Article III - Bill of Rights - Rights protected: Right to life, liberty and property

- Right to life is not just a protection of the right to

Section 1 - No person shall be deprived of life, be alive or to the security of one’s limb against
liberty or property without due process of law, nor physical harm. It is the right to a GOOD LIFE. The
shall any person be denied the equal protection of emphasis on the QUALITY of living is found in
the laws Article II Section 6 (to promote a life of dignity) and
Section 7 (which guarantees a decent standard of
Bernas living)

- The Bill of Rights is a guarantee that there are - Article II Section 12: The unborn have a
certain areas of a person’s life, liberty, and constitutional right to life.

property which governmental power may not

touch
Right to property
- It is between the government and the people
- Includes all kinds of property found in the Civil
- Bill of rights —> Applicable to government
Code

- Article 32 of the Civil Code —> Makes it applicable - Deemed to include bested rights such as a
to private parties
perfected mining claim, or a perfected homestead,
- All the powers of the government are limited by or final judgement

the Bill of Rights

- Includes the right to work and earn a living

- Police power, power of eminent domain, and - A license is not a right, but a privilege
power of taxation
withdrawable when public interest require its
- These powers are considered inherent because withdrawal.

they belong to the very essence of government - American Inter-Fashion Corp Case - a mere
and without them, no government can exist.
privilege may evolve into some form of property
- A constitution does not grant them, it can only right protected by due process, as for instance
define, delimit and allocate them.
when a privilege has been enjoyed for so long,
- Guarantee of Bill of Rights v. Article 13 (Social has been subject of substantial investment and
Justice)
has become the source of employment for
- The Bill of Rights focuses on CIVIL and thousands.

POLITICAL rights, while Article 13 focuses of - One’s employment, profession and trade is
SOCIAL and ECONOMIC rights
considered as property protected by the
- Bill of Rights is generally self-implementing, Constitution. Thus, an order of preventive
while Article 13 generally require implementing suspension without opportunity for hearing at all
legislation
violates property right.

- Life and liberty do NOT enjoy identical protection

Police power from the constitution. The primacy of human rights
- The most essential and insistent and the least over property rights is recognized. The rights of
limitable of powers, extending as it does to all the FREE EXPRESSION and of ASSEMBLY occupy a
great public needs
preferred position as they are essential to the
- Inherent and plenary power in the State which preservation and vitality of our civil and political
enables it to prohibit all that is hurtful to the institutions.

comfort, safety and welfare of society.

- A constitutional or valid infringement of human
- Scope: Rests upon public necessity and upon the rights requires a more stringent criterion,
right of the State and of the public to self- namely; existence of a GRAVE AND IMMEDIATE
protection
DANGER OF A SUBSTANTIVE EVIL which the
- The scope expands and contracts with State has the right to prevent.

changing needs
- When an employee retires and meets eligibility
- The national government, through the requirements, he acquires a vested property right
LEGISLATIVE department, exercises police power.
to benefits that is protected by the due process
- It is also delegated, within limits, to local clause.

governments.

- MMDA does not possess political power. It is Right to liberty

merely an executive authority.
- This is the right the freedom to live in a civilized
- Police power in Metro Manila is exercised by society with laws.

cities and municipalities.

Two kinds of due process

Protected rights: Life - Two aspects: procedural and substantive aspect

Page 1 of 49
- Substantive: prohibition of arbitrary laws, because 2. A real opportunity to be heard personally or
if all that the due process clause required were with the assistance of counsel, to present
proper procedure, then life, liberty, or property witnesses and evidence in one’s favor and to
could be destroyed arbitrarily provided that proper defend one’s rights

formalities are observed.

3. A tribunal vested with competent jurisdiction
- Procedural: Relates chiefly to the mode of and so constituted as to afford a person
procedure which government agencies must charged administratively a reasonable
follow in the enforcement and application of laws. guarantee of honesty as well as impartiality;
It is a guarantee on procedural fairness.
and

4. A finding by said tribunal which is supported

Procedural due process in courts in non-criminal by substantial evidence submitted for
cases consideration during the hearing or contained
- Essential requirements (Banco Espanol Filipino v. the records or made known to the parties
Palanca):
affected

1. There must be a court or tribunal clothes - Publication is required of due process.

with judicial power to hear and determine - For the effectivity of laws (statutes, presidential
the matter before it decrees, executive orders)

2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquitted - Administrative rules and regulations must also
over the person of the defendant or over be published if their purpose is to enforce or
the property which is the subject of implement existing law pursuant also to a valid
proceedings delegation

3. The defendant must be given an - Quantum of proof for administrative proceedings:

opportunity to be heard Substantial evidence (such relevant evidence as a
4. Judgement must be rendered upon lawful reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
hearing support a conclusion)

- A teacher in a school administrative proceedings - Notice and hearing

has a right to be assisted by counsel. Due process - Always required for quasi-judicial proceedings

demands this.
- But in performance of executive or legislative
- VOID FOR VAGUENESS DOCTRINE: A law is so functions, such as issuing internal rules and
vague as to not satisfy the due process need for regulations, an administrative body need not
notice when it lacks comprehensible standards comply with the requirements of notice and
that men “of common intelligence must hearing

necessarily guess as to its meaning and differ - Deportation proceedings — although not criminal
as to its application.
in nature, consequences are as serious. The
- It is repugnant to the Constitution in 2 respects:
provisions in the Rules of Court for criminal cases
1. It violates due process for failure to accord is applicable.

persons, especially the parties targeted by it, fair

notice of the conduct to avoid
Substantive due process
2. It leaves law enforcers unbridled discretion in - Laws that interfere with life, liberty or property
carrying out its provisions and becomes an satisfy substantive due process when:

arbitrary flexing of the Government muscle

1. That the interests of the public generally,
- To be unconstitutional, a law must be utterly vague as distinguished from those of a particular
on its face, that is to say, it cannot be clarified by class, require such interference
either a saving clause or by construction
2. That the means are reasonably necessary
- A statute is not rendered uncertain and void for the accomplishment of the purpose,
merely because general terms are used therein, or and not unduly oppressive upon
because of the employment of terms without individuals
defining them; much less do we have to define - The legislature may not, under the guise of
every word we use.
protecting the public interest, arbitrarily interfere
with private business or impose unusual and
Procedural due process in administrative cases unnecessary restriction upon lawful occupations

- Essential requirements of procedural due process - The requirement of due process is not a rigid
before administrative agencies:
concept. The heart of substantive due process is
1. The right to actual or constructive notice of the requirement of “reasonableness” or absence of
the institution of proceedings which may exercise of arbitrary power.

affect a respondent’s legal rights

Page 2 of 49
- Generally, when State acts interfere with life, Primacy of Human Rights and Enforcement
liberty or property, the presumption is that the
action is VALID.
1. Republic v. Sandiganbayan (Bill of Rights after
- In rare cases, however, such as prior restraint, EDSA revolution)

there is a presumption of invalidity.

Facts: Dimaano’s house was searched and items
- The allowable scope of reasonable interference were seized pursuant to EO 1.

with property is NOT the same as that with liberty

or property.
Issue: W/N the revolutionary government was bound
- Rarely has a law interfering merely with property by the Bill of Rights of the 1973 Constitution during
rights been declared unconstitutional.
the interregnum (The day when Aquino took her oath
- White Light: The hotel operators were able to raise was President til the day immediately before the
the issue of liberty of clients by appealing to “third adoption of the Freedom Constitution: February 26,
party standing”
1986 —> March 24, 1986). The Court ruled NO.

Equal protection Doctrine:

- Specific guarantee of the Equality of the Person. - During the interregnum, a person could not
The equality it guarantees is “legal equality,” or the invoke any exclusionary right under the Bill of
equality of all persons before the law.
Rights because there was neither a constitution
- Does not treat a person different because of nor a Bill of Rights then. Nevertheless, the
who he is or what he is or what he possesses
Filipino people continued to enjoy, under the
- Valid classification (People v. Cayat):
UDHR and ICCPR, almost the same rights found
1. Must rest on substantial distinctions
in the Bill of Rights under the 1973 Constitution.

2. Must be germane to the purpose of the law

- Pacta sunct servanda: The revolutionary
3. Must not be limited to existing conditions government was also obligated under
only
international law to observe the rights of
4. Must apply equally to all members of the individuals under the Declaration.

same class
- However, even after said revolutionary
- Fariñas v. Executive Secretary: Appointive and government, the Court ruled that the Freedom
elective officials do not belong to the same class
Constitution and later the 1987 Constitution
- British American Tobacco v. Camacho: Since this expressly recognized the validity of sequestrian
is not a case which involves suspect classification orders

nor impinges on fundamental rights, the rational - Read Bernas on sequestrian orders

basis test basis is what is applicable. It has been - 3 great powers of the government:

held that “in the areas of social and economic, a 1. Police power - inherent and plenary power in the
statutory classification that neither proceeds along State, which enables it to prohibit all that is
suspect lines nor infringes constitutional rights hurtful to the comfort, safety and welfare of
must be upheld against equal protection challenge society

if there is any reasonably conceivable state of 2. Eminent Domain - right of the State to acquire
facts hat could provide a rational basis for the private property for public use upon payment of
classification.”
just compensation

- Central Bank Employees v. Bangko Sentral: A 3. Taxation - power of the State to raise revenues for
provision of law, initially valid, can subsequently public purpose, through equitable and uniform
become unconstitutional, on the ground that its means.

continued operation would violate the equal

protection of the law. This is a case of RELATIVE Section 1 cases
CONSTITUTIONALITY.

- Nuñez v. Sandiganbayan: Dishonesty in public Hierarchy of Rights

service is a valid basis for classification.
2. Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Org. v.
- The equal protection clause does not only merely Philippine Blooming Mills Co. Inc. (hierarchy of rights)

prohibit the State from passing discriminatory Facts: The collective bargaining agreement (CBA)
laws, but also commands the State to pass laws between the union and the company has a provision
which positively promote equality or reduce on No Lockout - No Strike. The company called a
existing inequalities.
meeting and stated that if employees join the
demonstration against the Pasig Police and fail to
Article III cases report for work, they shall be dismissed the following
morning.

Page 3 of 49
 void since the court had never acquired jurisdiction
Issue: W/N the CBA violates the petitioner’s right to over the defendant or over the subject of the action.

freedom of expression and assembly. The court ruled

YES.
Issue:

1. W/N the court acquired the necessary jurisdiction

Doctrine: To regard the demonstration against police to enable it to proceed with the foreclosure of the
officers as evidence of bad faith in collective mortgage. The Court ruled YES.

bargaining, and hence a violation of the CBA and a 2. W/N the proceedings were conducted in such
cause of dismissal from employment of the manner as to constitute due process of law. The
demonstrating employees, stretches unduly the Court ruled YES.

compass of the CBA, is a “potent means of

inhibiting speech” and therefore inflicts a moral Doctrine:

as well as mortal wound on the constitutional 1. The jurisdiction of the court in such case is based
guarantees of free expression, peaceful assembly exclusively on the power which, under the law, it
and petition.
possesses over the property; and any discussion
- The strain construction of the Court of Industrial relative to the jurisdiction of the court over the
Relations that stipulated working shifts deny the person of the defendant is entirely apart from the
workers the right to stage mass demonstration case.

against police abuses during working hours, - The requirement of due process is satisfied if the
constitutes a virtual tyranny over the mind and life following conditions are present:

of the workers and deserves severe a. There must be a court or tribunal clothes
condemnation.
with judicial power to hear and determine
- Renunciation of the freedom should not be the matter before it
predicated on such a slender ground.
b. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquitted
over the person of the defendant or over
Due Process: In General the property which is the subject of
4. Tupas v. CA (late petition)
proceedings
Facts: Petitioners filed for the petition for review with c. The defendant must be given an
the Court of Appeals 14 days after the 15-day opportunity to be heard
reglementary period. The petition was declared tardy.
d. Judgement must be rendered upon lawful
hearing
Issue: W/N petitioners have been denied due - The jurisdiction of the court over the property,
process. The Court ruled NO.
considered as the exclusive object of such an
action, is evidently based upon the following
Doctrine: Rules of procedure are intended to conditions and considerations, namely:

ensure the orderly administration of justice and a. That the property is located within the district

the protection of substantive rights in judicial and b. That the purpose of the litigation is to subject
extrajudicial proceedings. the property by sale to an obligation fixed
- Observance of both substantive and procedural upon it by the mortgage

rights is equally guaranteed by due process, c. That the court at a proper stage of the
whatever the source of rights, be it the proceedings takes the property into custody,
Constitution or statute or rule of court.
if necessary, and exposes it to sale for the
purpose of satisfying the mortgage debt

I. Procedural Due Process - The court then formulated the following

propositions relative to the foreclosure proceeding
A. Judicial Proceedings proceeding against the property of a nonresident
mortgagor who fails to come in and submit himself
5. El Banco Español v. Palanca (jurisdiction over personally to the jurisdiction of the court:

person) (non-resident)
a. That the jurisdiction of the court is derived
Facts: El Banco foreclosed on the Manila properties from the power which it possess over the
of Engrancio. Since he was a non-resident of the property

Philippines, it was necessary to give notice by b. That jurisdiction over the person is not
publication in a newspaper. Default was rendered as acquired and is nonessential

the defendant did not appear. The property was sold c. That the relief granted by the court must be
in a public auction to El Banco Espanol. 7 years later, limited to such as can be enforced against
Palanca requested to set the order aside for being the property itself

Page 4 of 49
2. Notice was given by publication in a newspaper involved, and the reasons for the
and this is the only form of notice which the law decisions rendered
unconditionally requires. This is all that was
absolutely necessary to sustain the proceedings.
6. Shu v. Dee (NBI without judicial or quasi-judicial
power)

B. Administrative; Quasi-Judicial Proceedings; Facts: Shu filed a complaint with the NBI charging
Arbitration Dee with falsification of 2 deeds of real estate. (Dee,
et al. really forged Shu’s signatures.) In the NBI,
In General: Administrative due process evidence was provided by the petitioner alone.
5. Ang Tibay v. CA (due process in administrative Respondents say they were deprived of due process
proceedings)
since NBI never required them to submit sample
Facts: Employees of Any Tibay, who were members signatures of Shu for comparison. The case was
of the National Labor Union Inc., were laid off. The eventually brought before the SOJ, who decided in
Court of Industrial Relations ruled that the owner was favor of Shu. Before the SOJ, the respondents were
guilty of unfair labor practice for discriminating not given the petition for review when it was filed.
against the National Labor Union and unjustly They were not even required to answer nor comment.

favoring the National Workers’ Brotherhood.

Issue: W/N the respondents were denied due

Issue: W/N the CIR is bounded by any requirements process in proceedings before the SOJ? The Court
of due process given that it is an administrative ruled NO.

board. The Court ruled YES.

Doctrine: The essence of due process is simply to

Doctrine: The fact that the CIR may be said to be free have the opportunity to be heard. Respondents
from the rigidity of certain procedural requirements were given due process because they had the
does not mean that it can, in justiciable cases opportunity to file an MR with the SOJ. They were
coming before it, entirely ignore or disregard the also not denied due process in the NBI because the
fundamental and essential requirements of due NBI has no judicial or quasi-judicial powers. The
process in trials and investigations of an functions are only investigatory and informational,
administrative character. There are CARDINAL and their findings are merely recommendatory.

PRIMARY RIGHTS which must be respected even in

proceedings of this character:
Aspects of the Proceedings
1. Right to a hearing - Right of the party
interested to present his own case and 7. GMA Network Inc. v. COMELEC (aggregate total
submitted evidence in support thereof
airtime)

2. Tribunal must consider the evidence Facts: COMELEC Resolution No. 9615 limits the
presented broadcast and radio advertisements of candidates
3. The decision must have something to and political parties for national election positions to
support its decision an aggregate total of 120 and 180 minutes
4. Evidence must be substantial - Substantial respectively. Prior to the 2013 elections, time limit
evidence is such relevant evidence as a used to be on a “per station” basis.

reasonable mind might accept as adequate

to support a conclusion. Mere Issue: W/N COMELEC violated petitioners’ right to
uncorroborated hearsay or rumor doesn’t due process when it promulgated Resolution No.
constitute substantial evidence.
9615 without conducting a public hearing? The Court
5. The decision must be rendered on the ruled YES.

evidence presented at the hearing, or at

least contained in the record and Doctrine: When an administrative rule is merely
disclosed to the parties affected interpretative in nature, its applicability needs nothing
6. The CIR or any of its judges must act on furhther than its bare issuance for it gives no real
its or his own independent consideration consequence more than what the law itself has
of the law and facts of the controversy, already prescribed. When, upon the other hand, the
and not simply accept the views of a administrative rule goes beyond merely providing for
subordinate in arriving at a decision. the means that can facilitate or render least
7. The CIR should render its decision in such cumbersome the implementation of the law, but
a manner that the parties to the substantially adds to or increases the burden of
proceeding can know the various issues those governed, it behooves the agency to accord

Page 5 of 49
at least to those directly affected a chance to be person would have to conclude that an arbitrator
heard, and thereafter duly informed, before the was partial to the other party to the arbitration.
new issuance is given the force and effect of law. Chairman Baker’s act of furnishing the parties with
copies of Matthew Secomb’s article, considering the
Extradition Proceedings attending circumstances, is indicative of partiality,
such that a reasonable man would have to conclude
8. Government of HK v. Olalia, Jr. (bail in extradition that he was favoring RCBC.

cases)
- Evident partiality has been defined as an
Facts: Muñoz was charged with bribery before a arbitrator’s explicit bias toward one party and an
court in HK, thus detained. Muñoz filed a petition for arbitrator’s inferred bias when an arbitrator fails to
bail, but the RTC denied it since there is no law disclose relevant information to the parties.

granting bail in extradition cases.

Academic Discipline
Issue: W/N Muñoz has the right to apply for bail. The
Court held YES (provided that a certain standard for 10. ADMU v. Capulong (fraternity)

the grant is satisfactorily met)

Facts: After initiation rites of Aquila, Lennie Villa died
and Bienvenido Marquez was hospitalized.
Doctrine: Our extradition law does not provide the Respondent students were found guilty of the
grant of bail to an extraditee, however, there is no school’s rules on discipline and were dismissed.

provision prohibiting him or her from filing a motion

for bail, a right to due process under the Constitution. Issue: W/N respondent students have been afforded
While the time-honored principle of pacta sunct procedural due process prior to their dismissal from
servanda demands that the Philippines honor its petitioner university. The Court ruled YES.

obligations under the Extradition Treaty, it does not

necessarily mean that in keeping with it, the Doctrine: An administrative proceeding conducted to
Philippines should diminish a potential extraditee’s investigate the students’ participation in a hazing
right to life, liberty and due process.
activity need not be clothed with the attributes of a
- An extraditee should not be deprived of his judicial proceeding.

right to apply for bail, provided that a certain - Minimum standards for imposition of
standard for the grant is satisfactorily met. disciplinary actions in academic institutions:
- The potential extradited must prove by “clear 1. The students must be informed in writing
and convincing proof” that (1) he is not a flight of the nature and cause of any accusation
risk and (2) will abide with all the orders and against them
processes of the extradition court. 2. That they shall have the right to answer
the charges against them with the
Arbitration assistance of counsel, if desired
3. They shall be informed of the evidence
9. RCBC v. Banco De Oro (bias in arbitration)
against them
Facts: There was a dispute between RCBC and 4. They shall have the right to adduce
Banco de Oro. Since they couldn’t reach a evidence in their own behalf
settlement, RCBC commenced arbitration 5. The evidence must be duly considered by
proceedings with the International Chamber of the investigating committee or official
Commerce - Court of Arbitration (ICC-ICA). During designated by the school authorities to
the course of the proceedings, there was evident hear and decide the case
partiality in the 2nd partial award when Chairman - Academic Freedom:

Barker sent the letter containing the Matthew 1. Who may teach

Secomb article which reflected, in advance, the 2. What may be taught

disposition of the Arbitral Tribunal, as well as signaled 3. How it shall be taught

a preconceived course of action that the relief prayed 4. Who may be admitted to study

for by RCBC will be granted.

