to identify and apprehend the person or persons involved in the
death or disappearance; and
vi. to bring the suspected offenders before a competent court.
The return shall also state other matters relevant to the investigation, its resolution
and the prosecution of the case.
A general denial of the allegations in the petition shall not be allowed.
SEC. 10. Defenses not Pleaded Deemed Waived. All defenses shall be raised in
the return, otherwise, they shall be deemed waived.
SEC. 11. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions. The following pleadings and motions
are prohibited:
1. Motion to dismiss;
2. Motion for extension of time to file return, opposition, affidavit,
position paper and other pleadings;
3. Dilatory motion for postponement;
4. Motion for a bill of particulars;
5. Counterclaim or cross-claim;
6. Third-party complaint;
7. Reply;
8. Motion to declare respondent in default;
9. Intervention;
10. Memorandum;
11. Motion for reconsideration of interlocutory orders or interim relief
orders; and
12. Petition for certiorari, mandamus or prohibition against any
interlocutory order.
SEC. 12. Effect of Failure to File Return. In case the respondent fails to file a
return, the court, justice or judge shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte.
SEC. 13. Summary Hearing. The hearing on the petition shall be summary.
However, the court, justice or judge may call for a preliminary conference to simplify
the issues and determine the possibility of obtaining stipulations and admissions from
the parties.
The hearing shall be from day to day until completed and given the same priority as
petitions for habeas corpus.
SEC. 14. Interim Reliefs. Upon filing of the petition or at anytime before final
judgment, the court, justice or judge may grant any of the following reliefs:
(a) Temporary Protection Order. The court, justice or judge, upon motion or
motu proprio, may order that the petitioner or the aggrieved party and any
member of the immediate family be protected in a government agency or by
an accredited person or private institution capable of keeping and securing
their safety. If the petitioner is an organization, association or institution
referred to in Section 3(c) of this Rule, the protection may be extended to the
officers involved.
The Supreme Court shall accredit the persons and private institutions that
shall extend temporary protection to the petitioner or the aggrieved party and
any member of the immediate family, in accordance with guidelines which it
shall issue.
The accredited persons and private institutions shall comply with the rules
and conditions that may be imposed by the court, justice or judge.
(b) Inspection Order. The court, justice or judge, upon verified motion and
after due hearing, may order any person in possession or control of a
designated land or other property, to permit entry for the purpose of
inspecting, measuring, surveying, or photographing the property or any
relevant object or operation thereon.
The motion shall state in detail the place or places to be inspected. It shall
be supported by affidavits or testimonies of witnesses having personal
knowledge of the enforced disappearance or whereabouts of the aggrieved
party.
If the motion is opposed on the ground of national security or of the
privileged nature of the information, the court, justice or judge may conduct a
hearing in chambers to determine the merit of the opposition.
The movant must show that the inspection order is necessary to establish
the right of the aggrieved party alleged to be threatened or violated.
The inspection order shall specify the person or persons authorized to make
the inspection and the date, time, place and manner of making the
inspection and may prescribe other conditions to protect the constitutional
rights of all parties. The order shall expire five (5) days after the date of its
issuance, unless extended for justifiable reasons.
(c) Production Order. The court, justice or judge, upon verified motion and
after due hearing, may order any person in possession, custody or control of
any designated documents, papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs,
objects or tangible things, or objects in digitized or electronic form, which
constitute or contain evidence relevant to the petition or the return, to
produce and permit their inspection, copying or photographing by or on
behalf of the movant.
 The motion may be opposed on the ground of national security or of the
privileged nature of the information, in which case the court, justice or judge
may conduct a hearing in chambers to determine the merit of the opposition.
The court, justice or judge shall prescribe other conditions to protect the
constitutional rights of all the parties.
(d) Witness Protection Order. The court, justice or judge, upon motion or
