CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II

I. Nature of the Constitution

Purposes of the Constitution:
1. to prescribe the framework of a system of government
2. to assign to the several departments their respective powers and duties
3. to establish certain fixed principles on which government is founded
Classification of the Constitution:
1. written
2. conventional (or enacted)
3. rigid
Essential Qualities of the Written Constitution:
1. broad
2. brief
3. clear
Essential Parts of the Written Constitution:
1. constitution of liberty
2. constitution of government
3. constitution of sovereignty
2 steps in the amendment or revision of our Constitution:
1. Proposal
1. Constituent Assembly (vote of of Congress)
2. Constitutional Convention (call by 2/3 vote of Congress, or thrown to people by
majority vote of Congress)
3. People's Initiative [Amendment only] (12% of registered voters with 3% of registered
voters in each legislative district)
2. Ratification (majority of the votes cast in the plebiscite; 60-90 days)
Judicial Review of Amendments
The amending process, both as to proposal and ratification, raises a judicial question (Sanidad vs
COMELEC)
Doctrine of Proper Submission
Amendments cannot be submitteed to the people in a piecemeal fashion wherein the other
amendments are to follow. The people should have a frame of reference from which to read the
amendments being proposed. (Tolentino vs COMELEC)
II. The Constitution and The Courts

Diory Rabajante

Voting on en banc cases

majority of the members who actually took part in the deliberation on the issues in the case
and voted thereon
Doctrine of Purposeful Hesitation
- symbolic function of the court
- the court would not decide on matters which are considered political questions
Requisites of Judicial Inquiry: [APE-N]
1. ACTUAL CASE - there must be an actual case or controversy
Actual case- conflict of legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims
susceptible of judicial adjudication
2. PROPER PARTY - the question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party
Proper party one who has sustained or is in immediate danger of sustaining an
injury as a result of the act complained of
3. EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY - the constitutional question must be raised at the earliest
possible opportunity
what is not alleged cannot be proven
if question is not raised in the pleadings, it could not be raised at the trial,
except:
1. in criminal case can be raised any time in the discretion of court
2. in civil case - can be raised at any stage if necessary to the determination of the
case
3. in every case (except when there is estoppel) - can be raised at any stage if it
involves jurisdiction of the court
4. NECESSITY OF DECIDING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION - the decision of the
constitutional question must be necessary to the determination of the case itself
as long as there is some other basis that can be used by the courts for its decision,
the constitutionality of the challenged law will not be touched and the case will be
decided on other available grounds
Effects of Declaration of Unconstitutionality, 2 views:
ORTHODOX VIEW an unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights, imposes
no duties, and affords no protection
MODERN VIEW [OPERATIVE FACT DOCTRINE] the court does not annul or repeal
the statute it finds in conflict with the Constitution; it simply refuses to recognize it; the
decision affects the parties only and there is no judgment against the statue; the actual
existence of the statute prior to its declaration of unconstitutionality was an operative
fact and might have consequences which could not justly be ignored <more realistic
approach>
Partial Unconstitutionality, when valid (2 conditions):
1. the legislature is willing to retain the valid portions even if the rest of the statute is
declared illegal; and
2. the valid portions can stand independently as a separate statute
Diory Rabajante

III. The Fundamental Powers of the State

Police Power
Power of Eminent Domain
Power of Taxation
Similarities:
1. they are inherent in the State
2. they are necessary and indispensable
3. they are methods by which the State interferes with private rights
4. they presuppose an equivalent compensation
5. they are execised primarily by the legislature
Differences:
DIFFERENCES
As to regulation

POLICE POWER
regulates both liberty
and property

EMINENT DOMAIN

TAXATION

regulates property rights regulates property rights

only
only

As to who may exercise only the government

government and some

private entities

only the government

As to the property taken destroyed because it is

noxious or intended for
noxious purpose

-wholesome
-taken for a public use
or purpose

-wholesome
-taken for a public use
or purpose

As to Compensation

full and fair equivalent

of the property
expropriated

protection and public

improvements for the
taxes paid

intangible altruistic
feeling that the person
has contributed to the
general welfare

