Introduction

One of the oldest principles of law in any legal system is the observance of the right of the person to due process of law. This concept is not new, but was a product of a very long evolution tested through time and improved in its application throughout the various interpretations of different courts of law. We can trace its early roots In clause 39 of the Magna Carta, John of England promised as follows: "No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land." Magna Carta itself immediately became part of the "law of the land", and Clause 61 of that charter authorized an elected body of twenty-five barons to determine by majority vote what redress the King must provide when the King offends "in any respect against any man." Thus, Magna Carta established the rule of law in England by not only requiring the monarchy to obey the law of the land, but also limiting how the monarchy could change the law of the land. It should be noted, however, that in the thirteenth century these provisions may have been referring only to the rights of landowners, and not to ordinary peasantry or villagers. Shorter versions of Magna Carta were subsequently issued

by British monarchs, and Clause 39 of Magna Carta was renumbered "29." The phrase due process of law first appeared in a statutory rendition of

Magna Carta in A.D. 1354 during the reign of Edward III of England, as follows: "No man of what state or condition he be, shall be put out of his lands or tenements nor taken, nor disinherited, nor put to death, without he be brought to answer by due process of law." In 1608, the English jurist Edward Coke wrote a treatise in which he discussed the meaning of Magna Carta. Coke explained that no man shall be deprived but by legem terrae, the law of the land, "that is, by the common law, statute law, or custom of England.... (that is, to speak it once and for all) by the due course, and process of law.." Both the clause in Magna Carta and the later statute of 1354 were again explained in 1704 (during the reign of Queen Anne) by the Queen's Bench, in the case of Regina v. Paty. In that case, the House of

Commons had deprived John Paty and certain other citizens of the right to vote in an election, and had committed them to Newgate Prison merely for the offense of pursuing a legal action in the courts. The Queen's Bench, in an opinion by Justice Powys, explained the meaning of "due process of law" as follows: It is objected, that by Mag. Chart. c. 29, no man ought to be taken or imprisoned, but by the law of the land. But to this I answer, that lex terrae is not confined to the common law, but takes in all the other laws, which are in force in this realm; as the civil and canon law.... By the 28 Ed. 3, c. 3, there the words lex terrae, which are used in Mag. Char. are explained by the

words, due process of law; and the meaning of the statute is, that all commitments must be by a legal authority. Chief Justice Holt dissented in this case, because he believed that the commitment had not in fact been by a legal authority. The House of Commons had purported to legislate unilaterally, without approval of the House of Lords, ostensibly to regulate the election of its members. Although the Queen's Bench held that the House of Commons had not infringed or overturned due process, John Paty was ultimately freed by Queen Anne when she prorogued Parliament. Now, let us try to go deep into the realm of the concept of due process to get a clearer view of its development and application in the Philippine legal system.

BODY
Now comes the question, what is really due process? Due process is the legal requirement that the state must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects individual persons from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due-process violation, which offends against the rule of law. From the famous lines of Daniel Webster in the famous Dartmouth College case due process is that law which hears before it condems, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgment only after trial. Hence, the two elements of due process are notice and hearing. Due process has also been frequently interpreted as

limiting laws and legal proceedings (as in the case of substantive due process), so that judges - instead of legislators - may define and guarantee fundamental fairness, justice, and liberty. This interpretation has proven controversial, and is analogous to the concepts of natural justice,

and procedural justice used in various other jurisdictions. This interpretation

of due process is sometimes expressed as a command that the government must not be unfair to the people or abuse them physically. In the Philippine context, we have two classifications of due process of law namely: The Substantive Due Process; and The Procedural Due Process. SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS The law must be carefully scrutinized to the end that no person shall be deprived of his life, liberty or property without due process of law (Art. 3, Sec. 1 1987 Phil. Consti.) This does not concern the procedure but the intrinsic validity of the law, enactment or legislation itself, whether it is a valid or reasonable exercise of the authority of the government, otherwise it is unconstitutional for being violative of the due process clause. Here are some cases which clearly outlines the above cited rule: American Inter-Fashion v. Office of the President export quota allocation- Glorious Suns export quota allocation was a initially a privilege evolved into some form of property which should not be removed arbitrarily and without due process and hurriedly confer it to another. Chavez v. Romulo citizens right to bear arms - The right to bear arms cannot be classified as a fundamental right under the 1987 Constitution the right is a mere statutory privilege, not a constitutional right. It is erroneous

to assume that the US Constitution grants upon the people the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment pertains to the citizens collective right to take arms in defense of the state, not to the citizens individual right to own and possess arms. Exec. Secretary V. CA Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 A profession, trade or calling is a property right within the meaning of our constitutional guarantees; one cannot be deprived of the right to work or the right to make a living because these rights are property rights, the arbitrary and unwarranted deprivation of which normally constitutes an actionable wrong. Nevertheless, no right is absolute and the proper regulation of a profesion is a valid exercise of police power. Duncan v. Glaxo not ed to have a relationship with an employee of a competitor company Glaxo has a right to guard its trade secrets. (related topic: equal protection) Alejano v. Cabuay Oakwood Mutiny Case writ of habeas corpus is available where a person continues to be unlawfully denied one or more of his constitutional freedoms, where there is a denial of due process, where the restraints are not merely involuntary but also unnecessary, and where a deprivation og freedom originally valid has later become arbitrary. The above cited cases safeguard the rights of individuals from arbitrary exercise of governments power through due process clause of the constitution. PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS

There can be no due process of law without notice and hearing the side of the accused or the defendant. As applied in judicial proceedings, there are conditions that must be met in order to satisfy the requirement of due process namely: 1. There must be a court or tribunal clothed with judicial power to hear and determine the matter before it; 2. jurisdictions must be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant or over the property which is the subject of the proceedings; 3. the defendant must be given an opportunity to be heard; and 4. judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing.

