Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Nuino Vs Delima Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    D. Ram
    20 views1 page
    The petitioners, including former President Arroyo, challenged Department of Justice Circular No. 41 which allowed the DOJ to issue Hold Departure Orders and Watchlist Orders restricting travel. The court ruled that the DOJ does not have the authority to restrict travel rights through administrative issuances. Only the legislature can lawfully impose restrictions on travel rights and only for reasons of national security, public safety or public health. As Circular No. 41 was not a law passed by legislature, it could not override constitutional rights to travel. The DOJ's power is to investigate and prosecute crimes, not curtail travel rights through circulars without legislative authorization or justification.

    Original Description:

    Constitutional Law 2 - case digest

    Original Title

    12.Genuino vs Delima Case Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The petitioners, including former President Arroyo, challenged Department of Justice Circular No. 41 which allowed the DOJ to issue Hold Departure Orders and Watchlist Orders restricting travel. The court ruled that the DOJ does not have the authority to restrict travel rights through administrative issuances. Only the legislature can lawfully impose restrictions on travel rights and only for reasons of national security, public safety or public health. As Circular No. 41 was not a law passed by legislature, it could not override constitutional rights to travel. The DOJ's power is to investigate and prosecute crimes, not curtail travel rights through circulars without legislative authorization or justification.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    20 views1 page

    Nuino Vs Delima Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    D. Ram
    The petitioners, including former President Arroyo, challenged Department of Justice Circular No. 41 which allowed the DOJ to issue Hold Departure Orders and Watchlist Orders restricting travel. The court ruled that the DOJ does not have the authority to restrict travel rights through administrative issuances. Only the legislature can lawfully impose restrictions on travel rights and only for reasons of national security, public safety or public health. As Circular No. 41 was not a law passed by legislature, it could not override constitutional rights to travel. The DOJ's power is to investigate and prosecute crimes, not curtail travel rights through circulars without legislative authorization or justification.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Title

    G.R. No. 197930


    EFRAIM C. GENUINO et al vs HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA
    REYES, JR., J.:

    Facts

    The petitioners in these consolidated cases are former President Arroyo and her husband, and
    Efraim and Erwin Genuino. Former DOJ Secretary De Lima issued HDO and WLO against
    petitioners on the ground that criminal charges of plunder, qualified theft and violation of the
    Omnibus Election Code were filed against them.

    Petitioners filed temporary restraining order against the issued HDO and WLO of DOJ seeking
    relief and grant from court to allow them to travel so that former president Arroyo may seek
    medical treatment abroad.
    The court granted relief sought on a condition that petitioner will file a bond of PhP2M, an
    undertaking that petitioners shall report to Philippine consulate in the countries they are to visit
    (Germany, Singapore, USA, Italy, Spain and Austria) and shall appoint a representative to
    receive on their behalf subpoena, orders and other legal processes.
    Petitioners complied with all the conditions. Instead of following the order of the court, DOJ
    caused for the refusal to process the petitioners travel documents.

    Issue
    Whether or not DOJ Cir. No. 41 is against the right to travel

    Ruling

    Yes. The DOJ has no authority to issue DOJ Circular No. 41 which effectively restricts the
    right to travel through the issuance of Watchlist Orders (WLOs) and Hold Departure
    Orders(HDOs). There are only three considerations that may permit a restriction on the
    right to travel: national security, public safety or public health. Further, there must be an
    explicit provision of statutory law or Rules of Court providing for the impairment.
    DOJ Circular No. 41 is not a law. It is not a legislative enactment, but a mere
    administrative issuance designed to carry out the provisions of an enabling law. DOJ is not
    authorized to issue WLOs and HDOs to restrict the constitutional right to travel. There is
    no mention of the exigencies stated in the Constitution that will justify the impairment.
    The provision simply grants the DOJ the power to investigate the commission of crimes and
    prosecute offenders. It does not carry the power to indiscriminately devise all means it
    deems proper in performing its functions without regard to constitutionally-protected
    rights.

    You might also like