Limitations: Bill of Rights

IV. Police Power
-power of promoting the welfare by restraining and regulating the use of liberty and property
Characteristics:
most pervasive, least limitable and most demanding of the 3 powers
Justification:
Salus populi est suprema lex the welfare of the people is the supreme law
Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas a person must use his own property so as not to injure
another
Scope:
1. cannot be bargained away through the medium of a treaty or contract (Stone v
Mississippi)
Diory Rabajante

2. may use taxing power as its implement (Tio vs Videogram Regulatory Board)
3. may use eminent domain as its implement (Assoc. of Small Landowners vs Sec. of
Agrarian Reform)
4. could be given retroactive effect and may reasonably impair vested rights or contracts
(police power prevails over contract)
5. dynamic, not static, and must move with the moving society it is supposed to regulate
Who may exercise Police Power
the Legislature (inherent)
President (by delegation)
administrative boards (by delegation)
lawmaking bodies on all municipal levels, including barangay (by delegation)
Municipal governments / LGU's (conferred by statute general welfare clause of RA
7160)
Tests (Limitations):
1. LAWFUL SUBJECT interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a
particular class, require the exercise of police power
2. LAWFUL MEANS the means employed are reasonably necessary for the
accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly oppressive upon individuals
Additional limitations (when exercised by delegate):
express grant by law (e.g. RA 7160)
within territorial limits (for LGU's)
must not be contrary to law (City Government of Quezon City vs Ericta)
for municipal ordinances 1. must not contravene the Constitution or any statute
2. must not be unfair and oppressive
3. must not be partial and discriminatory
4. must not prohibit, but may regulate, trade
5. must not be unreasonable
6. must be general in application and consistent with public policy
V. Power of Eminent Domain
- a.k.a. Expropriation; Condemnation
use of the government of its coercive authority, upon just compensation, to forcibly acquire
the needed property in order to devote the same to public use
(see Rule 67, Rules of Court and Sec. 9, Art III, Constitution)
Who may Exercise
1. The Congress (inherent)
2. President
3. various local legislative bodies
4. certain public corporations (e.g. National Housing Authority)
Diory Rabajante

5. Quasi-public corporations (e.g. PLDT)

Eminent Domain vs. Destruction from Necessity
EMINENT DOMAIN
DESTRUCTION FROM NECESSITY
- public right
- arises from the laws of society and is vested in
the state or grantee, acting under the right and
power of the state or benefit of the state

- private right vested in every individual with

which the right of state or state necessity has
nothing to do
- comes under the right of necessity, of selfpreservation
- arises under the laws of society or society itself
- cannot require the conversion of the property
taken to public use, nor is there any need for the
payment of just compensation

Jurisdiction over a complaint for eminent domain Regional Trial Court (RTC)
Requisites of Eminent Domain [NP-TPJ]:
1. [N] NECESSITY OF EXERCISE
2. [P] PROPERTY
3. [T] TAKING
4. [P] PUBLIC USE
5. [J] JUST COMPENSATION
[N] Necessity of Exercise
- genuine necessity, and
- must be of public character
When exercised by legislature political question
When exercised by a delegate justiciable question
determine the: (a) adequacy of compensation; (b) necessity of taking; and (c)
public use character
[P] Property
GENERAL RULE: anything that can come under the dominion of man is subject to
expropriation
EXCEPTIONS: money and chose in action (personal right not reduced into possession, i.e.
the right to bring an action to recover debt, money or thing)
Private property already devoted to public use cannot be expropriated by a delegate acting
under a general grant of authority (City of Manila vs Chinese Community)
[T] Taking
- REQUISITES (Republic vs Castellvi) [EM-LPD]:
1. [E] expropriator must enter a private property
2. [M] entry must be for more than a momentary period
3. [L] entry must be under the warrant of legal authority
4. [P] entry is for public use
Diory Rabajante