motu proprio, may refer the witnesses to the Department of Justice for
admission to the Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Program, pursuant
to Republic Act No. 6981.
The court, justice or judge may also refer the witnesses to other government
agencies, or to accredited persons or private institutions capable of keeping
and securing their safety.
SEC. 15. Availability of Interim Reliefs to Respondent. Upon verified motion of
the respondent and after due hearing, the court, justice or judge may issue an
inspection order or production order under paragraphs (b) and (c) of the preceding
section.
A motion for inspection order under this section shall be supported by affidavits or
testimonies of witnesses having personal knowledge of the defenses of the
respondent.
SEC. 16. Contempt. The court, justice or judge may order the respondent who
refuses to make a return, or who makes a false return, or any person who otherwise
disobeys or resists a lawful process or order of the court to be punished for contempt.
The contemnor may be imprisoned or imposed a fine.
SEC. 17. Burden of Proof and Standard of Diligence Required. The parties shall
establish their claims by substantial evidence.
The respondent who is a private individual or entity must prove that ordinary diligence
as required by applicable laws, rules and regulations was observed in the
performance of duty.
The respondent who is a public official or employee must prove that extraordinary
diligence as required by applicable laws, rules and regulations was observed in the
performance of duty.
The respondent public official or employee cannot invoke the presumption that official
duty has been regularly performed to evade responsibility or liability.
SEC. 18. Judgment. The court shall render judgment within ten (10) days from the
time the petition is submitted for decision. If the allegations in the petition are proven
by substantial evidence, the court shall grant the privilege of the writ and such reliefs
as may be proper and appropriate; otherwise, the privilege shall be denied.
SEC. 19. Appeal. Any party may appeal from the final judgment or order to the
Supreme Court under Rule 45. The appeal may raise questions of fact or law or both.
The period of appeal shall be five (5) working days from the date of notice of the
adverse judgment.
The appeal shall be given the same priority as in habeas corpus cases.
SEC. 20. Archiving and Revival of Cases. The court shall not dismiss the petition,
but shall archive it, if upon its determination it cannot proceed for a valid cause such
as the failure of petitioner or witnesses to appear due to threats on their lives.
A periodic review of the archived cases shall be made by the amparo court that shall,
motu proprio or upon motion by any party, order their revival when ready for further
proceedings. The petition shall be dismissed with prejudice upon failure to prosecute
the case after the lapse of two (2) years from notice to the petitioner of the order
archiving the case.
The clerks of court shall submit to the Office of the Court Administrator a consolidated
list of archived cases under this Rule not later than the first week of January of every
year.
SEC. 21. Institution of Separate Actions. This Rule shall not preclude the filing of
separate criminal, civil or administrative actions.
SEC. 22. Effect of Filing of a Criminal Action. When a criminal action has been
commenced, no separate petition for the writ shall be filed. The reliefs under the writ
shall be available by motion in the criminal case.
The procedure under this Rule shall govern the disposition of the reliefs available
under the writ of amparo.
SEC. 23. Consolidation. When a criminal action is filed subsequent to the filing of a
petition for the writ, the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal action.
When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to a petition
for a writ of amparo, the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal action.
After consolidation, the procedure under this Rule shall continue to apply to the
disposition of the reliefs in the petition.
SEC. 24. Substantive Rights. This Rule shall not diminish, increase or modify
substantive rights recognized and protected by the Constitution.
SEC. 25. Suppletory Application of the Rules of Court. The Rules of Court shall
apply suppletorily insofar as it is not inconsistent with this Rule.
SEC. 26. Applicability to Pending Cases. This Rule shall govern cases involving
extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats thereof pending in the trial
and appellate courts.
SEC. 27. Effectivity. This Rule shall take effect on October 24, 2007, following its
publication in three (3) newspapers of general circulation.
I. SPEEDY DISPOSATION OF CASES actions and administrative or legislative investigations