11. Go v. Colegio de San Juan de Letrán (disciplinary

Issue: W/N There is legal ground to vacate the 2nd cases)

partial award. The Court held YES.

Facts: Go was allegedly a senior member of the Tau
Gamma Phi Fraternity and involves in the invitation
Doctrine: Reasonable Impression of partiality rites of neophyte members. To discuss the matter,
standard - requires a showing that a reasonable two written notices were sent by the school to the

Page 6 of 49
parents. The parents were invited twice for a Doctrine: While a hearing under the aforementioned
conference. They did not attend the first one, and EO is indispensible, it does not preclude the Board
only the mother attended the second. The parents from ordering, ex-parte, a PROVISIONAL increase (if
insist that there must be a formal inquiry; that they permanent, then you need to have a hearing) subject
were not informed in writing of the charges; and that to its final disposition of whether to not: (1) to make
they were not able to cross examine the evidence.
it permanent, (2) to reduce or increase it further or
(3) to deny the application.
Issue: W/N due process was denied. The Court held - The ERB, as an administrative agency, is not
NO.
bound by the strict or technical rules of
evidence governing court proceedings. In
Doctrine: Learn has the authority to promulgate rules exercising its function of rate or price fixing,
on discipline. This is provided for in the Manual of the ERB is considered as practicing a quasi-
Regulations for Private Schools, which has the force legislative, not quasi-judicial function.
of law.

- The 5 requirements of due process (Admu v. Profession

Capulong) were also complied with.

- The Court reiterated that disciplinary cases do 14. Corona v. United Harbor Association of the
not have to be done in the same manner as Philippines (pilot)

court proceedings. They may be summary in Facts: An administrative order by the Philippine Ports
nature, and cross examination is not required. Authority provided that “all appointments to harbor
What is essential is that the student is given the pilot positions in all pileage districts shall be only for
opportunity to be heard. a term of one year subject to yearly renewal or
cancellation by the Authority after a conduct of a
Deportation Proceedings rigid evaluation performance.”

12. Lao Gi v. CA (Filipino citizenship)

Issue: W/N said provision violate respondents right to
Facts: Petitioner’s Filipino citizenship was revoked procedural due process (NO) and substantial due
when it was found to be grounded on fraud and process (YES).

misrepresentation. Commission on Immigration and

Deportation charged petitioners with refusal to Doctrine:

register as aliens.
- PROCEDURAL due process was not violated - As
long as a party was given the opportunity to
Issue: W/N the CID denied petitioners of due defend his interests in due course, he cannot be
process. The Court ruled YES.
said to have been denied due process of law, for
this opportunity to be heard is the very essence of
Doctrine: After appropriate charges are filed in the due process.

CID, the specific grounds of which he should be (1) - As a general rule, notice and hearing, as
duly informed of, (2) a hearing should be fundamental requirements of due process,
conducted, and it is only after such hearing by the are essential only when an administrative
CID that the alien may be ordered (2) deported
body exercises its quasi-judicial function. In
the performance of its executive or
Regulations: Fixing of Rates and Regulation of legislative functions, such as issuing rules
Profession and regulation, an administrative body need
not comply with the requirements of notice
Rates and hearing.
- SUBSTANTIVE due process was denied - It is
13. Maceda v. Energy Regulatory Board (fixing rates)
apparent that the order unduly restricts the right of
Facts: The ERB issued an order granting a harbor plots to enjoy their profession before their
provisional increase of 1.42 per liter of oil. Three compulsory retirement. In the past, they enjoyed a
other oil companies applied to further increase the measure of security knowing that after passing 5
prices of petroleum products, which the ERB examinations and undergoing years of training,
admitted.
they would have a license which they could use
until their retirement, unless sooner revoked by the
Issue: W/N Maceda’s right to due process was PPA for mental or physical unfitness.

violated. The Court ruled NO.

Dismissals, Suspensions, Reinstatements, etc.

Page 7 of 49
 17. Estrada v. Sandiganbayan (plunder, void for
Dismissal in Private Sector vagueness)

Facts: Estrada assails the Plunder Law for being

15. Salaw v. NLRC
vague because it fails to provide the statutory
Facts: NLRC extracted from petitioner, without definition of “combination”, “series”, and “pattern”
assistance of counsel, a sworn statement which which invalidates the law.

appears that Salaw is in cahoots with a co-employee.

He was requested to appear before the disciplinary Issue: W/N the Plunder Law is unconstitutional for
committee without counsel or representative. He was being vague and thus violating the petitioner’s right
terminated from employment.
to due process. The Court held NO.

Issue: W/N dismissal of Salaw was legally justified. Doctrine: Legislative measure is presumed to be in
The Court ruled NO.
harmony with the Constitution. Petitioner failed to
overcome this presumption.

Doctrine: He was denied right to due process as - As long as the law affords some comprehensible
he was not given the chance to defend himself guide or rule that would inform those who are
when he was denied the assistance of counsel. subject to it what conduct would render them
- Aside from the dismissal being based on valid liable to penalties, the validity of the same shall be
and authorized cause as provided by law, the upheld.

Rudimentary requirement of due process; - A statute is not rendered uncertain and void
notice and hearing, must also be observed merely because general terms are used therein, or
(Primary Cardinal Rights) because of the employment of terms without
- Notice - to inform employee of impending defining them; much less is it required to define
dismissal
every word used.

- Hearing - opportunity to answer

- Void for vagueness doctrine

Ordinance/Statute/Memorandum Circular/Rules Tariff and Customs Code

16. People v. Nazario (“manager”, void for 18. Feeder International Line v. CA (assistance of
vagueness)
counsel)

Facts: Nazario is the operator of a fishpond. There is Facts: A foreign vessel was found in Iloilo not having
a municipal ordinance which requires owners or the shipping requirements on board. The sworn
managers to pay a municipal tax per year. He statements of the owners were taken without
contends that the ordinance is vague insofar as they assistance of a counsel.

reckon the date of payment. Furthermore, that he is

not included since he is merely a lessee/operator and Issues: W/N petitioner was deprived of property
the ordinance speaks of “owner or manager”
without due process of law in that its right to be
presumed innocent was not recognized and the
Issue: W/N the ordinance is void for vagueness. The decision was not supported by proof beyond
Court ruled NO.
reasonable doubt (NO) and W/N the owners’ right to
be assisted by counsel was violated (NO)

Doctrine: Void for Vagueness - A statute may be

said to be vague when it lacks comprehensible Doctrine:

standards that men of common intelligence must 1. The proceedings for the forfeiture of illegal goods
necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to imported are not criminal in nature since they do
its application
not result in the conviction of the wrongdoer nor
- The act must be utterly vague on its face in the imposition upon him of a penalty. A
(“perfectly vague); it cannot be clarified by a forfeiture proceeding under Tariff and
saving clause or by construction
Customs laws are purely civil and
- Repugnant to the Constitution in 2 respects: administrative in character. Only substantial
a. Violates due process for failure to accord evidence, not proof beyond reasonable doubt,
persons fair notice of the conduct to avoid is required. Moreover, the presumption of
b. Leaves law enforcers unbridled discretion innocence is only available for criminal cases.

in carrying out its provisions

Page 8 of 49
2. The fact that the testimonies were given without 20. Perez v. Madrona (not nuisance per se)

assistance may not be considered an outright Facts: Madrona enclosed their house with a concrete
violation of their constitutional right to be fence. The chief of Marikina stated that the fence was
assisted by counsel. The right to the assistance an illegally constructed improvement within the road
of counsel is not indispensable to due process right-of-way.

unless required by the Constitution or a law.

Exception is made only during the custodial Issue: W/N Madrona’s fence is a nuisance per se to
investigation of a person suspected of a crime, justify summary demolition. The Court ruled NO.

who may NOT waive his right to counsel except

in writing and in the presence of counsel, and Doctrine:

during trial. In other proceedings, the need for - Requirements for injunction:
counsel is not deemed essential to their validity.
1. Right to be protected - right over their
concrete fence which cannot be removed
Closure Proceedings without due process

2. Act which violated said right - summary

19. Central Bank v. CA (relative constitutionality)
demolition of concrete fence

Facts: The Monetary Board of Central Bank placed - Lucena Grand Central Terminal v. JAC Liner

Triumph Savings Bank (TSB) under receivership after - Nuisance: any act, omission, establishment,
reports showed that it had become insolvent and its condition of property, or anything else which
continued operations would cause injuries to shocks, defies, or disregards decency or
debtors, creditors and stockholders. TSB contends morality

that the Monetary Board violated the rule on - Nuisance per se: one which affects the
administrative due process because they were not immediate safety of persons and property
sent a notice and a hearing was not conducted.
and may be summarily abated under the
undefined law of necessity
Issue: W/N the absence of prior notice and hearing is - Nuisance per accidens: may be proven in a
constitutive of acts of arbitrariness and bad faith. The hearing conducted for that purpose
Court ruled NO.
- Not being a nuisance per se, but at most a
nuisance per accidens, its summary abatement
Doctrine: The Central Bank Act does not without judicial intervention is unwarranted.
contemplate prior notice and hearing before a
bank may be directed to stop operations and be Cancellation of Property Rights/Privileges
placed under receivership. It is enough that a
subsequent judicial review be provided in the said 21. American Inter-Fashion v. OP

act.
Facts: The Garments & Textile Board (GTEB)
- Petitioner’s reliance on the Bank Filipino case cancelled Glorious’ allocated export quotas because
(regarding relative constitutionality) is misplaced. it was found guilty of dollar-salting and
In that case, the Monetary Board had no sufficient misdeclaration of importations. The Company alleged
basis to arrive at a sound conclusion of insolvency that the charges against it were not supported by
to justify the closure, since their assets exceeded evidence.

their liabilities.

- Conditions prerequisite to the action of the Issue: W/N there was a violation of Glorious’ right to
Monetary Bank to forbid the institution to do due process. The Court held YES.

business in the Philippines (all present in this

case): Doctrine:

1. An examination made by the examining - Glorious was denied due process when the GTEB
department of the Central Bank failed to disclose evidence used by it in rendering
2. A report by said department to the a resolution against Glorious. GTEB cannot use the
Monetary Bank excuse that the subsequent disclosure of evidence
3. Prima facie showing that its continuance (in a case 3 years later) justified its failure to
in business would involve probably loss to disclose.

its depositors and creditors - In cancelling its export quotas, GTEB violated the
right to due process of Glorious. Before the
UDHA (R.A. 7279) - Squatting, Procedure for cancellation in 1984, Glorious had been enjoying
relocation, summary abatement
export quotas since 1977. In effect, what was
initially a privilege evolved into some form of

Page 9 of 49
 property right which should not be removed from it
arbitrarily and without due process only to Issue: W/N it was a legitimate exercise of police
hurriedly confer it on another.
power. The Court held YES.

22. British American Tobacco v. Camacho (expansive Doctrine: The State may interfere where public
tax category)
interest demand it, and a large discretion of this is
Facts: Lucky Strikes assails the freeze provision of necessarily vested in the legislature to determine, not
the NIRC where companies classified on October only what the interest of the public require, but what
1996 shall remain in their classification until revised measures are necessary for the protection of such
by Congress, while new companies shall be interest; yet, its determination in these matters is not
classified according to their net retail price.
final or conclusive, but is subject to the supervision
of the courts.

Issue: W/N the classification provisions violates equal - The real dependency of the billboard advertising is
protection and due process. The Court ruled NO.
not upon the unrestricted use of private property,
but upon the unrestricted use of the PUBLIC
Doctrine: In tax legislations, the standard required is HIGHWAYS is at once apparent.

that of RATIONAL BASIS TEST - the legislative - Police power cannot interfere with private property
classification must be shown to rationally further a rights for purely aesthetic purposes. It is a
LEGITIMATE STATE INTEREST. The state interests regulation of the use of streets and other public
which Congress considered are; prevention of thorough fairs.

potential corruption, promotion of fair competition, - Unsightly advertisements or signs which are
simplification of tax administration, etc.
offensive to sight, are not disassociated from the
- In claims of breach of due process, there is a general welfare of the public.

presumption of validity. In this case, petitioner

failed to rebut that presumption.
25. People v. Fajardo (not allowed to build on his lot
- Valid classification: as it covers view from the plaza)

a. Substantial distinction Facts: An ordinance was passed that said any person
b. Germane to the purpose of the law who will construct a building should obtain a written
c. Applies to both present and future permit from the mayor. The request of petitioners was
conditions denied because it would destroy the beauty of the
d. Applies equally to all those that belong to public plaza.

the same class

Issue: W/N the ordinance is valid. The Court ruled
II. Substantive Due Process NO.

23. United States v. Toribio (carabao slaughterhouse)

Doctrine: The ordinance operates to permanently
Facts: Toribio slaughtered a carabao without a permit deprive appellants of the right to use their own
in violation of Art No. 1147.
property; hence, it oversteps the bounds of police
power, and amounts to taking of appellants property
Issue: W/N the act regulating the slaughter of large without just compensation.

cattle is a valid exercise of police power. The Court - The only substantial distinction between restriction
held YES.
and taking, is that the restriction leaves the owner
subject to the burden of taxation, while outright
Doctrine: Elements of Police Power: confiscation would relieve him of that burden

1. The interests of the public generally, as

distinguished from those of a particular class, 26. Ermita-Malate Hotel and Manila Operators
require such interference Association v. City Mayor of Manila (curb immorality;
2. The means are reasonably necessary for the license fee)

accomplishment of the purpose, and not Facts: To curb immorality, an ordinance was enacted
unduly oppressive upon individuals. which increased license fees, classified motels into 2,
requires hotel quests to fill out forms, allows motels
24. Churchill v. Rafferty (billboards as nuisance)
to be inspected and makes unlawful to lease any
Facts: The billboards of petitioners are located upon room or portion more than twice every 24 hours.

private lands in Rizal. On the ground that it is

offensive to sight or otherwise a nuisance, the CIR Issue: W/N the ordinance is a valid exercise of police
asked them to put it down.
power. The Court held YES.

Page 10 of 49
 Facts: Ordinance No. 3353 disallowed the issuance
Doctrine: The police power rests on the legislative of business permits to casinos. It contravenes PD
organs of the government, whether national local. It 1869 which allows the playing of certain games of
is the power to prescribe regulations to promote chance.

the health, morals, peace, good order, safety and

general welfare of the people. Issue: W/N ordinance is valid. The Court held NO.

27. Ynot v. Intermediate Appellate Court (transport of Doctrine: Ordinances should not contravene a statute
carabao)
because municipal governments are only agents of
Facts: Marcos issued an EO that prohibits the the national government. The delegate cannot be
transport of carabaos between provinces. Ynot superior to the principal or exercise powers higher
transported 6 carabaos when they were confiscated than those of the latter.

by the police.
- To be valid, an ordinance must conform to the
following substantive requirements:
Issue: W/N the EO violates due process. The Court 1. It must not contravene the constitution or any
held YES.
statute
2. It must not be unfair or oppressive
Doctrine: The minimum requirements of due process 3. It must not be partial or discriminatory
are notice and hearing which may not be dispensed 4. It must not prohibit but may regulate trade
with because they are intended as a safeguard 5. It must be general and consistent with public
against arbitrariness.
policy
- 2 requirements of police power: lawful subject 6. It must not be unreasonable
and lawful method
- The ordinance does not satisfy with the second 30. Bennis v. Michigan (confiscated car)

requirement of police power (lawful method) Facts: Tina is a joint owner of a car where Bennis
because it cannot be seen how the prohibition of engaged in sexual activity with a prostitute and was
interprovincial transport can prevent the slaughter convicted of gross indecency. The car was declared
of carabaos.
a public nuisance and was abated.

- Due process is violated because the owner of

the property confiscated is denied the right to Issue: W/N the abatement order violates her due
be heard in his defense and is immediately process. The Court held NO.

condemned and punished.

Doctrine: An owner’s interest in the property may
28. Balacuit v. CFI (discount to children in movie be forfeited though the owner did not know to
house)
what extent the property will be used, or that
Facts: Ordinance 640 requires theater to charge only someone else used it in a crime. The acts of the
half of the regular price for children between 7-12 guilty party bind the interest of the owner whether
years old.
he be guilty or innocent.
- When a property is used to facilitate a criminal
Issue: W/N the ordinance violates substantive due activity, forfeiture of such is not a violation of due
process. The Court ruled YES.
process.

Doctrine: To invoke the exercise of police power, not 31. Cruzan v. Director of Missouri Dept. (informed
only must it appear that the interest of the public euthanasia)

generally requires an interference with public rights, Facts: Nancy was involved in a car accident that
but the means adopted must be reasonable caused her to become incompetent. In a case to end
necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose life support, her friend testified that Nancy said she
and not unduly oppressive upon the individuals.
didn’t want to live her life if she couldn’t live it
- The right of the power to fix a price at which his halfway normally. The Court said it wasn’t clear and
property should be sold or used in an inherent convincing that was required by the State.

attribute of the property itself and, as such,

within the protection of the due process clause. Issue: W/N the establishment of the requirement of
evidence is unconstitutional

29. Magtajas v. Pryce Properties (local ordinance

against PAGCOR)
Doctrine: INFORMED CONSENT DOCTRINE - right
of a competent individual to refuse treatment

Page 11 of 49
- The State is entitled to protect against potential 3. Must not be limited to existing conditions
abuses and may assert an unqualified interest only
in the preservation of human life weight against 4. Must apply equally to all members of the
the constitutionally protected interests of an same class
individual. - The classification is arbitrary and discriminatory. It
- Clear and convincing proof when the individual also lumps all marriages contracted within this
interests at stake in a state proceeding, are both period as having been for financial convenience to
particularly important and more substantial than avail of pension benefits.

mere loss of money.

34. Chavez v. COMELEC

32. Chavez v. Romulo (right to bear arms)

Facts: Chavez had several billboards and ads with
Facts: Arroyo issued a nationwide gun ban.
his name and photographs. A COMELEC resolution
was issued directing election candidates to remove
Issues: W/N the citizens right to bear arms is a any propaganda within 3 days, otherwise it would
constitutional right (NO) and W/N the issuance of count as premature campaigning.

said guidelines is a valid exercise of power (YES)

Issue: W/N the section is a valid exercise of police

Doctrine: The right to bear arms is a statutory power. The Court ruled YES.

privilege, not constitutional right. All licenses may be

revoked or rescinded by executive action.
Doctrine: Endorsement billboards of an electoral
- All property in the state is held subject to its candidate may be regulated/removed by the
general regulations, necessary to the common COMELEC without violating the non-impairment
good and general welfare. clause as a valid exercise of police power. The
- The right of individuals to bear arms is not moment that Chavez filed for his COC, his
absolute, but subject to regulation. The endorsements assumed partisan political character
maintenance of peace and order and the and indirectly promoted his candidacy, giving him
protection of the people are constitutional duties of advantage over not-so-popular candidates.

the State, and the right to bear arms is to be

construed in connection and in harmony with 35. Lucena Grand Terminal, Inc. v. Jac Liner, Inc.
these constitutional duties.
(exclusive franchise)

Facts: Ordinance 1778 declares inoperative petitioner

33. GSIS v. Montesclaros (survivorship pension claim)
and other terminals in the city in order to alleviate
Facts: GSIS denied Milagros’ claim for survivorship traffic congestion.

pension because under PD 1146, the surviving

spouse has no right to the pension if they contracted Issue: W/N the City of Lucena properly exercised
marriage within 3 years before the pensioner qualified police power. The Court held NO.

for the pension.