5. [D] the owner is deprived of enjoying his property

- if taking is under police power, it is not compensable
TAKING UNDER EMINENT DOMAIN vs TAKING IN POLICE POWER :
POLICE POWER
EMINENT DOMAIN
the prejudice suffered by the individual property
owner is shared in common with the rest of the
community

the individual suffers more than his aliquot part of

the damages, i.e. a special injury above that
sustained by the rest of the community

- where there is taking in the constitutional sense, the property owner need not file a claim for
just compensation with the Commission on Audit; he may go directly to the court to demand
payment. Arbitrary action of the government shall be deemed a waiver of its immunity from suit
(Amigable vs Cuenca)
[P] Public Use
whatever may be beneficially employed for the general welfare (Heirs of Ardona vs Reyes)
includes both direct or indirect benefit or advantage to the public
[J] Just Compensation
full and fair equivalent of the property taken from the property owner by the expropriator
that sum of money which a person, desirous but not compelled to buy, and an owner, willing
but not compelled to sell, would agree on as a price to be given and received therefor

WHERE ONLY PART OF HE PROPERTY IS EXPROPRIATED :

entitlement to consequential damages, if any + consequential benefits must be deducted from
the total compensation provided consequential benefits does not exceed consequential
damages

Payment of the correct amount + Payment within a reasonable time

FORM OF COMPENSATION :
* money (However, in Assoc. of Small Landowners vs Sec. of Agrarian Reform, payment is
allowed to be made partly in bonds because it deals with a revolutionary kind of
expropriation)

TRANSFER OF TITLE
- Payment of just compensation before title is transferred

RECKONING POINT OF MARKET VALUE OF PROPERTY :

- either as of the date of taking or filing of the complaint, whichever comes first

ENTITLEMENT TO INTEREST :
General Rule: when there is delay, there must be interest by way of damages (Art. 2209,
CC)
Exception: when waived by not claiming the interest
Diory Rabajante

PAYMENT OF TAXES :
- Taxes paid from the time of the taking until the transfer of the title, during which the owner
did not enjoy any beneficial use of the property, are reimbursable by the expropriator.

RIGHT OF LANDOWNER IN CASE OF NON-PAYMENT

General Rule: landowner is not entitled to recover possession of the property, but only to
demand payment
Exception: when the government failed to pay just compensation within 5 years from the
finality of judgment in expropriation proceedings, there is a right to recover property

VI. Power of Taxation

method by which contributions are exacted from persons and property for the support of
government and for all public needs.

obligation to pay taxes is a duty

TAXES vs LICENSES
TAX
LICENSE
- to raise revenues

- for regulatory purpose only

- justified under police power
- amount of fees required is usually limited to the
cost of regulation

Scope
all income earned in the taxing state, whether by citizens or aliens, and all immovable and
tangible personal properties found in its territory, as well as tangible personal property owned
by persons domiciled therein
Power to Tax Includes Power to Destroy
when used validly as an implement of the police power in discouraging and in effect
ultimately prohibiting certain things or enterprises inimical to public welfare
Power to Tax Does Not Include Power to Destroy
- where the tax is used solely for the purpose of raising revenues
Who May Exercise
1. Legislature / Congress (inherent)
2. President (by delegation / tariff powers [Sec. 28 (2), Art. VI, Consti])
3. local legislative bodies (conferred by direct authority [Sec. 5, Art. X, Consti])
Limitations of Taxation [DEP]:
1. [D] Due Process of Law
2. [E] Equal Protection
3. [P] Public Purpose
[D] Due Process
A. Substantive : tax should not be confiscatory except when used as an implement of police
Diory Rabajante

power
B. Procedural : * due process does not require previous notice and hearing before a law
prescribing specific taxes on specific articles may be enacted. * However, where the tax to be
collected is to be based on the value of the taxable property, the taxpayer is entitled to be notified
of the assessment proceedings and to be heard therein on the correct valuation of the property.
[E] Equal Protection
embodied in Sec. 28 (1), Art. VI, 1987 Constitution (The rule of taxation shall be uniform
and equitable. The Congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation.)