Section 16, Art. III. - All persons shall have the right to a speedy Transactional Immunity Statute – testimony of any person or whose
disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or possession of documents or other evidence necessary or convenient to
administrative bodies. determine the truth in any investigation conducted is immune from criminal
prosecution for an offense to which such compelled testimony relates.

Speedy Trial vs. Speedy Disposition of Cases Use and Fruit Immunity Statute – prohibits the use of the witness'
peedy trial Speedy disposition of cases compelled testimony and its fruit in any manner in connection with the
Refers to trial phase only Refers to disposition of cases (All phases) criminal prosecution for an offense to which such compelled testimony
Criminal cases only Judicial, quasi-judicial or admin. Proceedings relates.
May be Claimed by:
• Periods for decision for courts (Sec. 15, Art. VIII) 1. Accused – at all times; there is a reasonable assumption
• SC: 24 months from submission that the purpose of his interrogation will be to incriminate him
2. Witness – only when an incriminating question is asked,
• All lower collegiate courts: 12 months unless reduced by SC
since the witness has no way of knowing in advance the
• All other lower courts: 3 months nature or effect of the question to be put to him
Periods for decision for Constitutional Commissions (Sec 7, Art. IX- cannot invoke right to self-incrimination when:
A) - he question is relevant and otherwise allowed
60 days from date of submission for decision or resolution even if the answer may tend to incriminate him or
- subject him to civil liability
Factors considered in determining whether the right is violated - he question relates to past criminality for which
1. Length of delay the witness can no longer be prosecuted
2. Reason of delay - he has been previously granted immunity under
3. Assertion of the right or failure to assert it a validly enacted statute
4. Prejudice caused by delay
• Only natural persons can invoke this right. Judicial persons are
Remedy in case there has been unreasonable delay in resolution of a
subject to the visitorial powers of the state in order to determine
case: Dismissal through mandamus
compliance with the conditions of the charter granted to them.
J. RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION
Scope:

Section 17, Art. III. No person shall be compelled to be a witness
against himself.
Based on:
1. Humanitarian reasons – it is intended to prevent the State,
with all its coercive powers, from extracting from the suspect
testimony that may convict him;
2. Practical reasons – a person subjected to such compulsion
is likely to perjure himself for his own protection
Applicable to:
(1) Testimonial Compulsion
• In Villaflor v. Summers, since the “kernel of the privilege” was the
prohibition of “testimonial compulsion”, the Court was willing to
compel a pregnant woman accused of adultery to submit to the
indignity of being tested for pregnancy. Being purely a mechanical
act, it is not a violation of her constitutional right against self-
incrimination.
(2) Production of Documents, Papers and Chattels. Exception: when
books of accounts are to be examined in the exercise of police
power and power of taxation.

• Criminal prosecutions, government proceedings, including civil

 • What is prohibited is the use of physical or moral compulsion to
extort communication from the witness or to otherwise elicit evidence
which would not exist were it not for the actions compelled from the
witness.
• The right does not prohibit the examination of the body of the
accused or the use of findings with respect to his body as physical
evidence. Hence, the fingerprinting of an accused would not violate
the right against self-incrimination. However, obtaining a sample of
the handwriting of the accused would violate this right if he is
charged for falsification.
• The accused cannot be compelled to produce a private document in
his possession which might tend to incriminate him. However, a third
person in custody of the document may be compelled to produce it.
Right May be Waived:
Either: directly or impliedly failure to invoke it PROVIDED the waiver is
certain and unequivocal and intelligently and willingly made.
Section 18 (1), Art. III. No person shall be detained solely by reason of
his political beliefs and aspirations.
J. RIGHT AGAINST INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE
Section 18 (2), Art. III. No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist
except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been
duly convicted.
Involuntary Servitude – the condition of one who is compelled by force,
coercion, or imprisonment, and against his will, to labor for another, whether
he is paid or not.
Involuntary Servitude Includes
(1) Slavery –civil relation in which one man has absolute power over the
life, fortune and liberty of another;
(2) Peonage – a condition of enforced servitude by which the servitor is
restrained of his liberty and compelled to labor in liquidation of some
debt or obligation, real or pretended, against his will
General Rule: No involuntary service in any form shall exist.
Exceptions
1. Punishment for a crime for which the party shall have been duly
convicted (Sec. 18, Art. III)
2. Personal military or civil service in the interest of national
defense (Sec. 4, Art. II)
3. Naval enlistment – remain in service until the end of voyage so
that the crew would not desert the ship, making it difficult for the
owners to recruit new hands to continue the voyage (Robertson vs
Baldwin)
4. Posse comitatus – in pursuit of persons who might have violated
the law, the authorities might command all male inhabitants of a
certain age to assist them (US vs Pompeya)
5. Return to work order in industries affected with public
interest (Kapisanan ng Manggagawa sa Kahoy vs Gotamco)
6. Patria Potestas – unemancipated minors are obliged to obey their
parents so long as they are under parental power and to observe
respect and reverence to them always (Art. 311, Civil Code)
US vs An Act providing for the method by which the people of the town may
Pompeya upon to render assistance for the protection of the public and the pres
peace and good order is constitutional. It was enacted in the exerc
police power of the state and does not violate the constitutional pro
involuntary servitude.
Pollock vs No indebtedness warrants a suspension of the right to be free from c
Williams service, and no state can make the quitting of work any component o
or make criminal sanctions available for holding unwilling persons to la
K. CRUEL AND INHUMAN PUNISHMENT
Section 19, Art. III.
1. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or
inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed,
unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress
hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be
reduced to reclusion perpetua.
2. The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading
punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard
or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt
with by law.
When is a penalty “cruel, degrading and inhuman”?
(1) A penalty is cruel and inhuman if it involves torture or lingering
suffering. Ex. Being drawn and quartered.
(2) A penalty is degrading if it exposes a person to public humiliation.
Ex. Being tarred and feathered, then paraded throughout town.