Doctrine: The local government may be

Issue: W/N the provision is unconstitutional for considered to have properly exercised its police
violating the due process class (YES) and equal power when there is a lawful subject and lawful
protection clause (YES)
method.
- The 2nd requisite is absent because the means
Doctrine:
employed were unduly oppressive.

- Where the employee retires and meets the - The terminals are not injurious to the rights of the
eligibility requirements, he acquires a vested property, health or comfort of the community.
right to benefits that is protected by the due Because of this, they cannot be regarded as
process clause. Thus, a pensioner acquires a nuisance per se, but only as nuisance per accident
vested right to benefits that have become due as at most, so these terminals cannot be abated by
provided under the terms of the public employees ordinance.

pension statute. No law can deprive such person

of his pension rights without due process of law, 36. Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators
that is, without notice and opportunity to be heard.
Association v. City Mayor of Manila (motels)

- Requirements of valid classification: (See No. 26)

1. Must rest on substantial distinctions

2. Must be germane to the purpose of the Doctrine: Police power rests on the legislative
law organs of the government, whether national or

Page 12 of 49
local. It is the power to prescribe regulations that patronize their establishments for a “wash-
promote the health, morals, peace, good order rate” time frame.

and general welfare of the people.

2. Taxpayer suits
3. Third party standing
37. City of Manila v. Laguio (sauna, massage parlors, - Provided that 3 criteria are satisfied:
nightclub)
a. Litigant must have suffered an injury-
Facts: Ordinance No. 7783 seeks to prohibit certain in-fact, thus giving him or her a
establishments for amusement or entertainment. It sufficiently concrete interest in the
ordered establishments such as saunas, massage outcome of the issue of the dispute
parlors, night clubs, motels and the like, to shut b. Litigant must have a close relation to
down or to convert themselves into an allowable form the third party
of establishment within 3 months.
c. There must exist some hindrance to
the third party’s ability to protect his or
Issue: W/N Ordinance No. 7783 it violates her own interests
substantive due process. The Court held YES.
4. Doctrine of transcendental importance
- Two standards of judicial review:

Doctrine: Substantive requirements that an a. Strict scrutiny for laws dealing with
ordinance must conform to:
freedom of the mind or restricting the
1. It must not contravene the constitution or any political process
statute - Deals with FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

2. It must not be unfair or oppressive - The focus is on the presence of compelling,

3. It must not be partial or discriminatory rather than substantial, governmental interest
4. It must not prohibit but may regulate trade and the absence of less restrictive means for
5. It must be general and consistent with public achieving that interest

policy - Standard for determining the quality and the

6. It must not be unreasonable amount of governmental interest brought to
- Procedural due process - procedures that the justify the regulation of fundamental
government must follow before it deprives a freedoms

person of life, liberty or property

- Used to test validity of laws dealing with
- Substantive due process - asks whether the the regulation of speech, gender, race, as
government has an adequate reason for taking well as other fundamental rights as
away a person’s life, liberty, or property. It looks expansion from its earlier applications to
whether there is sufficient justification for the equal protection.
government’s action.
b. Rational basis standard of review for
economic legislation
38. White Light v. City of Manila (wash up rates)
- ECONOMIC/PROPERTY RIGHTS

Facts: Ordinance No. 7774 prohibits short time - The Court has often applied the rational basis
admission in hotels, motels, etc. and wash up rate test mainly in analysis of equal protection
schemes.
challenges.

- Laws or ordinances are upheld if they

Issue: W/N the ordinance is unconstitutional. The rationally further a legitimate governmental
Court held YES.
interest.

c. (Later on the US adopted Heightened or

Doctrine:
immediate scrutiny for evaluating
- The general rules on standing admit of several classifications based on gender and
exceptions such as:
legitimacy)

1. Overbreadth doctrine - (AKA Intermediate review) - governmental

- In over breadth analysis, challengers to interest is extensively examined and the
government action are in effect permitted to availability of less restrictive measures is
raise the rights of 3rd parties — generally considered.

applied to statutes infringing on the freedom

of speech, the over breath doctrine applies 39. Bayan v. Ermita (no permit, no rally)

when a statute needlessly restrains even Facts: The rallies of the petitioners were forcibly
constitutionally guaranteed rights
dispersed pursuant to the “no permit, no rally” policy
- Motel operators have a right to assert of BP No. 880 and its CPR. They say it is a violation
constitutional rights of their clients to of their right to peaceful assembly.

Page 13 of 49
 Doctrine: His retirement benefits were only future
Issue: W/N BP 880 violates the petitioner’s benefits and did not constitute a vested right. It is
constitutional rights (NO)
only UPON RETIREMENT that military personnel
acquire a vested right to retirement benefits. The
Doctrine: BP No. 880 is not an absolute ban on constitutional right to equal protection of laws it not
public assemblies, but it is a content-neutral absolute but it is subject to reasonable classification.

regulation of the time, place and manner of

holding public assemblies. Difference between Montesclaros and Parreño: In
Montesclaros, the employee retired, met the eligibility
40. Kilosang Mayo Uno v. Director-General, NEDA requirements and gained a vested right. In this case,
(uniform ID system)
petitioner did not meet the eligibility requirements
Facts: EO 420 directs all government agencies and upon retirement, thus was not entitled to his
GOCCs to adopt a uniform ID system.
retirement benefits.

Issue: W/N EO 420 infringes on their right to privacy. 43. St. Luke’s v. NLRC (regulation of profession)

The Court held NO.

Facts: Santos was an x-ray technician. After
enactment of Radiologic Technology Act of 1992, she
Doctrine: The right to privacy does not car the was prohibited from practicing without first getting a
adoption of reasonable ID systems by government certificate of registration from the Board.

entities. EO 420 applies only to government entities

that already maintain ID systems and issue ID cards Issue: W/N Santos was illegally dismissed by St.
pursuant to their regular functions under existing Luke’s because she was unable to secure a
laws. It does not grant such governmental entities certificate. The Court ruled NO.

any power that they do not already possess under

existing laws. Police powers needs to be anchored Doctrine: While the security of tenure is constitutional
on a law issued by the Legislature unless protected, its exercise may be regulated according to
otherwise cited in the Constitution, and must be the police power of the State. The regulation of the
exercised with lawful purpose and lawful means. medical field through the requirement of licenses is a
reasonable way of protecting the health and safety of
41. Mirasol v. DPWH (motorcycle prohibition)
the public from potential incompetence from
Facts: AO 1 was issued that absolutely banned practitioners.

motorcycles. Subsequently, Dept. Order No. 123

allowed motorcycles with 400cc engine displacement 44. MMDA v. Viron (power of MMDA)

access to toll roads.

Facts: EO 179 designated the MMDA to implement
an integrated NCR public transport system, ni light of
Issue: W/N the orders were valid exercises of police the worsening traffic situation. MMDA issued a
power (AO 1 is valid, but Dept. Order No. 123 is resolution eliminating bus terminals along major
invalid)
thoroughfares.

Doctrine: What is required is that the means used Issue: W/N EO 179 is a valid exercise of police
are not unreasonable, not exactly scientifically power. The Court ruled NO.

perfect. It is not an invalid exercise of police

power as they are not deprived of the right to Doctrine:

travel, only that the means used are regulated. - Requisites for declaratory relief:

1. Justiciable controversy

42. Parreño v. COA (pension banned for US citizen)

2. Controversy must be between 2 parties whose
Facts: When petitioner migrated to Hawaii and interests are adverse

became a naturalized US citizen, the AFP stopped 3. Party seeking declaratory relief must have legal
his monthly pension in accordance with PD 1638. interest in the controversy

Petitioner claims that this is a deprivation of his 4. Issue must be right for judicial determination

property since his retirement benefits is a vested - There is no law that grants MMDA police power
right.
or the power to legislate. Its functions are
administrative.
Issue: W/N PD 1638 is constitutional? The Court - Even assuming that the MMDA has the power to
ruled YES.
implement the program, the EO seeks to
decongest traffic by eliminating bus terminals

Page 14 of 49
 along EDSA. There are less intrusive means instances where such information is being
available, such as cracking down on color collected through unlawful means in order to
vehicles, or stricter enforcement of traffic rules. achieve unlawful ends.
- An indispensable requirement is showing, at
45. DND Secretary v. Manalo brothers (writ of least by substantial evidence, of an actual or
amparo)
threatened violation of the right to privacy in
Facts: The Manalo brothers were abducted, tortured life, liberty or security of the victim.
and interrogated by CAFGU members.

47. Merlaco v. Lim (writ of habeas data)

Issue: W/N the evidence presented by the Manalo Facts: A letter criticizing Lim was posted outside the
brothers was enough to grant their amparo petition. building of Meralco. Lim requested for a writ of
The Court ruled YES.
habeas data against petitioners alleging that their
failure to provide her with information about reports
Doctrine:
concerning threats to her safety amount to a violation
- The Amparo rule was promulgated by the SC in an of her right to privacy in life, liberty and security,
exercise of its expanded power to promulgate correctible by habeas data.

rules to protect people’s constitutional rights, given

the prevalence of extralegal killings and enforced Issue: W/N the RTC was correct in issuing the writ of
disappearances.
habeas data. The Court ruled NO.

- The writ of Amparo is a remedy available to any

person whose right to life, liberty and security is Doctrine:

violated or threatened to be violated by an unlawful - Writ of habeas data is a remedy available to any
act/omission of a public entity or private person
person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or
- Characteristics of writ of amparo: security is violated or threatened by an unlawful
a. Resolved through summary proceeding act or omission of a public official or employee or
(only requires substantial evidence of a private individual or entity engaged in the
b. Does not determine criminal guilty or gathering, collecting or storing of data or
liability for damages information regarding the person, family, home and
c. Preventive in that it breaks the expectation correspondence of the aggrieved party.

of impunity in the commission of such - The writs of amparo and habeas data will NOT
offenses issue to protect purely property or commercial
d. Curative in that it facilitates the concerns nor when the grounds invoked in
subsequent punishment of perpetrators as support of the petitioners are vague or
it will inevitable lead to subsequent doubtful.
investigation and action - Employment constitutes a property right.

46. Roxas v. Macapagal-Arroyo (writ of amparo/ 48. Caram v. Segui (adoption not subject to amparo)

habeas corpus)
Facts: Christina Caram states that respondents
Facts: Roxas was abducted during her immersion trip blackmailed her into surrendering custody of her
by the CPP-NPA.
child to the DSWD. She argues that the life, liberty,
and security of Baby Julian is being violated or
Issue: W/N decision of the CA to grant the petition for threatened by respondents’ enforcement of an illegal
the privilege of the writ of habeas data and amparo is Deed of Voluntary Commitment and that such
valid. The Court held NO.
separation and the action of the respondents should
amount to an “enforced disappearance”

Doctrine:

- Writ of Amparo does not protect property rights. Issue: W/N a petition for a writ of amparo is the
The remedy provides rapid judicial relief as it proper recourse for obtaining parental authority and
partakes of a summary proceeding that requires custody over a minor child. The Court ruled NO.

only substantial evidence to make the appropriate

reliefs available to the petitioner.
Doctrine:

- Writ of Habeas data is a judicial remedy - The extraordinary writ of amparo does not issue in
enforcing the right to privacy, most especially cases where the whereabouts of a person were
the right to informational privacy of individuals. never concealed in the first place.

It operates to protect a person’s right to control - The coverage is confined to extrajudicial killings
information regarding himself, particularly in and enforced disappearances, or threats thereof.

Page 15 of 49
- 4 elements of enforced disappearances:
- The writ of amparo is a remedy available to any
a. There be an arrest, detention, abduction, or person whose right to life, liberty and security is
any form of deprivevation of liberty violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful
b. That it be carried out by, or with the act or omission of a public official or employee, or
authorization/support/acquiescence of the of a private individual or entity. Mere membership
State or a political organization in these organizations/sectors cannot equate to an
c. That it be followed by the State or political actual threat that would warrant the issuance.

organization’s refusal to acknowledge or give - The writ of habeas data is a remedy available to
information on the fate or whereabouts of the anyone whose right to privacy in life, liberty or
person subject of the amparo petition security is violated or threatened with violation
d. That the intention for such refusal is to remove by an unlawful act or omission of a public official
subject person from the protection of the law or employee, or of a private individual or entity
for a prolonged period of time. engaged in the gathering, collecting, or storing
of data or information regarding the person,
49. Mison v. Gallegos (writ of amparo)
family, home and correspondence of the
Facts: Korea requested PH assistance in locating aggrieved party.

private respondent Ku. He was arrested by the BI. He

filed a petition for the issuance of a writ of amparo 51. Lawrence v. Texas

which was granted.

Facts: Officers observed petitioner with another man
engaging in sexual conduct.

Issue: W/N the privilege of the writ of amparo was

properly granted in the case at bar. The Court held Issue: W/N petitioner’s criminal conviction under the
NO.
Texas “Homosexual Conduct Law” (which
criminalizes sexual intimacy by same-sex couples,
Doctrine:
but not identical behavior by different-sex couples)
- Extralegal killings - killings committed without violates the equal protection of laws. The Court held
due process of law YES.

- Enforced disappearances - attended by the

following characteristics: Doctrine: Early American Sodomy laws were not
a. An arrest, detention or abduction of a person directed at homosexuals as such but instead sought
by a government official or organized groups to prohibit procreative sexual activity more generally.

of private individuals acting with the direct and - The fact that the governing majority in a State has
indirect acquiescence of the government traditionally viewed a particular practice as
b. Refusal of the State to disclose fate and immoral is not a sufficient reason for upholding a
whereabouts of the person or a refusal to law prohibiting the practice; neither history nor
acknowledge the deprivation of liberty which tradition could save a law prohibiting
places such persons outside the protection of miscegenation from constitutional attack.

law - Individual decisions by married persons,

concerning the intimacies of their physical
50. Zarate v. Aquino III (writ of amparo/habeas data)
relationship, even when not intended to produce
Facts: Certain Manobos filed a complaint for illegal offspring, are a form of ‘liberty’ protected by the
detention and kidnapping. Complainants were shown Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.

lists from which they identified the defendants. - This protection extends to intimate choices by
Petitioners are argueng that their inclusion in the lists unmarried as well as married persons.

are threats to their life, liberty and security warranting

protection of the writ of amparo. Respondents should 52. Obergefell v. Hodges

also be compelled via writ of habeas data to provide Facts: Petitioners are seeking to compel their states
petitioners will all information pertaining to them.
to recognize same-sex marriage and are opposing
the current definition of marriage as between a man
Issue: W/N writ of amparo should be issued (NO) and and a woman.

writ of habeas data (NO).

Issue: W/N fining marriage as between a man and

Doctrine:
woman denies due process and equal protection.
- The writ of amparo is sought individually and The Court ruled YES.

granted individually

Page 16 of 49
Doctrine: The right to marry is fundamental, due to the actors in the cyberspace front in a fuzzy way.
the following 4 principles and traditions:
What is more, formal crimes such as libel are not
1. Right to personal choice regarding marriage is punishable unless consummated.

inherent in individual autonomy.

- Child pornography also affects the rights of a
2. Right to marry is fundamental because marriage provider or notably a plain user of interactive
itself is uniquely important
computer service (Ex. Google)

3. The right to marry safeguards children and - In absence of legislation tracing the interaction of
families (many same-sex couples are in stable netizens and their level of responsibility such as in
families, and excluding them from marriage other countries, these sections on Libel,
stigmatizes them and their children)
Unsolicited Commercial Communications and
4. Marriage is a keystone of social order and both Child Pornography cannot stand scrutiny.

society and the State have the responsibility to 5. Prosecution under RPC and RA 10175

protect it.

- To deny marriage to same-sex couples would run 55. Imbong v. Ochoa Jr. (RH Law void for vagueness)

afoul of the equal protection clause; same-sex Facts: Petitioners argue that the RH law fails to
couples are denied all benefits granted to define the terms “health care provider” and “incorrect
opposite-sex couples and are barred from information.” It is also unclear whether “reproductive
exercising a fundamental right.
health information” falls under “rendering
reproductive health service and modern family
53. Remman Enterprises v. Professional Regulatory planning methods.”

Board (real estate developer’s right to dispose

property)
Issue: W/N the RH law is unconstitutional because of
Facts: The Real Estate Service Act of the Philippines being vague. The Court held NO.

aims to professionalize the real estate service sector

under a regulatory scheme of financing, registration Doctrine: A statute or act suffers from the defect
and supervision of real estate practitioners in the of vagueness when it lacks comprehensible
Philippines.
standards that men of common intelligence must
necessarily guess its meaning and differ in
Issue: W/N the act is unconstitutional for violating application.
substantive due process. The Court held NO.
- It is repugnant to the Constitution in 2 respects:

1. It violates due process for failure to accord

Doctrine:
persons, especially the parties targeted by it, fair
- If petitioners are burdened by the law, such is an notice of the conduct to avoid

unavoidable consequence of a reasonable 2. It leaves law enforcers unbridled discretion in

regulatory measure.
carrying out its provisions and becomes an
- The proper regulation of a profession, calling or arbitrary flexing of the Government muscle.

business has always been upheld as a - In determining whether the words use in a statute
legitimate subject of a valid exercise of police are vague, words must not only be taken in
power of the state. accordance with their plain meaning alone, but
also in relation to the other parts of the statute.

54. Disini v. SOJ (Cybercrime Law)

Facts: The Cybercrime Law aims to regulate access 56. Garcia v. Drilon (TPO issued ex-parte)

to and use of cyberspace.

Facts: Rosalie was allegedly abused by Jesus
physically emotionally economically. The TPO was
Void for being unconstitutional:
renewed by the RTC ex-parte.

1. Unsolicited Commercial Communications

2. Real Time Collection of Traffic Data

Issue: W/N Jesus was deprived of due process. The
3. DOJ to restrict/block access to suspected Court held NO.

computer data

4. Aiding/abetting and attempt in the commission of Doctrine: In the nature of the proceeding, a quick
cyber crimes
disposition is essential. An ex-parte motion is very
- The vagueness of Section 5 with respect to called for in a protection order because it is
Sec. 4 raises apprehension on the part of meant to prevent any more violence to be inflicted
internet users because of its obvious chilling on the children and the spouse.
effect on the freedom of expression, especially - The course is obliged to order the immediate
since the crime of aiding or abetting ensnares all issuance and service of the notice upon the

Page 17 of 49
 respondent and require him to file an opposition
within 5 days.
59. Central Bank Employees Association, Inc. v.
- The essence of due process is the opportunity Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (classification based on
to be heard. It does not always have to mean salary — relative constitutionality)

oral arguments, but it can also be through Facts: The New Central Bank Act exempts BSP
pleadings. officers whose salary grade is 20 and above from the
coverage of Salary Standardization Law.

Equal protection of law

Issue: W/N the act violates the equal protection
57. Villegas v. Hiu Chiong Tsai Pao Ho (employment clause. The Court held NO. (The enactment, however,
permit)
of subsequent laws — exempting all other rank-and-
Facts: Ordinance No. 6537 prohibits aliens from file employees of the GFIs from the SSL

being employed without securing a permit from the

mayor and imposes a fixed permit fee of P50 Doctrine: Relative constitutionality - A statute valid at
regardless of the nature of the work.
one time may become void at another time because
of altered circumstances. Thus, if a statute in its
Issue: W/N the requirement of the permit on all aliens practical operation becomes arbitrary or confiscatory,
regardless of the nature of work is violative of the its validity, even though affirmed by a former
equal protection clause. The Court ruled YES
adjudication is open to inquiry and investigation in
the light of changed conditions.