Here are some cases where procedural due process is best explained. Banco Espanol-Filipino v. Palanca mortgage foreclosure due process implies that: 1) there must be a court or tribunal clothed with the power to hear or determine the matter before it; 2) that jurisdiction has been lawfully acquired; 3) defendant shall have to opputunity to be heard; 4) judgment shall be rendered upon lawful hearing. | NOTICE must be given Bautista v. CA land dispute When a party was afforded the opportunity to participate in the proceedings but failed to do so, he cannot complain of deprivation of due process Rural Bank of Buhi v. CA bank receivership; insolvency there is no requirement whether express or implied that a hearing must first be conducted before a banking institution may be placed in receivership

Pollution Adjudication Board v. CA untreated wastewater discharged to sewer Ex parte proceedings - permitted by law in situations like these because stopping the discharged of the wastewater cannot be made to wait until protracted litigation; standards set by the board enough not required to prove immediate danger to life, health et. al Fabella v. CA public school teachers striking DUE PROCESS IN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS requisites: 1) actual or constructive notice of the institution of the proceedings which may affect ones legal rights; 2) real opportunity to be heard personally or with counsel; 3) to present witnesses and evidence is ones favor and to defend his rights; 4) tribunal vested with competent jurisdiction reasonable guarantee of honesty and impartiality; 5) finding is supported by substantial evidence contained and made known to the parties Guzman v. CA kicked out from school DUE PROCESS IN STUDENT DISCPLINE PROCEEDINGS requisites: 1) student must be informed in writing the nature and cause of the accusation against him; 2) right to answer the charges against them, with the assistance of counsel if desired; 3) they shall be informed of the evidence against them; 4) right to adduce evidence in their own behalf; 5) evidence must be duly considered by the investigating committee or officials hearing the case Lao Gi v. CA DUE PROCESS IN DEPORTATION PROCEEDINGS same requisites as those required in criminal proceedings (Rules of Court)

Secretary of Justice v. Lantion extradition case of Jimenez - DUE PROCESS IN QUASIJUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS requisites: 1) taking and evaluation of evidence; 2) determining facts based upon the evidence presented; 3) rendering an order based upon the facts proved Chavez v. COMELEC billboard of Chavez as endorser A statute or regulation is considered void for overbreadth when it offends the constitutionality principle that a governmental purpose to control or prevent activities constitutionally subject to state regulations may nor be achieved by means that sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade protected freedoms

Conclusion
From the above in depth discussion of due process including the different compilation of cases to which it has been applied, we can draw out the conclusion that due process as a principle of constitutional law has been applied in many aspects and played a great role in the exercise of arbitrariness on the part of the government or any of its instrumentalities or agencies. The due process clause of the constitution enshrined in Article 3 Section 1 which is worded thus No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws is considered as the protection to the hierarchy

of rights outlined in the first section of the constitution vis--vis the right to life, liberty and property.

Recommendation
The researcher would like to recommend that the there must be series of lectures and conferences to be conducted by the Supreme Court, Integrated Bar of the Philippines or any other agencies which has expertise in the subject matter of due process to be able to inform our indigent litigants or the masses of such right to due process of law. Further the researcher would like to recommend the following studies for future researchers: 1. Due Process: A comparative analysis from different legal systems; and 2. The Due Process Clause of the 1987 Philippine Constitution and its historical development

Bibliography
A. Books Bernas, Joaquin Philippine: A Commentary Cruz, Isagani 2009 Edition The 1987 Philippine Constitution of the Republic of the

Constitutional Law 1995 Edition 2008 Edition

Gonzales, Neptali Constitutional Law B. Internet Sources

http://www.batasnatin.com/law-library/political-and-public-internationallaw/constitutional-law/1700-procedural-due-process-substantive-dueprocess-due-process-requisites.html http://majorteoh.wordpress.com/2007/09/09/due-process-of-law-in-thephilippines/ http://www.sulongnetwork.ph/resources_files/hsa_sc_petition.pdf http://law.jrank.org/pages/6315/Due-Process-Law.html http://www.chanrobles.com/searchresults.php?cx=partner-pub0513148074404120%3A9788978791&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=ISO-88591&q=1987+Constitution&sa=Search&siteurl=chanrobles.com %2F&siteurl=chanrobles.com%2F

University of the Visayas Colon Street, Pari-an, Cebu City, Philippines

A Research Paper Presented to the Faculty of the College of Law of the Gullas Law School University of the Visayas

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Subject Constitutional Law

By: Mr. Mat Eric M. Medalle LLB

Submitted to: Atty. Avenescio Piramide Law Professor