Standards Used
(1) The punishment must not be so severe as to be degrading to the
dignity of human beings.
(2) It must not be applied arbitrarily.
(3) It must not be unacceptable to contemporary society
(4) It must not be excessive, i.e. it must serve a penal purpose more
effectively than a less severe punishment would.
• Excessive Fine - A fine is excessive, when under any circumstance,
it is disproportionate to the offense.
Note: Fr. Bernas says that the accused cannot be convicted of the crime to
which the punishment is attached if the court finds that the punishment is
cruel, degrading or inhuman.
Reason: Without a valid penalty, the law is not a penal law.
L. NON IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT
Section 20, Art. III. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-
payment of a poll tax
 For humanitarian reasons… an added guaranty of the liberty of
persons against their incarceration for the enforcement of purely
private debts because of their misfortune of being poor
Debt – any civil obligation arising from a contract, expressed or implied,
resulting in any liability to pay in money.
Scope of guaranty against imprisonment for non-payment of debt
• If an accused fails to pay the fine imposed upon him, this may result
in his subsidiary imprisonment because his liability is ex delicto and
not ex contractu.
A FRAUDULENT debt may result in the imprisonment of the debtor if:
1. The fraudulent debt constitutes a crime such as estafa; and
2. The accused has been duly convicted.
POLL TAX
General Rule: Non-payment of taxes is punishable with imprisonment.
Exception: Failure to pay a poll tax
Poll tax – a specific sum levied upon every person belonging to a certain
class without regard to his property or occupation.
• A tax is not a debt since it is an obligation arising from law. Hence,
its non-payment maybe validly punished with imprisonment.
M. DOUBLE JEOPARDY
Section 21, Art. III. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for
the same offense. If an act is punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or
acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same
act.
Double jeopardy – when a person was charged with an offense and the
case was terminated by acquittal or conviction or in any other manner without
his consent, he cannot again be charged with the same or identical offense.
Requisites of Double Jeopardy
1. valid complaint or information
2. filed before a competent court
3. to which defendant has pleaded, and
4. defendant was previously acquitted or convicted or the case
dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent.
Two (2) Kinds of Double Jeopardy
(1) When a person is put twice in jeopardy of punishment for the
same offense (1st sentence of Section 21)
(2) When a law and an ordinance punish the same act (2nd sentence
of Sec. 21)
Same Offense
Requisites for a valid defense of double jeopardy:
(1) First jeopardy must have attached prior to the second.
(2) The first jeopardy must have terminated.
(3) The second jeopardy must be for the same offense as that in the
first.
When does jeopardy ATTACH: (1st requisite)
(a) A person is charged
(b) Under a complaint or information sufficient in form and substance to
sustain a conviction
(c) Before a court of competent jurisdiction
(d) After the person is arraigned
(e) Such person enters a valid plea.
When does jeopardy NOT attach:
(a) If information does not charge any offense
(b) If, upon pleading guilty, the accused presents evidence of complete
self-defense, and the court thereafter acquits him without entering a
new plea of not guilty for accused.
(c) If the information for an offense cognizable by the RTC is filed with
the MTC.
(d) If a complaint filed for preliminary investigation is dismissed.
When does first jeopardy TERMINATE: (2ND REQUISITE)
1)Acquittal
2)Conviction
3)Dismissal W/O the EXPRESS consent of the accused
4)Dismissal on the merits.
Examples of termination of jeopardy:
(a) Dismissal based on violation of the right to a speedy trial. This
amounts to an acquittal.
(b) Dismissal based on a demurrer to evidence. This is a dismissal on
the merits.
(c) Dismissal on motion of the prosecution, subsequent to a motion for
reinvestigation filed by the accused.
(d) Discharge of an accused to be a state witness. This amounts to an
acquittal.
When can the PROSECUTION appeal from an order of dismissal:
(a) If dismissal is on motion of the accused. Exception: If motion is
based on violation of the right to a speedy trial or on a demurrer to
evidence.
(b) If dismissal does NOT amount to an acquittal or dismissal on the
merits
(c) If the question to be passed upon is purely legal.
(d) If the dismissal violates the right of due process of the prosecution.
(e) If the dismissal was made with grave abuse of discretion.
What are considered to be the “SAME OFFENSE”:
(a) Exact identity between the offenses charged in the first and second
cases.
(b) One offense is an attempt to commit or a frustration of the other
offense.
(c) One offense is necessarily included or necessary includes the other.
• Note: where a single act results in the violation of different laws or
different provisions of the same law, the prosecution for one will not
bar the other so long as none of the exceptions apply.
Same Act
• Double jeopardy will result if the act punishable under the law and
the ordinance are the same. For there to be double jeopardy, it is not
necessary that the offense be the same.
Supervening Facts
1) Under the Rules of Court, a conviction for an offense will not bar a
prosecution for an offense which necessarily includes the offense
charged in the former information where:
(a) The graver offense developed due to a supervening fact
arising from the same act or omission constituting the former
charge.
(b) The facts constituting the graver offense became known or
were discovered only after the filing of the former
information.
(c) The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the
consent of the fiscal and the offended party.
2) Under (1)(b), if the facts could have been discovered by the
prosecution but were not discovered because of the prosecution’s
incompetence, it would not be considered a supervening event.
Effect of appeal by the accused
• If the accused appeals his conviction, he WAIVES his right to plead
double jeopardy. The whole case will be open to review by the
appellate court. Such court may even increase the penalties imposed
on the accused by the trial court.
• In Almario v. CA, the Court held that the delays were not
unreasonable; hence, there was no denial of the right to speedy trial.
Second, the dismissal was with the consent of the accused. Hence,
reinstatement did not violate the right against double jeopardy.
N. EX POST FACTO LAWS AND BILL OF ATTAINDER
Section 22, Art. III. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be
enacted.
Kinds of Ex Post Facto Laws
(1) One which makes an action done before the passing of the law, and
which was innocent when done, criminal, and punishes such action.
 (2) One which aggravates the crime or makes it greater than when it
was committed.
(3) One which changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
punishment than that which the law annexed to the crime when it
was committed.
(4) One which alters the legal rules of evidence and receives less
testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the
offense in order to convict the accused.
(5) One which assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only BUT,
in effect, imposes a penalty or deprivation of a right, which, when
done, was lawful.
(6) One which deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful
protection to which he has become entitled such as the protection of
a former conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of amnesty. (In Re
Kay Villegas Kami)
prohibition.
BILL OF ATTAINDER
Bill of attainder – is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without judicial
trial. If the punishment be less than death, the act is termed a bill of pains
and penalties.” (Cummings v. Missouri)
(All Bills of Attainder are Ex Post Facto Laws)
Elements of Bill of Attainder
1. There must be a law.
2. The law imposes a penal burden on a named individual or easily
ascertainable members of a group.
3. There is a direct imposition of penal burden without judicial trial.