Doctrine:

- Requiring a person to get an employment permit 60. Yrasuegui v. Philippine Airlines (obese flight
from the Mayor who can deny it at his will is attendant)

tantamount to denying the right to engage in Facts: Armando was unable to meet weight
livelihood.
standards despite being given the opportunity to do
- The shelter under the due process and equal so. Thus, he was dismissed from PAL.

protection clause is given to all persons, both

aliens and citizens.
Issue: W/N petitioner’s obesity can be a ground of
- This decisions teaches us that a law can offend dismissal. The Court ruled YES.

against equal protection not only when it classifies

but also when it fails to classify.
Doctrine: The Court said that obesity is a bona fide
occupational qualification and would fall under the
58. Ormoc Sugar Co., Inc. v. Treasurer of Ormoc City Labor Code which gives the causes of termination of
(sugar tax)
an employee by their employer.

Facts: Ordinance No. 4 imposed a municipal tax on - Meiorin Test:

Ormoc Sugar Co., Inc.

1. Employer must show that it adopted the standard
for a purpose rationally connected to the
Issue: W/N the equal protection clause was infringed. performance of the job

The Court ruled YES.

2. The employer must establish that the standard is
reasonably necessary to the accomplishment of
Doctrine: Equal protection clause applies only to that work-related purpose

persons or things identically situated and does not - BFOQ is valid provided it reflects an inherent
bar a reasonable classification of the subject of quality reasonably necessary for satisfactory job
legislation.
performance

- Taxing ordinance should not be singular and

exclusive to exclude subsequently established 61. People v. Siton (vagrancy)

sugar central of the same class.

Facts: Respondents were charged with vagrancy
- Classification is reasonable where it is:
since they were found loitering around the street of
1. Based on substantial distinctions which make real Davao City.

differences

2. Germane to the purpose of the law

Issue: W/N Article 202 is unconstitutional. The Court
3. Applies not only to present conditions but also to ruled NO.

future conditions which are substantially identical

to those of the present
Doctrine:

4. Applies only to those who belong to the same

class

Page 18 of 49
- It was a valid exercise of police power. The resigned from his office only upon the start of the
purpose was to maintain minimum standards of campaigning period.

decency, morality, and civility in human society.

- The anti-vagrancy law is not discriminatory against Issue: W/N the provisions violate the equal protection
the poor and unemployed because they re not clause. The Court held NO.

being punished by their status, but only when they

are engaging in indecent and immoral conduct.
Doctrine:

- Farinas v. ES: The legal dichotomy created by the

62. League of Cities v. COMELEC
legislature is a reasonable classification.

Facts: Prior to the effectivity of RA 9009, 16 bills were

filed together with 33 others, however, were not 64. People v. Jumawan (marital rape)

acted upon by the Senate. The 16 municipalities then Facts: The Anti-Rape Law provides for a single
filed individual bills for the conversion of the definition for all kinds of rape, namely; (1) rape, as
municipalities to cities, which both houses approved.
traditionally known, (2) sexual assault, (3) marital
rape.

Issue: W/N the city hood laws violate the equal

protection clause. The Court ruled NO.
Issue: W/N there is a substantial distinction between
marital and non-marital rape. The Court ruled NO.

Doctrine: The equal protection clause extends to

all persons, natural or artificial, within the Doctrine: Equal protection requires that similar
territorial jurisdiction. Artificial persons, are, objects should not be treated differently, so as to
however, entitled to protection only insofar as give undue factor to some and unjustly
their property is concerned. Since no deprivation discriminate against others.

of property results due to the enactment of the - The single definition for all 3 forms of the crime
subject laws, equal protection clause cannot be shows that the law does not distinguish between
invoked. rape committed in wedlock and those committed
without marriage.

63. Quinto v. COMELEC (appointive official)

Facts: Provisions of a COMELEC resolution provide 65. Villanueva v. JBC (requirement for judges)

that an incumbent appointive official is considered Facts: JBC requires 5 years of service as judges of
ipso facto resigned from his office upon the filing of first-level courts before they can qualify as an
his COC. However, the FEA provides that an applicant to second-level courts.

incumbent elective official is considered ipso facto

Issue: W/N the requirement of JBC is constitutional.
The Court held YES.

Elective Officials Appointive Officials

Doctrine: The equal protection clause does not
Occupy their office by Hold their office by preclude classification of individuals who may be
virtue of the mandate virtue of their accorded different treatment under the law as
of the elecotrate designation thereto long as the classification is reasonable and not
by an appointing arbitrary.
authority - The number of years provides a relevant basis to
determine competence

They are elected to Some hold their office - Classification satisfies rational basis test as
an office for a definite in a germanent
substantial distinctions do exist and it is
term and may be capacity and are
reasonable and relevant to its legitimate purpose.

removed therefrom entitled to security of

only upon stringent tenure while others
64. Ferrer, Jr. v. Bautista

conditions serve at the pleasure

Facts: The Socialized Housing Tax of QC imposes tax
of the appointing
based on square-footage of one’s property and a
authority
garbage fee based on whether or not the payee is an
Expressly allowed to As officers and occupant of a lot, condominium, social house project
take part in political employees of the civil or apartment.

and electoral service, they are

activities strictly prohibited Issue: W/N the two ordinances violate the equal
from engaging in any protection law. (SHT - NO, garbage fee - YES)

partisan political
activity or take part in Page 19 of 49
any election except to
vote
 - When public safety or order requires otherwise as
Doctrine: The disparities between a real property prescribed by law

owner and an informal settler as two distinct class re

too obvious as it conforms to the practical dictates of Upon what grounds may a court allow intrusion?
justice and equity and is not discriminatory within the - It is submitted that the requirement of probably
meaning of the constitution.
cause in the preceding section should be followed.

- As to the garbage fee, the ordinance must be

equitable and based as far as practicable on Requisites when the intrusion is made without
the taxpayer’s ability to pay, and not unjust, judicial order:
excessive oppressive or confiscatory. 1. Based upon a government official’s assessment
that public safety and order demand such
66. 1-UTAK v. COMELEC (PUVs and public terminals)
intrusion

Facts: COMELEC Resolution No. 9615 prohibit the - Public order and safety - the security of human
posting of campaign and propaganda materials on lives, liberty and property against the activities of
PUVs and public terminals.
invaders, insurrectionists and rebels

2. As prescribed by law

Issue: W/N the provisions violate equal protection. - *The exercise of this power by an executive officer
The Court ruled YES.
is subject to judicial review

- If a person other than the president is deemed to

Doctrine: There is no substantial distinction between have this power, he should first be properly
PUVs and terminals and private vehicles as to authorized.

“ownership.” The only difference is that the former

requires a franchise to “operate” and operation is not Implementing statute
what is involved here as the posting of campaign - Anti-Wire Tapping Law

materials is an act of “ownership.”



- Captive audience doctrine - Allows the Effect of violation of Sections 2 and 3(1)
restriction of speech when a listener cannot, as - Any evidence shall be inadmissible

a practical manner, escape from intrusive - Purely personal

- In this case, avoidance is not impossible. Audience

can avert their eyes in a different direction.
Can an act of a private individual, allegedly in
violation of appellant’s constitutional rights, be
Section 3 - (1) The privacy of communication and invoked against the State?
correspondence shall be inviolable except upon - No, in the absence of governmental interference,
lawful order of the court, or when public safety or the constitutional right against unreasonable
order requires otherwise as prescribed by law. search and seizure cannot be invoked against the
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of State. (People v. Marti)

this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible

for any purpose in any proceeding. Section 3 cases

Reason Privacy; Exclusionary Rule

- When the 1935 Constitution was being formulated,
the prevailing doctrine was Olmstead v. US. In this 67. Salcedo-Ortanez v. CA (wiretap)

case, the court said that the law on privacy refers Facts: Among the evidence presented in an
to physical trespass (property rights).
annulment case were 3 cassette tapes of alleged
- In 1967, the Katz v. US doctrine overruled the telephone conversations between petitioner and
Olmstead doctrine and provided protection for unidentified persons.

physical and non-physical trespass (like wire-

tapping)
Issue: W/N the tape recordings are admissible as
evidence. The Court ruled NO.

Forms
- Correspondence and communication: letters, Doctrine: Absent a clear showing that both parties
messages, telephone calls, telegrams and the like
consented to recording of the cassette tapes in
question, the inadmissibility of the subject tapes
When is it allowed? is mandatory under the law.

- Upon lawful order of the court, or

68. Zulueta v. CA (husband and wife privacy)

Page 20 of 49
Facts: Petitioner’s wife seized documents for a legal allegedly owned by Damaso. Damaso was then
separation cause and disqualification from the changed with subversion.

practice of medicine by entering his clinic and

ransacking the drawers and cabinets.
Issue: W/N the evidence presented y the protection
was enough to convict the accused. The Court ruled
Issue: W/N the papers and other materials obtained NO.

by a wife from her husband through forcible intrusion

are admissible as evidence. The Court held NO.
Doctrine: The constitutional immunity from
unreasonable searches and seizures is personal. It
Doctrine:
cannot be waived by anyone except the person
- A person, by contracting marriage, does not whose rights are invaded or one who is expressly
shed his/her integrity or his/her right to privacy authorized to do so in his behalf.

as an individual and the constitutional

protection is ever available to him or to her. 71. Spouses Very v. Layague

- The law insures absolute freedom of Facts: Petitioners’ house in Davao was under the
communication between spouses by making it care of two houseboys. The petitioners consented
privileged. Neither husband nor wife may be only to the extent to verify if the house was being
testified/examined for or against the other without used as a safe house for rebel soldiers. In the search,
consent.
the rooms were locked, so the officer’s employed a
- Exclusionary rule is a legal rule, based on locksmith’s services and found illegal firearms.

constitutional law, which precludes evidence

collected or analyzed in violation of the Issue: W/N evidence was inadmissible. The Court
defendant’s constitutional rights from being held YES.

adduced in a court of law.

- Exceptions: through lawful order and if public Doctrine: The purpose of the right against
safety/order requires it
unreasonable searches and seizures is to prevent
- Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine — If the violations of private security in person and property
search (tree) is invalid (poisonous), the evidence and unlawful invasions of one’s home. However, such
(fruits) is inadmissible in court
right is NOT absolute. There are certain exceptions
when WARRANTLESS searches and seizures are
69. People v. Marti (search by private person)
valid:

Facts: Marti attempted deliver 4 packages to Zurich, 1. Search incidental to an arrest

but it was found by the proprietor as he was 2. Search of a moving vehicle

following the standard operating procedure.

3. Seizure of evidence in plain view

- Under the circumstances, the police officers had

Issue: W/N the evidence had been obtained in ample to procure a search warrant but did not.

violation of his constitutional rights. The Court held - Exclusionary principle: subjects of illegal search
NO.
and seizures are inadmissible as evidence.

- Waiver:

Doctrine: In the absence of governmental 1. Specific

interference, the liberties guaranteed by the 2. By person/person with authority

Constitution cannot be invoked against the State.

- Plain view: In this case, they had to unbolt the door
- The Bill of Rights governs the relationship between to get it.

the individual and the state, not between private

individuals.
Habeas Data
- Exclusionary rule does NOT apply to non-
governmental action because it binds government, 72. Vivares v. St. Theresa’s College

not individuals
Facts: Graduating high schools students had photos
- The exclusionary rule is in the Anti-wiretapping of them in FB drink, smoking and in their
law, that is why it applies to private individuals
undergarments which were discovered by the school.
They were barred from joining the commencement
Waiver of Rights under Sec. 2 and Sec. 3 rights.

70. People v. Damaso (personal waiver)

Issue: W/N writ of habeas data could be issued
Facts: The Phil. Constabulary found firearms and against respondent (YES) and W/N there was an
those who were present in the house said that it was

Page 21 of 49
actual or threatened violation of the right to privacy in 2. Publication of sailing dates of transports
life, liberty or security of the minors (NO)
or the number and location of troops
3. Obscene publications
Doctrine: The writ of habeas data can be availed of 4. Incitements to acts of violence and the
as an independent remedy to enforce one’s right overthrow by force of orderly government
to privacy, more specifically the right to - Adiong v. COMELEC - The prohibited acts were
informational privacy. The writ, however, will not found to present no substantial danger to
issue on the basis merely of an alleged unauthorized government interest. The prohibition therefore did
access to information about a person.
not satisfy the requirements of the clear and
- Existence of a person’s right to informational present danger rule. Moreover, the prohibitions
privacy and a showing, at least by SUBSTANTIAL was found to suffer from overbreadth. It
EVIDENCE, of an actual or threatened violation of encompassed the use of privately owned property
the right to privacy in life, liberty or security of the such as a vehicle. Thus, an unreasonable
victim are indispensable before the writ may be restriction on the use of property.

extended.
- New sounds Broadcasting v. Dy:

- Informational privacy - right to control - Content-neutral: merely concerned with

information about yourself incidents of the speech, or one that merely
controls the time, place or manner, and under
Section 4 - No law shall be passed abridging the well-defined standards

freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, - Content-based: generally treated with more
or the right of the people peaceably to assemble suspect because of judicial concern with
and petition the government for redress of discrimination in the regulation of expression

grievances. - Content neutral regulations of speech or of

conduct that may about to speech, are subject
What do speech, expression and press include? to lesser but still heightened scrutiny.

- All forms of expression, whether oral, written, tape - Ostensibly, the ordinance was a content neutral
or disc recorded
zoning ordinance. However, under the
- Includes movies, and symbolic speech like circumstances of the case, the real purpose of
wearing an armband as a symbol of protest
the ordinance was to silence the station which
- Includes peaceful picketing
had been a strong critic of the local
administration. The ordinance must therefore be
No prior restraint viewed as a content-based regulation.

- The first prohibition is against prior restraint

- Freedman v. Maryland: Procedural safeguards
- Prior restraint - official government restrictions on designed to obviate the dangers of a censorship
the press or other forms of expression in advance system:

of actual publication or dissemination.

1. The burden of proving the film is
- The most blatant form is a system of licensing unprotected expression must rest on the
administered by an executive officer
censor
- Similar to this is judicial prior restraint which 2. The requirement cannot be administered in
takes the form an injunction against publication
a manner which would lend an effect of
- Movie censorship, although not the same level as finality to the censor’s determination
press censorship, also belongs to this type of prior - We do not follow Freedman. The Court has held
restraint.
that, while Freedman has a lot to commend itself,
- License taxes are also objectionable as prior “we are not ready to hold that it is unconstitutional
restraint
for the Congress to grant an administrative body
- Ex. The warning on media against airing the quasi-judicial power to preview and classify TV
alleged wiretapped conversation between the programs and enforce its decision subject to
President and other personalities constitutes review by our courts. (INC v. CA)

unconstitutional prior restraint on exercise of - Freedom of religion has been accorded

freedom of speech and press. (Chavez v. preferred status

COMELEC)

- It is NOT absolute, but bears a heavy presumption Does every form of speech enjoy the same degree
against constitutionality.
of protection?
- Exceptions:
- No. Doctrine of freedom of speech - primarily for
1. When a nation is at war the protection of “core” speech (speech which
communicates political, social or religious ideas) —

Page 22 of 49
 These enjoy the same degree of protection. to arrive at judgement where the grater weight
Commercial speech, however, does not.
shall be placed.

- Constitutional freedoms are not absolute, and

Commercial Speech they may be abridged to some extent to serve
- Communication which no more than proposes a appropriate and important interests

commercial transaction (Ex. Advertisement of - Usefulness of dangerous tendency rule: Not all
goods or services)
evils easily lend themselves, like sedition, to
measurement of proximity and degree.

What must be showed in order for government to - For legislation therefore whose object is not the
curtain speech?
prevention of evil measurable in terms of
- To enjoy speech, commercial speech must not be proximity and degree, another test had to be
false or misleading and should not propose an evolved.

illegal transaction.
*Of these, the 2nd and 3rd are in favor.

- Even truth and lawful commercial speech may be

regulated if:
Which has found preference with the SC?
1. Government has a substantial interest to - In early speech cases involving incitement to
protect sedition, an analysis of the SC decisions yields a
2. The regulation directly advances that language that favors the more restrictive
interest dangerous tendency rule.

3. It is not more extensive than is necessary - Contempt of SC: Dangerous tendency rule

to protect that interest - Contempt of inferior courts: Clear and present

danger rule has also been given at least a nodding
Subsequent punishment assent

- Second basic prohibition of free speech and press - With the restoration of democracy, the clear and
clause: prohibits systems of subsequent present danger test is again coming into favor.

punishment which have the effect of unduly

curtailing expression
Symbolic Speech
- Standards for allowable subsequent punishment of - When speech and non speech elements are
expression:
combined in the same course of conduct, a
1. Dangerous tendency test sufficiently important gov’t interest in regulating the
- All it requires, for speech to be punishable, is non speech element can justify incidental
that there be a rational connection between the limitations on free speech

speech and the evil apprehended

- O’Brien test:
- Ex. People v. Perez: Malcolm found in Perez’s 1. Within constitutional power of the government
words a seditious tendency which could easily 2. Furthers an important or substantial
produce disaffection among the people and a governmental interest unrelated to the
state of feeling incompatible with a disposition suppression of free expression
to remain loyal to the Government and obedient 3. If the incidental restriction on alleged freedom
to the laws.
is no greater than is essential to that interest
2. Clear and present danger test Ebraling MR: O’Brien only applies if the State’s
- Whether the words are used in such regulation is not related to communicative conduct.

circumstances and are of such a nature as to

create a clear and present danger that they will Unprotected speech
bring about the substantive evils that Congress - Libel and obscenity

has a right to prevent

- No essential part of any exposition of ideas

- It is a question of proximity and degree.

- Such slight social value as a step to truth that
- Whether the gravity of the “evil” discounted by any benefit that may be derived from them is
its improbability, justified such invasion of free clearly outweighs by the social interest in order
speech as is necessary to avoid the danger
and morality

3. Balancing of interests tests

- It is the Court’s function in the case before it Libel
when it finds public interests served by - Public and malicious imputation of a crime, vice,
legislation on the one hand and the First defecy, real or imaginary, or

Amendment freedoms affected by it on the - Any act, omission, condition, status or

other, to balance the one against the other and circumstance tending to dishonor, discredit, or

Page 23 of 49
- Contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to - To enjoy immunity, a publication containing
black the memory of one who is dead
derogatory information must not only (1) be true,
- Elements of libel: but also, (2) fair, and it must be made in (3) good
1. Allegation of a discreditable act or faith and (4) without comments or remarks.

condition concerning another;

2. Publication of the charge Libel of public officials and public figures
3. Identity of the person defamed - Requires a federal rule that prohibits a public
4. Existence of malice official from recovering damages for a defamatory
- There is malice when the author is prompted by ill- falsehood relating to his official conduct unless he
will or speaks not in response to duty, but to injure proves that the statement was made with ACTUAL
the person’s reputation
MALICE

- Publication - making the defamatory matter, after it - Actual malice - with knowledge that it was false
has been written, known to someone other than or with reckless disregard of whether it was
the person to whom it has been written
false or not.

- We follow this rule (even when it comes to

Article 354 of RPC - Every defamatory imputation barangay officials, Japan Airlines and PCGG
is presumed to be malicious, except in the commissioner)

following cases: - Public figures are not unprotected.