Characteristics of Ex Post Facto Law

(a) Must refer to criminal matters
(b) Prejudicial to the accused
(c) Retroactive in application

• In Lacson v. Exec. Sec., the Court held that in general, ex post facto
law prohibits retrospectivity of penal laws. RA No. 8249 is not a
penal law.... The contention that the new law diluted their right to a
two-tiered appeal is incorrect because “the right to appeal is not a
natural right but statutory in nature that can be regulated by law. RA
8249 pertains only to matters of procedure, and being merely an
amendatory statute it does not partake the nature of ex post facto
law.”

• In Calder v. Bull, the Court said that when the law alters the legal
rules of evidence or mode of trial, it is an ex post facto law.
Exception: (Beazell v. Ohio) unless the changes operate only in
limited and unsubstantial manner to the disadvantage of the
accused.

• In Bayot v. Sandiganbayan, the accused was convicted by the

Sandiganbayan for estafa on May 30, 1980. Accused appealed. On
March 16, 1982, BP Blg. 195 was passed authorizing suspension of
public officers against whom an information may be pending at any
stage. On July 22, 1982, the court suspended the accused. The
Supreme Court ruled that Art. 24 of the Revised Penal Code that
suspension of an officer during trial shall not be considered a penalty.
The suspension in the case is merely a preventive and not a penal
measure which therefore does not come under the ex post facto