1. A private communication made by any person - If the utterances are false, malicious or
to another in the performance of any legal, unrelated to performance of his duties or
moral or special duty; irrelevant to matters of public interest involving
- Requisites:
public figures —> may give rise to criminal and
a. Legal, moral, or social duty or at least civil liability

an interest
b. Communication is addressed to an Obscenity and indecency
officer or a board, superior, having - Test for obscenity (Miller v. California)
some interest or duty in the matter, a. Whether the average person, applying
and who has the power to furnish the contemporary community standards would
protection sought find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals
c. Statements in the communication are to prurient interest
made in good faith and without malice b. Whether the work depicts or describes, in a
2. A fair and true report (publication), made in patently offensive way, sexual conduct
good faith, without any comments or remarks, specifically defined by the applicable state law
of any juridical, legislative, or other official c. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks a
proceedings which are not of confidential serious literary, artistic, political or scientific
nature, or of any statement, report or speech value
delivered in said proceedings, or of any other - The Court notes that stricter rules could be
act performed by public officers in the followed for television and radio because of its
exercise of their functions. pervasive quality and interest in protection of
- Not an exclusive list of qualified children.

communications since fair commentaries on - Bethel v. Fraser & Hazelwood v. Kulmeier: Stricter
matters of public interest are privileged and rules for schools also because of the nature of the
constitute a valid defense in an action for libel community that is involved in the relationship
or slander
between school and parents

- Parties, counsel and witnesses are exempted from - Doctrine of relative obscenity: Obscenity is an
liability in libel or slander for words otherwise issue proper for judicial determination and should
defamatory published in the course of judicial be treated on a case to case basis.

proceedings, provided that the statements are - The language in question may not appeal to the
relevant to the case.
prurient interests of an adult, but the problem is
- Policarpio v. Manila Times: Newspapers may that they were uttered in a TV program rated
publish news items relative to judicial, legislative or “G” which would likely reach even the eyes and
other official proceedings, which are not of a ears of children (Soriano v. Laguardia)

confidential nature, because the public is entitled

to know the truth with respect to such Assembly and petition
proceedings, which, being official and non-
confidential are open to public consumption.

Page 24 of 49
- Freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and Doctrine: To require a prior submission of a film to
petition for redress of grievances (human rights) censor avoids constitutional invalidity only with
has a primacy over property rights.
procedural safeguard designed to eliminate the
- JBL Reyes v. Mayor Bagatsing: To justify dangers of censorship, such as:
limitations on freedom of assembly, there must be 1. The burden of proving the film is unprotected
proof of sufficient weight to satisfy the CLEAR expression must rest on the censor
AND PRESENT DANGER TEST
2. The requirement cannot be administered in a
- Rules on assembly and petition: manner which would lend an effect of finality
1. Inform licensing authority of date, place to the censor’s determination whether a film
and time constitutes protected expression.
2. Filed well ahead in time - Because only a judicial determination in an
3. Refusal or modification should use the adversary proceeding ensures the necessary
CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TEST sensitivity to freedom of expression, only a
4. Presumption is towards the scales of procedure requiring a judicial determination
justice and liberty suffices to impose a valid final restraint.

- Disciplinary action may be taken against students 3. The procedure must also assure a prompt final
for conduct which “materially disrupts class decision
work or involves substantial disorder or *Freedman doctrine was not fully accepted by the
invasion of the rights of others.” Philippine court in INC v. CA: “We are not ready to
hold that it is unconstitutional for Congress to grant
Section 4 cases an administrative body quasi-judicial power to
preview and classify TV programs and enforce its
73. Near v. Minnesota (malicious articles against decision subject to review by our courts.”

officials)

Facts: The Saturday Press published 9 articles 75. New York Times Co. v. US (top secret
against public officers not performing their duties in information)

connection with a Jewish gang and so, they were Facts: US seeks to enjoin the New York Times and
charged under Chapter 285 of Minnesota Session Washington Post from publishing the Pentagon
Laws.
papers

Issue: W/N the statute infringes on the liberty of Issue: W/N US can employ prior restraint on speech.
press. The Court held YES.
The Court ruled NO.

Doctrine: The chief purpose of the constitutional Doctrine: Any system of prior restraints carries a
guarantee is precisely to prevent precious restraint heavy presumption against constitutional validity

on publication. Public officers find their remedies for - Government carries a heavy burden of proving the
false accusations under libel laws, NOT in justification for restraints imposed

proceedings to restrain the publication of

newspapers and periodicals.
76. INC v. CA (X classification)

- Protection to previous restraint is NOT Facts: The INC has a television program which
absolutely unlimited, exceptions: propagates their beliefs, and oftentimes in
1. When nation is at war comparison with other religions. It was classified as
2. Publication of number and location of US “x” or not for public viewing by the Board of Review
troops (military information) for Moving Pictures and Television for being offensive
3. Publication cites acts of violence against other religions.

4. Obscene publication
Issue: W/N BRMPT gravely abused its discretion. The
74. Freedman v. Maryland (judicial determination)
Course ruled YES.

Facts: Petitioner violated a statute by exhibiting a film

titled “Revenge at Daybreak” without first submitting Doctrine: Respondents failed to apply the CLEAR
the picture to the board.
AND PRESENT DANGER rule. Prior restraint
speech, including religious speech, cannot be
Issue: W/N the Maryland Motion Picture Censorship justified by hypothetical fears, but only by a the
is valid. The Court held NO.
showing of a substantive and imminent evil which
has taken the life of reality already on ground.

Page 25 of 49
Difference of Freedman and INC: In the US, the from 1996-2002. In 2002, they were required to
movie board can make a final determination. But in submit a certification that their property is classified
the Philippines, the determination of the movie board as commercial and not agricultural land. Unable to
cannot be final and must be brought before the get the permits, Mayor Dy ordered the closure of the
courts.
station.

77. Chavez v. COMELEC (Hello Garci)

Issue: W/N the City infringed the freedom of speech
Facts: News of an audiotape between GMA and of Newsounds. The Court ruled YES.

Garcilliano about fixing the votes during the 2004

elections surfaced. NTC had a press release warning Doctrine:

radio/TV companies not to air false information.

- A prior restraint on speech carries a
presumption of invalidity, requiring the strict
Issue: W/N free speech and freedom of the press has scrutiny test.
been infringed (YES) and W/N mere press statements - The burden is on the government to provide a
by respondents constituted a form of content-based compelling interest to justify the infringement.

prior restraint (YES)

- Permit requirements are content neutral, but
the undeniable political color led to the
Doctrine:
conclusion that it was a content-based
- 3 tests for evaluating restraints on freedom of regulation.
speech and expression:
1. Dangerous tendency doctrine — rational Subsequent punishment
connection between speech restrained
and danger contemplated 79. People v. Perez (dangerous tendency rule)

2. Balancing of interests tests - conflicting Facts: During the American occupation, Perez
social values and individual interests uttered seditious remarks against then Governor
3. Clear and present danger rule - speech is General Wood.

restrained because such would lead to an

evil that the government has a right to Issue: W/N Perez’ remark against the Gov-Gen is
prevent (Phils generally uses this) seditious and not within the bounds of free
- Aspects of freedom of the press: expression. The Court held YES.

1. Freedom from prior restraint (freedom from

gov’t censorship of publications Doctrine: Dangerous Tendency Rule - Speech may
- Any law or official that requires some form of be curtailed or punished when it creates
permission to be had before publication can dangerous tendency to produce a certain evil
be made, commits an infringement of the which the State has the right to prevent. Fear
right must be for evil that is serious, imminent and
- Content-neutral regulation (time, place or which has a high probability of serious injury to
manner) - intermediate approach the State. All that is required is that there be a
a. Furthers an important or substantial rational connection between the speech and the
governmental interest evil sought to be avoided.

b. Governmental interest is unrelated to

suppression of speech 80. Dennis v. US (overthrow of government)

c. Incidental restriction is no greater than Facts: Dennis, et. al. violated the Smith Act by their
essential to the furtherance of such conspiracy to organized the Communist Party and to
interest advocate the overthrow of the Government.

- Content-based restraint/censorship (subject

of speech) - strictest scrutiny; clear and Issue: W/N the Smith Act violates the Bill of Rights.
present danger rule The Court held NO.

2. Freedom from punishment subsequent to

publication Doctrine: Clear and Present Danger Rule - The
3. Freedom of access to information question is whether the words used are used in
4. Freedom of circulation such circumstances and are of such nature as to
create a clear and present danger that they will
78. Newsounds Broadcasting Network v. Dy
bring about the substantive evils that Congress
Facts: The permits for the radio stations of the has a right to prevent. Requires a greater level of
petitioners have been renewed and issued annually

Page 26 of 49
proximity and degree between the speech and the Issue: W/N COMELEC may prohibit the posting of
evil sought to be avoided. decals/stickers on mobile places, public or private.
- An attempt to overthrow of the Gov’t by force and The Court ruled NO.

violence, even though doomed from the

inadequate number of revolutionists, is a Doctrine:

substantial enough interest for the gov’t to limit - Balancing of interest test - individual freedom
speech.
on the one and and substantial public interest
on the other
81. Gonzales v. COMELEC (early nomination of - Clear and present danger rule - Not only must
candidates)
the danger be patently clear and pressingly
Facts: Sections of the Revised Election Code present, but the evil sought to be avoided must
prohibits early nomination of candidates and limits be so substantive as to justify a clamp over
period for electoral campaign.
one’s mouth or a writing instrument to be stilled

Issue: W/N the assailed sections are unconstitutional. 84. SWS v. COMELEC (election survey before
The Court held NO.
election)

Facts: Petitioners wish to publish survey results

Doctrine: Balancing of Interest - It is the Court’s beyond the period provided by the Fair Election Act.

function to balance public interest and the

Constitutional freedoms affected by it, and to Issue: W/N Section 5.4 is unconstitutional for
arrive at a judgement where the greater weight abridging the freedom of speech, expression, and of
shall be placed.
the press. The Court ruled YES.

82. Ayer Productions Pty. Ltd v. Capulong (public Doctrine: The O’Brien Test provides that a gov’t
figure)
regulation of time, place and manner is
Facts: The movie company did not get the consent of sufficiently justified if:
Juan Ponce Enrile to the showing of the film, invoking 1. It is within the constitutional power of the
his right to privacy. A TRO was issued.
gov’t
2. It furthers an important or substantial gov’t
Issue: W/N the TRO should yield to the right to interest
privacy. The Court ruled YES.
3. The governmental interest is unrelated to the
suppression of free expression
Doctrine:
4. The incident restriction to free speech and
- Public figure - a person who, by his expression is no greater than is essential to
accomplishments, face, or mode of living, or the furtherance of that interest
adopting a profession or calling which gives the
public a legitimate interest in his doings, his affairs 85. The Diocese of Bacolod v. COMELEC (tarpaulins)

and his character has become a public personage Facts: Two tarpaulins classifying candidates
or a celebrity
according to their vote on their passage of the RH
- A limited intrusion upon the privacy of a public law was posted outside of the Cathedral.

person is permissible if the info sought to be

elicited from him is a matter of public concern. Issue: W/N the assailed orders violated the freedom
- The freedom of speech and expression necessarily of speech. The Court held YES.

includes the freedom to film and produce motion

pictures as they are considered a medium for mass Doctrine:

communication and a vehicle for communication, - The form of expression is just as important as
expression and entertainment.
the information conveyed that it forms part of
the expression.
Speech and the Electoral Process - While it may influence the success or failure of the
named candidates and political parties, this does
83. Adiong v. COMELEC (election propaganda)
not necessarily mean it is election propaganda.
Facts: COMELEC Resolution No. 2347 prohibits the The tarpaulin was not paid for by any political
posting of stickers and decals in mobile places such group. Personal opinions are not covered by the
as cars or other moving vehicles.
term “political advertisement” or “election
propaganda”

Page 27 of 49
- The need to protect the basic right to freedom of deliberation about some issue fostering informed
expression:
and civic-minded deliberation

1. It includes the right of the people to - Equality-based approach - weigh liberty to express
participate in public affairs, including the right v. Equality of opportunities

to criticize gov’t actions

- Regulation of speech in the context of electoral
2. Encouraged under the market place of ideas
campaigns made by persons who are NOT
3. Involves self-expression that enhances candidates or who do not speak as members of a
human dignity
pool party would be unconstitutional

4. Expression is a marker of group identity

- The only way such regulation can become
5. The Bill of Rights is supposed to protect constitutional is if what is regulated is
individuals and minorities against majoritarian DECLARATIVE SPEECH which has for its principal
abuses perpetuated through the framework object the endorsement of a candidate only.

of democratic governance.
- The regulation should be:

6. Free speech must be protected under the 1. Provided by law

safety valve theory

2. Reasonable

- Content-based regulation bears a heavy 3. Narrowly tailored to meet the objective of

presumption of invalidity.
enhancing the opportunity of all candidates to be
heard and considering the primary of the
86. 1-UTAK v. COMELEC (PUVs and public terminals)
guarantee of free expression

Facts: COMELEC Resolution No. 9615 prohibit the 4. Demonstrably the least restrictive means to
posting of campaign and propaganda materials on achieve that object

PUVs and public terminals.

- Regulation should be with respect to only time,
place, and manner of the rendition of the message
Issue: W/N the provisions violates free speech. The and must NOT prohibit speech or censor it on the
Court ruled YES.
basis of content.

- The election surveys have the tendency to shape

Doctrine:
voter preferences. Hence, they partake of the
- Valid content-neutral regulation: nature of election propaganda which makes it
1. Gov’t regulation is within constitutional power declarative speech in the context of an electoral
of gov’t campaign and subject to regulation.

- Posting of campaign materials does not affect

“operation” thus it is not an act of ownership, and 88. Davao City Water District v. Aranjuez

beyond the power of the COMELEC

Facts: During a fun run and office hours, the
2. Furthers an important/substantial gov’t employees wore t-shirs with inscriptions of their
interest protest. They also attached inscriptions on places no
3. Gov’t interest is unrelated to suppression of officially designated as an area for grievances.

free expression
4. Incidental restrictions on freedom of Issue: W/N the actions of the employees were a
expression is no greater than that is essential violation of rules. The Court held NO.

to the furtherance of the interest

Doctrine: The CSC Resolution only prohibits
87. SWS v. COMELEC (declarative speech)
concerted mass action or collective activity that
Facts: COMELEC Res. No. 9674 directed SWS and effects work stoppage or service disruption.

other survey forms to submit to the COMELEC the

names of all commissioners, payors and subscribers Commercial Speech
of all surveys that they’ve published from Feb. 12 -
Apr. 23, 2013.
89. Rubin v. Coors Brewing (liquor labels)

Facts: Coors is assailing a statutory provision that

Issue: W/N the rights of petitioners to free speech will bans disclosure of alcoholic content on beer labels to
be curtailed by the requirement to submit the names prevent “strength wars.”

of their subscribers. The Court ruled NO.

Issue: W/N the ban is an unconstitutional

Doctrine:
infringement on free speech. The Court held YES.

- Right to political speech - speech both intended

and received as a contribution to public Doctrine:

Page 28 of 49
- Commercial speech - speech that does no more - Elements of libel:
than propose a commercial transaction
1. Allegation of a discreditable act or
- Commercial Speech Doctrine - Commercial condition concerning another
speech enjoys protection under the 1st 2. Publication of the charge - making the
Amendment, however, the government is defamatory matter, after it has been
permitted to prohibit misleading speech that would written, known to someone other than the
be protected in other contexts and require person to whom it has been written
affirmative disclosures that the speaker might not 3. Identity of the person defamed
make voluntarily.
4. Existence of malice - when the author of
- Edenfield standard - gov’t carries the burden of the imputation is prompted by ill-will or
showing that the challenged regulation advances spite and speaks not in response to duty
the government’s interest in a direct and material but merely to injure reputation
way. Standard is not satisfied by mere speculation - Privileged communications - communication made
or conjecture; must demonstrate that the harm it by any person to another in the performance of a
recites are real and its restrictions will in fact legal, social, or moral duty. Fair and true report,
alleviate them to a material degree.
made in good faith, without comments, remarks of
- (Central Hudson Test) Elements to determine any juridical, legislative or other official proceeding
whether regulation of commercial speech is which are not confidential or of any statement,
allowed: report or speech delivered in said proceedings. Or
1. Concerns lawful activity and is not any other act performed by public officers in the
misleading exercise of their functions. Based on official
2. Government interest in regulating reports and public documents

commercial speech is substantial - Requisites of Privileged Communications:

3. Regulation directly advances government 1. The person who made the communication
interest has a legal, moral, or social duty to make
4. Regulation is not overbroad the communication, or had an interest to
protect
Unprotected Speech 2. The communication is addressed to an
officer or a board or superior having an
Libel interest in the matter, who has the power
to furnish the protections sought
90. Policarpio v. Manila Times (protected if true and 3. Statements are made in food faith and
done in good faith)
communicated without malice.
Facts: Policarpio is looking to recover damages from - Malice is presumed except in privileged
The Manila Times for their publishing of 2 defamatory communications.

and libelous articles alleging that she is guilty of - For private persons, the presumption of malice is
malversation of public funds and estafa.
conclusive; for public officers and employees, the
burden of proving malice lies on the plaintiff.

Issue: W/N The Manila Times is guilty of publishing - Newspapers can publish news items relative to
defamatory articles. The Court held YES.
government proceedings which are not of a
confidential nature because the public is entitled to
Doctrine:
know the truth behind such proceedings.

- Unprotected speech - speech that may be - But, to enjoy immunity, a publication containing
prevented and punished without suffering derogatory information must not only be TRUE,
constitutional infirmity because such utterances but also FAIR, and it must be made in GOOD
are not essential parts of any exposition of ideas, FAITH and without any comments or remarks.

and are of such slight social value as a step to

truth that any benefit that may be derived from 91. Lopez v. CA (wrong picture of person)

them is clearly outweighed by the social interests Facts: This Week Magazine published the photo of
in order and morality
the wrong Fidel Cruz as being responsible for the
- Libel - a public and malicious imputation of a hoax of the year.

crime, vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any

action or omission, condition, status or Issue: W/N damages should be awarded to
circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, respondent, Fidel G. Cruz. The Court held YES.

discredit or contempt of a person or to blacken the

memory of one who is dead.
Doctrine:

Page 29 of 49
- Libel by negligence - if the publisher is unaware, Issue: W/N Miller is protected under the 1st
when under the circumstances, the truth could Amendment’s freedom of speech guarantee. The
have been verified.
Court ruled NO.

- For liability to arise the without offending press

freedom, there is this test to meet: The Doctrine:

constitutional guarantees a federal rule that - Obscenity is not within the area of constitutionally
prohibits a public official from recovering protected speech or press.

damages for a defamatory falsehood relating to - Tests for obscenity:

his official conduct unless he proves that the 1. Roth - Rejection of obscenity as utterly
statement was made with ‘actual malice’ — without redeeming social importance. Such
that is, with knowledge that it was false or with utterances are no essential part of any
reckless disregard of whether it was false or exposition of ideas, and are of such slight
not. social value as a step to truth that any benefit
that may be derived from them is clearly
92. Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (ad parody)
outweighs by the social interest in order and
Facts: Hustler magazine published a parody morality (presumption of utter worthlessness)

advertisement for a liquor which was entitled “Jerry 2. Memoirs v. Massachusetts - New test for
Falwell talks about his first time” that portrayed him obscenity:

with his mother as drunk and immoral. However, it a. The dominant theme of the material,
contained a disclaimer that it was only an ad parody.
taken as a whole, appeals to a prurient
interest in sex

Issue: W/N under the 1st amendment, a public figure b. The material is patently offensive
may rocover damages for emotional harm caused by because it affronts contemporary
the publication of an ad parody offensive to him. The community standards relating to the
Court ruled NO.
description or representation of sexual
matters

Doctrine:
c. The material is utterly without redeeming
- To ensure the free flow of ideas and opinions on social value (worthlessness must be
matter of public interest, public figures and officials proved — unworkable).

may not recover for the tort of intentional infliction 3. Miller test
of emotional distress by reason of publications a. Whether the average person, applying
without showing that such contain a false contemporary community standards
statement of fact which was made with “actual would fine that the work, taken as a
malice,” i.e. with knowledge that the statement whole, appeals to PRURIENT
was false or with reckless disregard as to whether INTEREST
or not it was true.
b. Whether the work depicts or
- However, it must be noted that not all speech describes, in a patently offensive way,
about a public figure is immune from sanction in sexual conduct SPECIFICALLY
the form of damages. It has been continuously DEFINED by the applicable state law
held that public figures can recover for libel or c. Whether the work, taken as a whole,
defamation only when they can prove both that the LACKS serious literary, artistic,
statement was false and that it was made with the political or scientific value (SLAPS)
requisite level of culpability.

- New York Times v. Sullivan - Public officials have a 94. Gonzales v. Kalaw-Katigbak (obscene movie)

wider range of influence. Private officials do not Facts: The respondent board classified their movie,
have the opportunity to rebut, unlike public figures Kapit sa Patalim, as “for adults only” and deleted
with platforms.
some parts of the film.

Obscenity Issue: W/N the resolution was made with GAD. The
Court ruled NO.

93. Miller v. California (mailing of adult materials)

Facts: Miller conducted a mass mailing campaign to Doctrine:

advertise the sale of illustrated books of adult - Where the movies, theatrical productions, radio
material.
scripts, television programs, and other such media
of expression are concerned censorship,
especially so if an entire production is banned,

Page 30 of 49
 censorship or previous restraint on these materials Lounge, etc. are required to wear panties and a g-
is only permissible when there is a clear and string during their erotic performances

present danger of an evil of a substantive

character that the State has a right to prevent. Issue: W/N Indiana’s public indecency statute
There must be a causal connection between this violates the freedom of expression guarantee. The
danger and the expression being complained of, Court ruled NO.

and a reasonable apprehension about its

imminence.
Doctrine: When speech and non speech elements are
- Where television is concerned, a less liberal combined in the same course of conduct, a
approach calls for observance. This is so sufficiently important governmental interest in
because unlike motion pictures where the regulating the non speech element can justify
patrons have to pay their way, television incidental limitations on 1st Amendment freedoms.

reaches every home where there is a set. - Application of O’Brien test

Children then will likely be among the avid

viewers of the programs therein shown. 97. Renton v. Playtime Theater (zoning legislation)

- The Hicklin Test was used in not allowing Facts: Ordinance No. 3526 prohibited any adult
obscenity in Roth v. US. The test judges a material motion picture theater from locating within 1,000 feet
by the effect of an isolated excerpt upon of any residential zone, single or multiple family
particularly susceptible persons.
dwelling, church or park, and school.

- Prevailing test: Whether the average person,

applying contemporary community standards, Issue: W/N the Renton Ordinance violated the 1st
the dominant theme of the material taken as a and 14th amendment? The Court held NO.

whole appeals to prurient interest

- Sex and obscenity are not synonymous. The Doctrine: The ordinance is a content-neutral
portrayal of sex in art, etc. is not sufficient reason regulation, which is valid if designed to (1) serve a
to deny material the constitutional protection of substantial governmental interest and (2) does not
freedom of speech and press.
unreasonably limit avenues of communication.

Difference of censorship in the US and Phils.: In the 98. Bethel School District v. Fraser (speech in
US, the movie boards can make a final decision assembly)

regarding censorship. In the Philippines, the courts Facts: Fraser, an HS student, delivered a speech in
can intervene to see if the administrative agency an assembly where he used sexual innuendos. He
committed GAD.
faced disciplinary action, suspension and was
removed from the list of graduation speakers.

95. Pita v. CA (seizure of obscene materials)

Facts: Pursuant to the Anti-Smut campaign, Issue: W/N there is a violation of his Freedom of
magazines and other publications believed to be Speech? The Court ruled NO.

obscene, pornographic and indecent were seized

and confiscated from dealers, distributers, news- Doctrine: The use of Tinker jurisprudence (wearing of
stand owners and peddlers along Manila sidewalks.
an armband as a form of protest was upheld as a
student’s right to engage in a passive expression of
Issue: W/N the seizure violates the freedom of political view point) does not concern speech/action
expression of the petitioner. The Court held YES.
intruding works of school and rights of other students

- The 1st Amendment does not prevent the

Doctrine: Before confiscation or seizure of school district from disciplining students in
materials, authorities must first secure a search giving offensively lewd and indecent speech.
warrant and carry the burden of convincing the - The freedom to advocate unpopular and
court or judge with jurisdiction that said materials controversial views in schools/classrooms must be
to be seized are obscene, and pose a clear and balanced in society’s countervailing interest in
present danger of an evil substantive enough to teaching students the boundaries of socially
warrant State interference and action.
appropriate behavior.

- It does not follow that the same latitude of freedom

96. Barnes v. Glen Theater (erotic performances)
given to adults be the same as that permitted to
Facts: The public indecency statute prohibits public children.

nudity in public places. Thus, dancers of the Kitty Kat

99. Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (

Page 31 of 49
Facts: Students wrote for their school paper - Use O’Brien for combination of speech and non-
regarding student pregnances, and impact of divorce speech elements

on students. The principal, believing they were

inappropriate, scrapped the 2 pages they were Assembly and petition
printed on.

100. Bayan v. Ermita (no permit, no rally and CPR)

Issue: W/N respondents’ rights were violated. The (same as #39)

Court ruled NO.

Facts: The rallies of the petitioners were forcibly
dispersed pursuant to the “no permit, no rally” policy
Doctrine:
of BP No. 880 and its CPR. They say it is a violation
- When it is student speech, determine whether it is of their right to peaceful assembly.

made inside our outside school.

- Stricter rules are allowed for speech in school Issue: W/N BP 880 violates the petitioner’s rights to
because of the nature of the community that is free speech, expression, and assembly. The Court
involved and the protection of relationship held NO.

between the school and the parents

- The school has the duty to regulate:
Doctrine:

1. Illegal drug use

- BP 880 is not an absolute ban of public
2. Expression that materially and substantially assemblies but a restriction that simply
disrupts school work
regulates the time, place and manner of the
3. School-sanctioned speech
assemblies. These are content-neutral
4. Sexual innuendos
- Application of permit to rally can only be denied on
- Tinker test: If what a student says disrupts class or the ground of clear and present danger to public
work, then disciplinary action may be taken
morals, order, safety and health.

- School officials may impose reasonable - A policy in lieu of maximum tolerance is void to
restrictions on the speech of students, teachers ensure that the authorities will not use it as
and other members of the school community if no justification for abuse. Maximum tolerance is for
public forum had been created or involved.
the protection of all rallyists and is independent of
- School facilities may be deemed to be public the content of expressions in the rally.

forums only if school authorities have, by policy or

by practice, opened the facilities for indiscriminate Section 5 - No law shall be made respecting an
use by the general public, or by some segment of establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
the public, such as student organizations.
exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment
of religious profession and worship without
CLASS DISCUSSION discrimination or preference, shall forever be
3 tests for free speech: allowed. No religious test shall be required for the
1. Dangerous tendency
exercise of civil or political rights.
- Sedition tests

- Talking bad about the the Supreme Court

2 principal parts:
2. Clear and present danger
1. Non-establishment clause - prohibits the
- General rule that we use, except when the evils establishment of any religion

are not that near, then use balancing interests

2. Free exercise clause - guarantees the free
3. Balancing interests
exercise of religion

Content based - use the rules for the tests

Other provisions expressing the non-
Content-neutral: establishment principle:
- Test:
1. Article VI, Section 29 (2) - “No public money or
1. Gov’t regulation is within constitutional property shall be appropriated, applied, paid or
power of gov’t employed, directly or indirectly, for the use,
2. Furthers an important/substantial gov’t benefit or support of any sect, church,
interest denomination, sectarian institution, or system of
3. Gov’t interest is unrelated to suppression religion, or of any priest, preacher, minister, or
of free expression other religious teacher or dignitary as such,
4. Incidental restrictions on freedom of except when such priest, preacher, minister, or
expression is no greater than that is dignitary is assigned to the Armed Forces or to
essential to the furtherance of the interest

Page 32 of 49
 any penal institution, or government orphanage or directly, and exclusively used for religious,
leprosarium.”
charitable, or educational purpose shall be
2. Article II, Section 6 - “The separation of Church exempt from taxation.”

and State shall be inviolable.”

2. Article VI, Section 1(2) - “No public money or
3. Article IX-C, Section 2(5) - prohibits religious property shall ever be appropriated, applied,
denominations and sects from being registered paid, or employed, directly or indirectly, for the
as political parties or organizations
use benefit, or support of any sect, church,
denomination, sectarian institution, or system of
Purpose of non-establishment clause:
religion, or of any priest, preacher, minister, or
- Seeks to protect:
other religious teacher or dignitary as such,
a. Voluntarism - value that is both personal and except when such priest, preacher, minister, or
social.
dignitary is assigned to the Armed Forces, or to
i. As a personal value, it is nothing more than any penal institution, or government orphanage or
the inviolability of the human conscience leprosarium.”

which is also protected by the free exercise 3. Article XIV, Section 3(3) - “At the option
clause.
expressed in writing by the parents or guardians,
ii. As a social value, it means that the growth of religion shall be allowed to be taught to their
a religious sect as a social force must come children or wards in public elementary and high
from the voluntary support of its members schools within regular class hours by instructors
because of the belief that both spiritual and designated or approved by the religious
secular society will benefit if religions are authorities of the religion to which the children or
allowed to compete on their own intrinsic wards belong, without additional cost to the
merit without benefit of official patronage
Government.”

b. Insulation of the political process from interfaith 4. Religious schools can be owned by foreigners

dissension

Free Exercise
Meaning of non-establishment clause
- Neither a State nor Federal Gov’t can set up a Meaning
church.
- One one hand, it forestalls compulsion by law of
- Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid the acceptance of any creed or practice of any
all religions, or prefer one religion over another
form of worship.

- State cannot, openly or secretly, participate in the - Freedom of conscience and freedom to adhere to
affairs of any religious organizations or groups and such religious organization or form of worship as
vice versa.
the individual may choose cannot be restricted by
- Jefferson: A wall of separation between Church law.

and State
- On the other hand, it safeguards the free exercise
of the chosen form of religion

How does one distinguish allowable from non- - Embraces two concepts — freedom to believe and
allowable aid? freedom to act

- To be allowed, government aid must:

- The first one is absolute, but in the nature of
1. Have a secular legislative purpose
things, the second cannot be.

2. Have a primary effect that neither advances nor

inhibits religion
Double meaning
3. Not require excessive entanglement with recipient - Freedom to believe - While the gov’t may look into
institutions
the good faith of a person, it cannot inquire into a
person’s religious pretensions.

*Religion in the Philippines is confined to a theist - The moment that belief flows over into action, it
definition, which essentially violates the principles becomes subject to government regulation.

behind it (Ex. Tax exemption)

- While legislation for the establishment of religion is
forbidden, and its free exercise is permitted, it
Constitutionally created exceptions to the non- does not follow that everything which may be so
establishment clause: called can be tolerated.

1. Article VI, Section 28 - “Charitable institutions,

churches, parsonages or convents apparent Free exercise case v. Non-establishment case
thereto, mosques, and non-profit cemeteries, and - Guide: Every violation of the free exercise clause
all lands, buildings, and improvements actually, involves compulsion, whereas a violation of the

Page 33 of 49
 non-establishment clause need not involve church and state, freedom of worship and banning
compulsion
the use of public money or property.

- The resolutions do not directly or indirectly

Purpose of prohibition of religious tests establish any religion, nor appropriate public
- Render the gov’t powerless to restore the money or property for the benefit of any sect,
historically and constitutionally discredited policy priest or clergyman.

of probing religious beliefs by test oaths or limiting

public offices to persons who have, or perhaps 103. Board of Education v. Allen (providing textbooks
more properly, profess to have a belief in some to schools)

particular kind of religious concept

Facts: The NY Education Law requires local public
- To allow religious tests would have the effect of school boards to lend textbooks free of charge to all
formal or practical establishment of particular students in Grades 7-12, including those in private
religious faiths
schools.

Section 5 cases Issue: W/N the statutory requirement is

unconstitutional. The Court held NO.

Non-establishment of religion
Doctrine:

101. Aglipay v. Ruiz (postage stamps incidental - States have a legitimate interest in the manner by
benefit to religion
which parochial schools perform their secular
Facts: Stamps were issued to commemorate the educational functions while leaving untouched its
celebration in the City of Manila of the 33rd sectarian mission

International Eucharistic Congress.

- (SCHEMPP RULE) Test whether the degree of
involvement of the State with religion is
Issue: W/N the incidental benefit of the Roman permissible:

Catholic Church of issuing the stamps is violative of 1. There must be a secular legislative purpose

the Constitution. The Court ruled NO.

2. A primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits
religion

Doctrine:

- What is guaranteed by our Constitution is religious 104. Lemon v. Kurtzman (salary subsidy to teachers)

liberty, not mere religious toleration.

Facts: A Pennsylvania statute allowed the state to
- Religious freedom, however, as a constitutional reimburse teachers’ salaries, textbooks and
mandate is not inhibition of profound reverence for instructional materials. A Rhode Island statute
religion and is not denial of its influence in human supplemented 15% of teachers’ annual salaries.
affairs
Most of the beneficiaries for both acts were Catholic
- The Government should not be embarrassed in schools/teachers.

its activities simply because of incidental

results, more or less religious in character, if Issue: W/N the state aid to these schools violate the
the purpose had in view is one which could Freedom of Religion Clause. The Court held YES,
legitimately be undertaken by appropriate both statutes foster an impermissible degree of
legislation. The main purpose should not be entanglement.

frustrated by its subordinate to mere incidental

results not contemplated. Doctrine:

- BOE v. Allen: The content of books can easily be

102. Garces v. Estenzo (image of patron saint)
ascertained, while a teacher’s treatment of a
Facts: The image of the patron saint of Valencia for subject cannot and that the danger to separation
the fiesta was acquired using private funds from of Church and State posed by a teacher under
fundraising activities.
religious control cannot be ignored.

- NOTE: Teachers should be trusted with the

Issue: W/N the resolutions contravene the clause on separation of secular and sectarian

non-establishment of religion. The Court ruled NO.

- 3 main evils against which the establishment
clause was intended to afford protection:
Doctrine: Not every governmental activity which 1. Sponsorship
involves the expenditure of public funds and which 2. Financial Support
has some religious tint is violative of the 3. Active involvement of the sovereign in
constitutional provisions regarding separation of religious activity

Page 34 of 49
- Every case involving the 3 evils should be analyzed
with the Lemon Test.
Issue: W/N the creche (YES) and chanukah menorah
- (LEMON TEST) Test for when government aid to (NO) violates the establishment clause of the first
religion is allowable: amendment.

1. Statute must have a secular legislative

purpose Doctrine:

2. Its principal or primary effect must be one - The non-establishment clause prohibits the gov’t
that neither advances nor inhibits religion from appearing to take positions regarding
3. Statute must not foster an excessive religious belief. The gov’t must remain secular; it
government entanglement with religion may recognize the holiday’s secular aspects, but
- Test to determine whether/not there no further.

is excessive entanglement: - Lynch standards for gov’t use of religious

a. Determine the character and symbols
purposes of the institutions 1. Any endorsement of religion is invalid.
that are benefitted 2. The effect of the display depends upon the
b. Nature of the aid the State message that government’s practice
provides communicates. The inquiry turns upon the
c. Resulting relationship between context in which the object appears.
the government and the 3. Every gov’t practice must be judged in its
religious authority unique circumstances to determine
whether it endorses religion
105. Tilton v. Richardson (construction grants to - Under the establishment clause, the government
schools)
may not:

Facts: The Higher Education Facilities Act gave 1. Promote or affiliate itself with any religious
grants to colleges and universities, provided that they doctrine or organization

were only used for non-religious purposes. It also 2. Discriminate among persons on the basis of
provided that the facility should not be used for their religious beliefs and practices

sectarian instruction/religious worship within 20 3. Delegate a governmental power to a religious

years.
institution

4. Involve itself too deeply in such an

Issue: W/N the Act violates either the Establishment institution’s affairs

or Free Exercises Clauses of the First Amendment. - The court also looks into whether the
The Court held NO, but the limitation of federal challenged governmental practice has the
interest in the facilities to a period of 20 years purpose or effect of endorsing religion (Note:
violates the Religion of the 1st Amendment.
“endorsement” is closely related to
“promotion”)
Doctrine:
- In the case of Lynch, the government’s use of
- The non-establishment clause is not violated religious symbolism is unconstitutional if it has
absent any evidence of coercion directed at the the effect of endorsing religious beliefs and the
practice or exercise of religious beliefs. effect of the government’s use of religious
- Excessive entanglements between gov’t and symbolism depends upon its context.
religion are fostered by statutory programs
provided to parochial elementary and secondary 107. Imbong v. Ochoa (RH Law)

schools, however; there are generally significant Facts: The petitioners contend that the RH Law
differences between the religious aspects of violates the constitutional guarantee respecting
church-related institutions of higher learning and religion as it authorizes the use of public funds for the
parochial elementary and secondary schools.
procurement of contraceptives. It also compels
medical practitioners to (1) refer patients who seek
106. Court of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties advice on reproductive health programs to tore
Union (government endorsement to creche and doctors and (2) to provide full and correct information
menorah)
on reproductive health programs and service,
Facts: First, a creche, donated by the Holy Name although it is against their religious beliefs and
Society, was placed on the Grand Staircase of the convictions.

Allegheny County Courthouse. Second, a chanukah

menorah was placed just outside the City-County Issue: W/N the RH Law Contravenes the guarantee of
Building, donated by a Jewish group.
religious freedom.

Page 35 of 49
 - Only the prevention of an immediate and grave
Doctrine:
danger to the security and welfare of the
community can justify the infringement of religious
The Establishment Clause and Contraceptives freedom.

- The State is not precluded to pursue its legitimate - There is no immediate danger to the life or health
secular objectives without being dictated upon by of an individual in the perceived scenario.

the policies of any one religion.

- The health concerns of women may still be
- Petitioners can neither cause the government to addressed by other practitioners who may perform
adopt their particular doctrines as policy for reproductive health related procedures with open
everyone, nor can they not cause the government willingness and motivation. Furthermore, there are
to restrict other groups.
already other secular steps taken by the
Legislature to ensure that the right to health is
The Free Exercise Clause and the Duty to Refer protected.

- Sections of the RH Law mandate a hospital or

medical practitioner to immediately refer a person Exception: Life Threatening Cases
seeking health care and services under the law to - Principle of Double-Effect - The doctor is always
another accessible healthcare provide despite their morally obliged to save both lives, but when it is
conscientious objections based on religious or medically impossible to save both, he can act in
ethical beliefs.
favor of one.

- In a situation where the free exercise of religion is

allegedly burdened by gov’t legislation or practice, Family Planning Seminars
the compelling state interest test is used (strict - Reasonable exercise of police power

scrutiny).
- Those who attend are not compelled to accept the
- In applying the test, the first inquiry is whether a information given to them.

conscientious objector’s right to religious freedom

has been burdened.
CLASS DISCUSSION:
- Though it has been said that the act of referral is - The Court invalidated a part of the law; they did
an opt-out clause, it is, however, a false not provide an exemption.

compromise because it makes pro-life health

providers complicit in the performance of an act 108. In re: Valenciano (masses)

that they find morally repugnant or offensive.

Facts: Puno is alleging that the holding of masses at
- A conscious objector should be exempt from the basement of the QC Hall of Justice violates the
compliance with the mandates of the RH Law. If he constitution.

would be compelled to act contrary to his religious

belief and conviction, it would be violative of “the Issue: W/N the holding of masses at the basement of
principle of non-coercion” enshrined in the the QC City Hall violates the constitution. The Court
constitutional right to free exercise of religion.
held NO.

Institutional Health Providers Doctrine:

- The punishment of a healthcare service provider, - Benevolent neutrality allows accommodation of

who fails and/or refuses to refer a patient to religion

another, or who declines to perform reproductive - Government neutrality:

health procedure on a patient because of 1. Gov’t must not prefer one religion over
incompatible religious beliefs, is a clear inhibition another or religion over irreligion
of a constitutional guarantee.
2. Gov’t funds must not be applied to
religious purposes
RH-IRR (equal protection clause) 3. Gov’t action must not aid religion
- The protection accorded to other conscientious 4. Gov’t must not result in excision
objectors should equally apply to all medical entanglement with religion
practitioners without distinction whether they *Partaking in these acts would violate voluntarism
belong to the public or private sector.
and breed interfaith dissension

- Accommodation - recognition of the reality that

Compelling State Interest some governmental measures may not be
- The Court finds no compelling state interest which imposed on a certain portion of the population for
would limit the free exercise of religion.
the reason that these measures are contrary to
their beliefs.

Page 36 of 49
 - passive; the State, without being entangled, 111. US v. Ballard (good faith in believing)

merely gives consideration to its citizens who Facts: Respondents were were supposedly selected
want to freely exercise their religion
as divine messengers to promote the “I Am
- Establishment - positive action on the part of the Movement.” It was alleged that they false
State; the State becomes involved through the use represented people that they had the ability to cure
of gov’t resources with the primary intention of diseases for money and property.

setting up a state religion

Issue: W/N the court can look at the actuality of the

Free Exercise of Religion teachings. The Court ruled NO.

109. Victoriano v. Elizalde (closed shop agreements)

Doctrine:

Facts: RA 3350 does not require members of any - Freedom to believe embraces the right to maintain
religious sectors to join a labor organization as a theories of life and death.

condition for employment.

- The absoluteness of the freedom to believe
carries with it the corollary that the
Issue: W/N RA 3350 discriminately favors members government, while it may look into the good
of religious sectors. The Court held NO.
faith of a person, cannot inquire into a person’s
religious pretensions.
Doctrine:

- Free exercise of religious belief/belief is superior to 112. Ebraling v. Division superintendent (flag
contract rights.
ceremony)

- The establishment clause of religion does not ban Facts: The children are members of the Jehovah’s
regulation on conduct whose reason or effect witness who were expelled by their public school
merely happens to coincide or harmonize with the because they refused to salute the flag, sing the
tenets of some or all religions.
national anthem and recite the patriotic pledge as
- The free exercise clause has been interpreted to required by law.

require that religious exercise be preferentially

aided.
Issue: W/N they may be expelled from school for
- Generally, any legislation whose effect or purpose refusing to take part in the flag ceremony due to their
is to impede the observance of one or all religions, religious beliefs. The Court ruled NO.

or to discriminate invidiously between the religions

is invalid.
Doctrine: The sole justification for a prior restraint
- Exception: If a general law is enacted which has or limitation on the exercise of religious freedom
for its purpose and effect to advance the state’s is the existence of a grace and present danger of
secular goals, the statute is valid despite its a character both grave and imminent of a serious
indirect burden on religious observance, unless evil to public safety, public morals, public health
the state can accomplish its purpose without or any other legitimate public interest, that the
imposing such burden.
State has a right (and duty) to prevent.

110. Cantwell v. Connecticut (prior restraint)

Motion for Reconsideration

Facts: The Cantwells were going house to house Doctrine:

trying to share their faith, which was Jehovah’s - The court reversed its holding in Gerona declaring
witness, by playing records from a phonograph and the flag as being devoid of any religious
asking for solicitations.
significance.

- Not a religious ceremony, but an act and

Issue: W/N the state law requiring a permit for profession of love and allegiance and pledge
solicitation is unconstitutional. The Court held YES.
of loyalty to the fatherland which the flag
stands for
Doctrine:

- To believe is absolute, but freedom to act can be 113. Goldman v. Weignberger (yarmulke in military)

regulated only when it comes to time, manner and Facts: Goldman, an Orthodox Jew and ordained
place.
rabbi, is serving in the US Armed Forces. A regulation
- Religious speech is protected under the free prohibited from wearing his yarmulke while indoors.

exercise clause and is likewise within the ambit of

free expression, and may only be suppressed upon Issue: W/N the regulation infringed upon his 1st
showing of a clear and present danger.
Amendment rights. The Court held NO.

Page 37 of 49
 a. Separation (strict or tame) - protects the
Doctrine:
principle of church-state separation with
- Generally, the 1st Amendment challenges to a rigid reading of the principle

military regulations are examined with less i. Separationist (strict) - absolute barrier
scrutiny than similar challenges from civilian to the formal interdependence of
society, given the need for the military to religion and state

“foster instinctive obedience, unity, ii. Strict neutrality (tame) - requires the
commitment and esprit de corps.” state to be neutral in its relations with
- There is not the same individual autonomy in the groups of religious believers and non-
military as there is in larger civilian society.
believers; it does not require the state
to be their adversary

114. Church of Lukumi v. City of Hialeah (animal b. Benevolent neutrality - protects religious
sacrifice)
realities, tradition and established
Facts: The Santeria Religion express their devotion to practice with a flexible reading of the
spirits through animal sacrifice. The City of Hialeah principle

issued an ordinance that prohibited unnecessary - Philippines adheres to the benevolent neutrality
killings by reason of religious sacrifice.
approach. Benevolent neutrality gives room for
accommodation of religious exercises. It allows
Issue: W/N the ordinances violate the Free Exercise breaches in the wall of separation to uphold
clause. The Court held YES.
religious liberty.

- Sherbert Test - validity of state intrusion with

Doctrine:
the free exercise of religion is determined by:
- Smith Standard: A law that is neutral and of 1. Whether an individual’s right to religious
general applicability need not be justified by a freedom has been burdened
compelling governmental interest even if the 2. Whether the individual’s religious belief in
law has the incidental effect of burdening a the matter is sincere and its centrality in
particular religious practice. A law failing to his faith
satisfy these requirements must be justified by 3. Whether the State has a compelling
a compelling governmental interest and must interest in pursuing the interference
be narrowly tailored to advance this interest. 4. Whether such intrusion is the least
- Minimum requirement of neutrality - law does restrictive or least burdensome to the
not discriminate on its face; it is not neutral if it individual’s religious freedom
refers to a religious practice without a secular - Morality referred to in the law is public and
meaning discernible from the language or necessarily secular, not religious

context

- General applicability - the free exercise clause Motion for Reconsideration

protects religious observers against unequal - The government must do more than assert the
treatment.
objectives at risk if the exemption is given, it
must precisely show how and to what extent
115. Estrada v. Escritor (court official with live in this objectives will be undermined if
partner; benevolent neutrality)
exemptions are granted.
Facts: Estrada charged Escritor for having illicit - CLASS DISCUSSION: giving exemptions is like
relations with a man not her husband. Escritor says a slippery slope, it would mean that you would
that she is a member of the Johavah’s witness and have to grant exemptions to the rest

the Watch Tower and Bible Tract Society and that her - Benevolent neutrality could allow
conjugal arrangement is in conformity with her accommodation of morality based on religion,
religious beliefs.
provided it does not offend compelling state
interests.
Issue: W/N respondent should be found guilty of - Even if compelling state interest is proved, the
gross and immoral conduct. The Court remanded the State has to further demonstrate that it is the least
case to the Court Administrator.
intrusive means possible so that the free exercise
is not infringed any more than necessary to
Doctrine:
achieve the legitimate goal of the state.

- Strict Neutrality v. Benevolent Neutrality

- Two main standards used by the US in deciding 116. Perfecto v. Esidera (morality)

religion clause cases:

Page 38 of 49
Facts: Perfecto is accusing Judge Esidera of being to this, their relatives applied for a writ of habeas
married to her first husband and contracting a corpus before the court, which was granted.

subsequent marriage prior to the annulment of her

first marriage, as well as falsifying her daughter’s Issue: W/N the writ of habeas corpus is the proper
birth certificate information.
remedy. The Court held YES, because a prime
specification of an application for a writ of habeas
Issue: W/N Esidera is guilty of immoral conduct corpus is restraint of liberty, which in this case is the
under the CPR. The Court held NO.
women’s freedom of locomotion.

Doctrine:
Doctrine:

- Under the test of benevolent neutrality, religious - The writ of habeas corpus was devised and exists
freedom is weight against a compelling state as a speedy and effectual remedy to relieve
interest
persons from unlawful restraint, and as the best
- The Court may not sit as judge of what is and only sufficient defense of personal freedom.

disgraceful and immoral conduct according to - The Mayor does not have the power to deport.
a particular religious and does not have There is no law, order, or regulation, which even
jurisdiction and proper authority to determine hints at the right of the Mayor or chief of police to
which conduct contradicts religious doctrine. force citizens of the Philippines Islands to change
- They can only have jurisdiction over matters of their domicile.

morality insofar as it involves the public or its

interest.
118. Marcos v. Manglapus (right to return in the
- In resolving cases that touch on issues morality, country not included)

the Court is bound to remain neutral and to limit Facts: Marcos, in his deathbed, has signified his wish
the bases of its judgement on secular moral to return to the Philippines to die.

standards.

Issue: W/N the President may prohibit Marcos from

Section 6 - The liberty of abode and of changing returning to the Philippines (YES)

the same within the limits prescribed by law shall

not be impaired except upon lawful order of the Doctrine:

court. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired - The right to return to one’s country is not
except in the interest of national security, public among the rights specifically guaranteed in the
safety, or public health, as may be provided by Bill of Rights, which treats only the liberty of
law. abode and the right to travel, but it is our well-
considered view that the right to return may be
Rights protected: considered, as a generally accepted principle of
1. Right to choose a person’s abode
international law and under our Constitution, is
2. Right to travel both at home and going out of the part of the law of the land.
country
- However, it is distinct and separate from the
right to travel and enjoys different protection
How are these limited? under the International Covenant of Civil and
- The liberty of abode may be limited only upon Political rights, i.e., against being “arbitrarily
lawful order of a court
deprived” thereof.
- Right to travel may be limited by administrative - UDHR and ICCPR treat the right to freedom of
authorities as may be provided by law in the movement and abode within the territory of a
interest of national security, public safety or public state, the right to leave a country, and the right
health.
to enter one’s country as SEPARATE and
DISTINCT crimes.

Section 6 cases - But under her residual powers, the President has
the obligation under the Constitution to protect the
Liberty of Abode and Right to Travel people, promote their welfare and advance
national interest.

117. Villavicencio v. Lukban (deported prostitutes)

Facts: Upon the orders of the Mayor of Lukban, the 119. Yap, Jr. v. CA (not disallowed, merely requiring
police hunted 170 prostitutes to board steamers that certification from Mayor prior to change of residence)

were destined for Davao without their consent. Due Facts: Petitioner’s bail was fixed with the condition of
securing a certification or guaranty from the mayor of

Page 39 of 49
his residence, that he is indeed a resident, or in case Limitations to the exercise of the right to
he changes abode, he is required to give notice to information and policy of public disclosure:
the court.
1. National security matters

2. Trade secrets and banking transactions

Issue: W/N petitioner was unduly restricted of his 3. Criminal matters or classified law enforcement
constitutional liberty of abode and travel. The Court matters, “such as those relating to the
ruled NO.
apprehension, protection and detention of
criminals”

Doctrine:
4. Other confidential matters

- The order is consistent with the nature and - The Ethical Standards Act prohibits public
function of a bail bond to ensure that the petitioner officials from using or divulging confidential or
will make himself available at all times whenever classified information officially known to them
the Court requires his presence
by reason of their office and not made available
- Informing the court of the intention to transfer to the public

residence and requiring certification from the - Diplomatic correspondence

Mayor to do the same only mandates a person to - Closed door Cabinet meetings

inform the authorities and does not bar him from - Executive session of either house of Congress

changing his residence and also does not violate - International deliberations of the SC

his right tot ravel.

Section 7 cases
Section 7 - The right of the people to information Information and Access to Official Records
on matters of public concern shall be recognized.
Access to official records, and to documents and 120. Legaspi v. CSC (eligibility of sanitarians)

papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or Facts: CSC denied Legaspi’s information for
decisions, as well as to government research data information regarding the civil service eligibilities of 2
used as basis for policy development, shall be sanitarians, and so he asks for the issuance of the
afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as extraordinary writ of Mandamus.

may be provided by law.

Issue: W/N Legaspi has the right to information
Rights guaranteed by Section 7: concerning the civil service eligibilities of the 2
1. Right to information on matters of public concern
sanitarians. The Court ruled YES.

2. Corollary right of access to official records and

documents
Doctrine:

*These are political rights available to citizens only

- To be covered by Sec. 7, the information must:

1. Be of public concern

Limits: - No rigid test; case-to-case determination of

- Subject to limitations as may be provided by law
“public concern” or “public interest”

2. Not be exempted by law

Limits on authority to curtail these rights:

- The standards have been developed for regulation 121. Valmonte v. Belmonte, Jr. (GOCC)

of speech and press and of assembly and petition Facts: Petitioners pray thar respondent furnish them
and of association are applicable to right of access with the list of names of the BP members who were
to information
able to secure loans immediately before the elections
through intercession note from Imelda Marcos.

Public concern, standing and remedy

- Public concern, like public interest, eludes exact Issue: W/N petitioners are entitled to access the
definition. They embrace a broad spectrum of documents. The Court ruled YES.

objects which the public may want to know, either

because these directly affect their lives or simply Doctrine:

because such matters arouse the interest of an - The constitutional guarantee of right to information
ordinary citizen.
of official records covers gocc’s such as GSIS.

- The standing of a matter of “public right” is that he - Funds of GSIS assumes a public character
is a citizen.
because it is a trustee of contributions from the
- The remedy is mandamus.
gov’t and its employees and the administrator
of various insurance programs.

Page 40 of 49
122. Chavez v. PCGG (Marcos’ ill gotten wealth)

Facts: Chavez brought an action to make public the 124. Province of North Cotabato v. GRP Panel (MOA-
compromise agreements bet. PCGG and the heirs of AD peace negotiations not exempted)

Marcos re: distribution of ill-gotten wealth.

Facts: The GRP and MILF were scheduled to sign the
MOA-AD. The petitioners contend that the GRP
Issue: W/N PCGG should disclose the agreements to violated EO3, LGC and IPRA which requires
the public. The Court held YES.
continuous consultation as a corollary to the right
information.

Doctrine:

- PCGG is required to disclose such agreements. Issue: W/N respondents violated the provisions on
They do not fall among some of the recognized public consultation and right to information. The
restrictions against public disclosure such as: Court ruled YES.

1. National security matters

2. Trade secrets and banking transactions Doctrine:

3. Criminal matters - The case involves a subject of public concern, as it

4. Other confidential information involves sovereignty and territorial integrity.

- Alleged ill gotten-wealth assumes a public - The right to information includes information
character for they are products of illegal use of regarding negotiation leading to the consummation
public funds
of the contract.

- Based on the intent of the framers of the - Envisioned to be corollary to the twin rights to
Constitution, it is incumbent upon the PCGG to information and disclosure is the design for
disclose sufficient public information on any feedback mechanisms.

proposed settlement they have decided to take up - Included as a component of the comprehensive
but with the same restrictions in general as with peace process is consensus-building and
those matters of classified information.
empower for peace, which includes “continuing
consultations on both national and local levels
123. Akbayan v. Aquino (JPEPA diplomatic to build consensus for a peace agenda and
negotiations)
process, and the mobilization and facilitation of
Facts: JPEPA will be the first bilateral free trade people’s participation in the peace process.
agreement to be entered into by the Philippines with
another country. Petitioners are seeking to obtain the 125. Sereno v. Committee on Trade and Related
negotiation documents submitted during the Matters (minutes of EO 486)

negotiation process of JPEPA. The full text was only Facts: Paras, chairman of the Association of
released after the negotiations.
Petrochemical manufactures asked for the minutes
held by the CTRM, which resolved to recommend to
Issue: W/N failure to disclose the text during the GMA to left the suspension of the tariff reduction
negotiation period is violative of petitioners’ right to schedule on petrochemicals and certain plastic
information.
products.

Doctrine:
Issue: W/N the minutes of the CTRM are exempt
- Diplomatic regulations are of privileged character. from the right to information. The Court held YES.

Opening it to public scrutiny might inhibit the give-

and-take essential to successful negotiations.
Doctrine:

- When the government has claimed executive - There are 2 requisites for the right to
privilege, and it has established that the information to be compelled by mandamus:
information is covered, then the party 1. The information sought must be in relation
demanding it must show that the information is to matters of public concern or interest
vital, not simply for the satisfaction of its 2. Must not be exempted by law from the
curiosity, but for its ability to effectively and operation of the constitutional guarantee
reasonably participate in social, political and - CTRM meetings are classified as closed-door
economic decision-making. Cabinet meetings and are exempted.
- CLASS DISCUSSION: When what is involved is
confidential, use the balancing of interests tests
Section 8 - The right of the people, including
- Confidentiality v. Need to disclose
those employed in the public and private sectors,
- Freedom of information v. Freedom to demand to form unions, associations, or societies for
disclosure

Page 41 of 49
purposes not contrary to law shall not be Issue: W/N PADCOM can be compelled to join the
abridged. association due to the provision on automatic
membership as a condition. The Court held YES.

Meaning:
- The right to form associations shall not be Doctrine:

impaired except through a valid exercise of police - Automatic membership as a stipulation in a

power.
contract is valid.

- It is an aspect of the general right of liberty; it is an

aspect of freedom of contract
Section 9 - Private property shall not be taken for
- In so far as associations may have for their object public use without just compensation.
the advancement of beliefs and ideas, freedom of
association is an aspect of freedom of expression Eminent Domain
and belief.
- power of the state to take private property for
- The guarantee also includes the right not to join an public use upon payment of just compensation.

association.

Constitutional provisions:
Protection under the constitution 1. Article III, Sec. 9 - sets down the limits on the
- The Constitution recognizes a hierarchy of values, inherent power

as seen in Sec. 1.
2. Article VII, Sec. 18 - public utilities

- The degree of protection an association enjoys 3. Article XIII, Sec. 4 - land reform

depends on the position which the association’s 4. Article XVIII, Sex. 22 - idle/abandoned agricultural
objective or activity occupies in the constitutional lands

hierarchy of values

Where does the power of eminent domain reside?

Government employees - Inherently, it is possessed by the State and
- Have the right to form unions
exercised by the national government

- The right to strike may be limited by law.

- The SSS and public school teachers do not have a Scope

constitutional right to strike, but the current ban on - In the hands of the Congress, the scope is plenary.

them against strikes is statutory and may be lifted

by statute.
Elements of the exercise of the power of eminent
domain:
Right to Form Association 1. There is “taking” of private property

2. The taking must be for needed “public use”

126. Manila Public School Teachers v. Laguio, Jr.

3. There must be “just compensation”

Facts: Public school teachers went on a mass action

by rallying instead of conducting classes. They Taking
wanted immediate pay of due chalk and clothing
allowances, as well as 13th month pay.
Circumstances which constitute taking for
purposes of eminent domain:
Issue: W/N any rights were violated. The Court held 1. The expropriation must enter upon the private
that the case was not ripe for adjudication.
property

2. The entrance must not be for a momentary

Doctrine: Public school teachers, being part of the period, that is, the entrance must be permanent

government and under the CSC, do not have a 3. The entry must be under warrant or color of legal
constitutional right to strike.
authority

4. The property must be devoted to public use or

127. Padcom Condominium Corp. v. Ortigas Center otherwise informally appropriated or injuriously
Association
affected

Facts: PADCOM built a condominium on land which 5. The utilization of the property must be in such a
was owned by Ortigas & Company. As part of a way as to oust the owner and deprive him of all
condition under the Deed of Sale, PADCOM had to beneficial enjoyment of the property.

join the Ortigas Center Association. They refused to

pay their membership dues.

Page 42 of 49
Distinguish the manner in which police power and - BUT: If the value increased independently of what
eminent domain affect the right of private the expropriator did, then the value is that of the
property: later filing of the case.

- Police power regulates or may even destroy

private property, but there is no transfer of May entry into the property be made before just
ownership nor compensation
compensation?
- Eminent domain transfers ownership and must be - Yes.

compensated.
- For purposes of entry into the property prior to full
payment, the LGC requires a deposit with the
When injurious private property is destroyed in proper court of at least 15% of the fair market
the public interest, is there compensable taking? value of the property based on the current tax
- No.
declaration of the property to be expropriated.

- However, where the expropriation is public

When municipal property is taken by the state, is works, RA 8974 requires prior full payment.

there compensable taking?

- Depends on the nature of the property — if it is Are commissioners required for determine just
patrimonial property of the municipality, yes. compensation?
Otherwise, no.
- Yes, trial by commissioners is a substantive right
which a judge may not dispense with.

Public use
- Equivalent to “public welfare” in police power
Must compensation be in money?
- The requirement of public use means that the - No, however, it must be in some form that
expropriator must use the property for the purpose embodies certainty of value and of payment, such
specified in the petition. If this is not done, the as government bonds.

expropriator must return the property, even if there

was no agreement for reversal.
Judicial review
- But the owner must return to the expropriator
the compensation it had received with legal Is the exercise of the powers of eminent domain
interest and must pay the expropriator for subject to judicial review?
benefits the lot may have obtained.
1. Adequacy of compensation

2. Necessity of the taking

Just compensation 3. “Public use” character of the purpose of the

- The just and complete equivalent of the loss which taking

the owner of the thing expropriated has to suffer

by reason of the expropriation
Can there be any instance or aspect of the
- Payment that matches market value
exercise of the power of eminent domain which is
- Includes not only correct determination of amount, not subject to judicial review?
but also reasonable period for payment from its - Yes, when it is exercised directly by the Congress
taking.
and not through subordinate bodies.

Who are entitled to just compensation? Res judicata

- All whose rights might be affected by taking by the - While the principle of res judicator does not
state
denigrate the right of the State to exercise eminent
domain, it does apply to specific issues decided in
What is the point of reference for evaluating a a previous case.

piece of property? - It cannot however, bar the State or its agent

- General rule: Value must be that as of the time of from thereafter complying with this requirement,
the filing of the complaint for expropriation
as prescribed by law, and subsequently
- Filing of case generally coincides with the taking
exercising its power of eminent domain over the
- Exception: When the filing of the case comes later same property.

than the time of taking, and meanwhile the value of

the property has increased because of the use to Is expropriation proper as a substitute for the
which the expropriator has put it, the value is that enforcement of a valid contract?
of the time of the earlier taking.
- No. It lies only when it is made necessary by the
opposition of the owner to the sale/lack of any
agreement as to price.

Page 43 of 49
 Facts: Fighter planes and heavy bombers have
The State may not waive its right to exercise an frequently passed over respondents’ buildings and
inherent power (power of eminent domain) lands creating noise which resulted to the destruction
of the use of the property as a commercial chicken
Essential requisites for a local gov’t unit to validly farm.

exercise eminent domain:

- An ordinance must authorize it.
Issue: W/N there was a taking under the 5th
- Cannot expropriate on the strength of a Amendment. The Court held YES.

sanggunian resolution alone

Doctrine:

Limitations on the eminent domain powers of - If the landowner is to have full enjoyment of the
local governments: land, he must have exclusive control of the
1. The order of priority in acquiring lan for socialized immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere

housing
- If the flights rendered the property uninhabitable,
2. Resort to expropriation proceedings as a means there would be a taken that is compensable under
to acquiring it
the 5th Amendment.

*Private lands rank last in the order of priority for - It is the owner’s loss, not the taker’s gain, which is
purposes of socialized housing.
the measure of the value of the property taken.

*Expropriation proceedings may be resorted to only - Though it would only be an easement of flight
after the other modes of acquisition are exhausted.
(not land) which was taken, the owner’s right to
possess and exploit the land or its beneficial
Section 9 cases ownership was destroyed.

Elements of “Taking” 130. Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New

York (not taking, there is still control of the owner)

128. Republic v. Vda. De Castellvi (rent by military; Facts: The Grand Central Station was designated as
elements of taking)
a landmark, thus subject to certain laws to preserve
Facts: Castellvi and AFP entered into a lease its historic/aesthetic importance.

agreement that rented the property on a year-to-year

basis. AFP wanted to renew it, but Castellvi Refused. Issue: W/N the subject law indeed effected a “taking”
They filed an ejectment case, but while it was on of Penn Central’s property without just
appeal, they filed a case for eminent domain.
compensation. The Court ruled NO.

Issue: W/N the lease contract constitutes taking for Doctrine:

purposes of eminent domain. The Court ruled NO.

- To determine whether a “taking” has occurred, the
Court must look at:

Doctrine:
1. Economic impact of the regulation to the
- Requisites of taking: extent to which it interferes with direct
1. Expropriator must enter a private property investment-backed expectations

2. Entrance into private property must be 2. Character of government action

more than a momentary period - There would be no taking if the owner would
3. Entry of property should be under warrant still retain a reasonable benefit from the
or color of legal authority property, even if its use was restricted by
4. Property must be devoted to a public use government regulations
or otherwise informally appropriated or
injuriously affected 131. OSG v. Ayala (free parking spaces in malls)

5. Utilization of the property for public use Facts: Malls are being compelled to provide free
must be in such a way as to oust the parking spaces for the purpose of decongesting
owner and deprive him of all beneficial traffic in Metro Manila.

enjoyment of property
- Limitations to power of eminent domain: Issue: W/N the corporations should be required to
1. Public purpose give free parking. The Court ruled NO.

2. Just compensation
3. Due process Doctrine:

- Government cannot, under the guise of police

129. US v. Causby (navigable airspace)
power, force private entities to provide free parking

Page 44 of 49
 in their own private premises. Such an act is established facility for this purpose for the use of the
tantamount to a “taking” that requires “just residents.

compensation.”

- Regulation that deprives any person of the Issue: W/N there was a genuine necessity to justify
profitable use of his property constitutes a taking the condemnation of petitioners’ property. The Court
and entitles him to compensation
held NO.

Public Use Doctrine: Foundation of the right to exercise the

power of eminent domain:
132. Sumulong v. Guerrero (housing is for public use)
1. Genuine necessity
Facts: Petitioners’ houses were being expropriated 2. Public character
for socialized housing.
3. Shown to exist
*Not only should the purpose of taking be specified;
Issue: W/N expropriation is valid and in accordance the genuine necessity should also be of public
with law. The Court held NO.
character which must be shown to exist.

Doctrine:
Just Compensation
- The orders issued pursuant to the corollary
provisions of the decrees authorize immediate 135. City of Manila v. Estrada (judicial review of just
taking without notice and hearing are violative compensation)

of due process. Facts: The City of Manila seeks to expropriate a land

- The owner is denied of the opportunity to prove in Palo to build a new market. After commissioners
that the valuation in the tax documents is fair/ submitted their report, the trial court reduced the
wrong.
price from P20 to P15/sqm. It was further modified to
- Requirements of writ of possession:
P10/sqm.

1. Complaint for expropriation sufficient in form

and substance
Issue: W/N the decision of the court to reduce the
2. Provisional determination of just price to P10/sqm is considered as just
compensation made by the trial court based compensation. The Court held YES.

on judicial discretion

3. Deposit requirement under the Rules of Court Doctrine:

must be complied with

- The court cannot interfere with the report of the
commissioners unless prejudice or fraud has been
133. Phil. Columbian Association v. Hon. Panis showed; an award which is grossly excessive or
(housing project)
insufficient cannot stand, although there be
Facts: The City of Manila filed for expropriation of a nothing which even tends to indicate prejudice or
parcel of land where respondents are the occupants.
fraud on the part of the commissioners

- Just compensation means a fair and full equivalent

Issue: W/N City of Manila has power to expropriate for the loss sustained. The interests of the public
private property. The Court held YES.
and of the owner and all the circumstances of the
particular appropriation should be taken into
Doctrine:
consideration.

- The Revised Charter of Manila grants the mayor - 3 kinds of evidence used in computing just
the power of eminent domain over its territorial compensation:
jurisdiction
1. Testimony regarding mere offers
- Due process was accorded when petitioner filed 2. Sale of similar situated lands within the
an MR.
vicinity (only this is admissible in court,
- Public use now includes the broader notion of WITH reservations)
indirect benefit or advantage, including in 3. Expropriation of similar within the area
particular, urban land reform and housing.

136. San Roque v. Republic (just compensation is an

134. Masikip v. Pasig (genuine necessity)
indispensable requisite)

Facts: The City of Pasig notified Masikip of its Facts: Dispute over a land which was previously
intention to expropriate the land owned by him for expropriated by the Government, without proof of full
the sports development and recreational activities of payment of just compensation, and was
the barangay, however, there is already an subsequently purchased by San Roque.

Page 45 of 49
 - When taking the precedes the filing, just
Issue: W/N there was a valid and complete compensation must be computed from taking.

expropriation of the parcels of land. The Court held - Inflation rate must not be included as this is
NO.
already properly accounted for through
payment of interest on the amount due to the
Doctrine:
landowner, and through the award of exemplary
- Without full payment, there can be no transfer damages and attorney’s fees in cases where
of title from the landowner to the expropriator. there was irregularity in the taking of property.
Eminent domain cases are strictly construed
against the expropriator. The payment of just Judicial Review
compensation is an indispensable requisite for the
exercise of the State’s sovereign power of eminent 139. De Knecht v. Bautista (EDSA extension; social
domain.
impact)

Facts: DPWH ordered that the EDSA extension must

137. Republic v. BPI (consequential damages proper pass through Rein - Del Pan, instead of the original
if other property impaired)
alignment through Roxas Boulevard.

Facts: The DPWH expropriated some portions of the

land of BPI and Villanueva for the construction of the Issue: W/N the extension of EDSA through Rein - Del
Zapote flyover. However, they failed to consider the Pan is arbitrary. The Court held YES.

value of the building since the construction of the

flyover would affect the integrity of the building.
Doctrine:

- The necessity of taking is a question of fact,

Issue: W/N the award for additional just subject to judicial review. The government may not
compensation for BPI’s building in the amount fixed capriciously or arbitrary choose what private
therefore is unfounded. The Court ruled NO.
property should be taken

- Limits of judicial review:

Doctrine:
1. Adequacy of just compensation
- General rule: Just compensation to which the 2. Necessity of taking
owner of the condemned property is entitled to 3. Public use character
is the market value - Except:
- Market value - sum of money which a person 1. Subdivisions
desirous but not compelled to buy, and an 2. Resale for social justice
owner willing but not compelled to sell, would
agree on as a price to be paid by the buyer and 140. Manotok v. NHA (executive order)

received by the seller

Facts: Upon the signing of the decree, expropriation
- EXCEPTION: When only a part of the building is of the Tambunting estate, etc. were automatically
expropriated expropriated.

- Consequential damages are awarded if as a

result of the expropriation, the remains property Issue: W/N the decree violates petitioner’s right to
of the owner suffers from an impairment or due process and just compensation. The Court held
decrease in value.
YES.

138. NPC v. Manalastas (inflation rate not included)

Doctrine:

Facts: NPC constructed transmission lines on - In the exercise of the power of eminent domain,
respondetns’ land. They demanded for damages/ the requirement of due process may not
payment of the fair market value, including inflation necessarily entail judicial process.

rate.
- However, where it is alleged that in the taking of a
person’s property, his right to due process has
Issue: W/N inflation rate must be taken into account been violated, the courts will have to step in.

in determining just compensation. The Court held - Petitioner is deprived of opportunity to prove
NO.
higher value

- For purposes of entry into the property prior to

Doctrine:
full payment, the LGC requires a deposit with
- Just compensation must be computed from the the proper court of at least 15% of the fair
time of filing of the case, which usually coincides market value of the property based on the
with taking.

Page 46 of 49
 current tax declaration of the property to be subject to amendment, alteration, or repeal by the
expropriated. Congress when the common good so requires.”

- However, where the expropriation is for

national infrastructure, 100% of the zonal/ Timber license
market value is required. - They may be validly amended, modified, replaced
or rescinded by the Chief Executive when national
141. Republic v. De Knecht (EDSA extension
interests so quire.

Facts: BP 340 was enacted which expropriated the - They are not deemed contracts within the purview
same subject property for the same purpose.
of the due process clause.

Issue: W/N an expropriation proceeding that was Is a license protected by the contract clause?
determined by a final judgement of this Court may be - A license or permit is not a contract between the
subject of a subsequent legislation for expropriation. sovereignty and the licensee or permitee, and is
The Court ruled YES.
not a property in any constitutional sense, as to
which the constitutional prescription against
Doctrine:
impairment of the obligation of contracts may
- A previous judgement regarding the validity of an extend.

expropriation shall not be a bar for the Congress to - It is in the nature of a special privilege, or a
pass a subsequent law providing for such permission or authority to do what is within its
expropriation, as long as it is not arbitrary and/or terms.

repugnant to the constitution

- Expropriation proceedings may be undertaken by Free exercise of religion is superior to contract

the Republic not only by voluntary negotiation by rights.
land owners, but also by taking appropriate court
action or by legislation
Section 10 cases

Section 10 - No law impairing the obligation of 142. Home Building and Loan Assn. v. Blaisdell
contracts shall be passed. (extended mortgage redemption)

Facts: By reason of the Great Depression, owners of

When may a law be said to have impaired the real property are unable to meet payments as they
obligation of contracts? come due and are threatened with foreclosure sale.
1. Changes the terms of a legal contract between The Minnesota Mortgage Moratorium Law
parties, either in the time or mode of performance
temporarily extends the time allowed for redeeming
2. Imposes new conditions
property.

3. Dispenses with those expressed

4. Authorizes for its satisfaction something different Issue: W/N the provision exceeds the power of the
from that provided in its terms, is a law which State. The Court ruled in the negative.

impairs the obligation of a contract and is null

and void.
Doctrine:

- When can State impair contracts:

Does every impairment of the substance of a 1. Police power

contract violate the Constitution? 2. Emergency

- No. A valid exercise of police power is superior to 3. Remedial legislation

the obligation of contracts.

4. Franchise

- Doctrine of Incorporation: All laws of the land are

Does the contract clause protect public deemed part of contracts

contracts? - An emergency existed which furnished a proper

- Yes, the clause protects contracts with the occasion for the exercise of the reserved power
government.
of the State to protect the vital interests of the
- Franchises are contracts
community.
- The obligation arising from franchises are subject - Moratorium - postponement of fulfillment of
to modification by police power
obligation

- With reference to public utilities, Article XII Sec. 11 - Valid moratorium law:
states: “Neither shall any such franchise or right be 1. Emergency
ranted except under the condition that it shall be 2. Temporary in nature
3. Only exercised in reasonable conditions

Page 47 of 49
 reclassified Jupiter Street as a high density
143. Rutter v. Esteban (unreasonable delay of 8 commercial zone.

years)

Facts: Esteban failed to pay 2 installments for land, Issue: W/N CA erred in enjoining petitioner’s use of
and his defense that he was a war sufferer under RA the property for a commercial purpose. The Court
342, who was entitled to 8 years before an obligation held YES.

may be enforced against him.

Doctrine: Although contractual stipulations are

Issue: W/N RA No. 342 is unconstitutional (YES)
binding for the parties concerned, they can still be
impaired if necessary for a legitimate exercise of
Doctrine:
police power, also when they are contrary to law,
- The test for the constitutionality of a moratorium morals, good customs, public order, or public
statute: period should be definite and reasonable
policy.
- Instances where the State may transfers the
bounds limiting the application of its reserved 146. Miners’ Assn. v. Factoran (mining agreements)

power to protect the integrity of the gov’t and Facts: Article 12, Sec. 12 of the 1987 Constitution
security of the people: prohibited the utilization of inalienable lands of public
1. Impairment should refer to the remedy and domain through license, concession or lease. Corry
not to a substantive right. issued 2 EOs which authorized the DENR secretary
2. The State may postpone the enforcement to issue administrative orders in furtherance of the
of the obligation but cannot destroy it by constitutional provision. The DENR secretary issued
making the remedy futile. an order that stated that all existing mining
3. The propriety of the remedy. This rule agreements would be converted into a production
require that the alteration or change that sharing agreement.

the new legislation desires to write into an

existing contract must not be burdened Issue: W/N the administrative orders violate Art. 3
with restriction and conditions that would Sec. 10. The Court held NO.

make the remedy hardly pursuing.

Doctrine:

144. Abella v. NLRC (separation pay)

- Mining license

Facts: Abella had been leasing a farm land for 30 - It is a privilege that can be revoked at any
years, where Dionele and Quitco work. When the time
lease expired, they lost their jobs.
- A reservation clause providing that all agreement
are subject to regulations of the Congress is valid.

Issue: W/N workers are entitled to separation pay. - The state, in the exercise of its police power,
The Court held YES.
may not be precluded by the constitutional
restriction on non-impairment of contracts from
Doctrine:
altering, modifying and amending the mining
- Existing laws are read into contract and are leases or agreements.
deemed part thereof.
- The non-impairment clause is not absolute — 147. Ortigas & Co. v. Feati Bank and Trust Co.
an impairment would be valid if it is done for (industrial and commercial zone)

the promotion of the general good and through Fact: Ortigas sold 2 parcels of land to Angeles and
legitimate means. the Deed of Sale stated that it should only be used
- To fall under this prohibition, the law must for residential purposes. It sold it to Chavez, who
change the rights of parties with each other then sold it to Feati Bank, “free from all liens and
and not with non-parties. encumbrances.” Feati Bank began constructing a
bank on the lot.

145. Presley v. Bel-Air Village Assn. (commercial

zone)
Issue: W/N Res. No. 27 declaring lots part of the
Facts: Presley operates a Hot Pan de Sal store in the commercial and industrial zone is valid because it did
property of the Almendras, as a lessee. On the initial so in exercise of its police power. The Court held
Deed of Restriction, it provides that such property YES.

shall only be used for residential, and not commercial

purposes. However, the passing of an ordiance Doctrine:

Page 48 of 49
- Local Autonomy Act empowers a municipal
council to adopt zoning and subdivision
ordinances or regulations for the municipality

- There was an impairment of contracts, but it

was a valid impairment because there was a
valid exercise of police power.
- In order to promote the general welfare, the state
may interfere with personal liberty, property,
business and occupations.

- Persons may be subjected to all kinds of restraints

and burdens, in order to secure the general
comfort, health and prosperity of the state and to
this fundamental aim of our Government, the rights
of the individual are subordinated.

148. SWS v. COMELEC (same as #87)

Facts: COMELEC Res. No. 9674 directed SWS and

other survey forms to submit to the COMELEC the
names of all commissioners, payors and subscribers
of all surveys. Petitioners contend that it forces to
disclose privileged information under the contract.

Issue: W/N the resolution violates the non-

impairment clause? The Court held NO.

Doctrine:

- A state action that impairs a private contract is not

valid unless it is reasonably related to the
achievement of a legitimate state interest.

- The constitutional guarantee of non-impairment

is limited by the exercise of police power. It is a
basic rule in contracts that the law is deemed
written into the contract between the parties.

Page 49 of 49