UNIFORMITY persons or things belonging to the same class shall be taxed at the same
rate
* REQUISTES (Tan vs Del Rosario): [SCAE]
1. [S] standards that are used are substantial and not arbitrary
2. [C] categorization is germane to achieve the legislative purpose
3. [A] the law applies, all things being equal, to both present and future conditions
4. [E] classification applies equally well to all those belonging to the same class

EQUITABLE TAXATION based on the capacity to pay

* EQUALITY IN TAXATION tax shall be strictly proportional to the relative value of the
property

PROGRESSIVE SYSTEM OF TAXATION the rate increases as the tax base increases

[P] Public Purpose

whatever may be beneficially employed for the general welfare
Double Taxation / Direct Duplicate Taxation
when additional taxes are laid on the same subject by the same taxing jurisdiction during the
same taxing period and for the same purpose.
despite the lack of specific prohibition, double taxation will not be allowed if it results in a
violation of the equal protection clause.
Tax Exemptions
-may either be:
1. constitutional
- Art. Vi, Sec. 28 (3) : when lands, buildings and improvements are actually, directly and
exclusively [ADE] for religious, charitable or educational purposes entitled to exemption
2. statutory- discretion of legislature
VII. Due Process of Law
no precise definition because it might prove constricting and prevent the judiciary from
adjusting it to the circumstances of particular cases
responsiveness to the supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of justice
embodiment of sporting idea of fair play
Diory Rabajante

guaranty against any arbitrariness on the part of the government

Protection of Person
Covers Natural (citizen and alien) and Artificial Persons. As to the latter, with respect only to
property because its life and liberty are derived from and subject to control of legislature
Deprivation (in Sec. 1, Art. III)
connotes denial of right to life, liberty or property
not unconstitutional. what is prohibited is deprivation without due process of law.
Life
connotes integrity of the physical person
not mere animal existence; embraces the enjoyment by the individual of God-given faculties
that can make his life worth living.
Liberty
freedom to do right and never wrong (Mabini)
right to be free from arbitrary personal restraint or servitude
Property
anything that can come under the right of ownership and be the subject of contract
all things within the commerce of man

However, one cannot have a vested right to a public office as this is not regarded as property.
If created by statute, it may be abolished by the legislature at any time.

Mere privileges are not property rights and are therefore revocable at will
Substantive Due Process
requires intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with the rights of the person to his life,
liberty or property
REQUISITES
1. Lawful Subject
2. Lawful Means
Procedural Due Process
- restriction on actions of judicial and quasi-judicial agencies of government
- Notice + Hearing (...hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders
judgment only after trial)
1. Judicial Due Process
Requisites: [IJHJ]
1. [I] Impartial and Competent Court
2. [J] Jurisdiction lawfully acquired over the person of t he defendant and/or property
3. [H] Hearing
- not necessarily trial-type hearing; submission of position papers is enough
- right of a party to cross-examine the witness against him in a civil case is an
indispensable part of due process
- the filing of a motion for reconsideration cures the defect of absence of a hearing
Diory Rabajante

- Cases in which notice and hearing may be dispensed with without violating due
process:
a) abatement of nuisance per se
b) preventive suspension of a civil servant facing admin. charges
c) cancellation of passport of a person sought for the commission of a crime
d) statutory presumptions
4. [J] Judgment rendered upon lawful hearing
2. Administrative Due Process
REQUISITES [HEDSPIK]:
1. [H] Right to a hearing
2. [E] Tribunal must consider the evidence presented
3. [D] Decision must have something to support itself
4. [S] Evidence must be Substantial
5. [P] Decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing, or at least
contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected
6. [I] Tribunal, body, or any of its judges must act on its or his own independent
consideration of the facts and law of the controversy
7. [K] Decision is rendered in such a manner that the parties to the proceeding can know
the various issues involved, and the reason for the decision rendered
VIII. Equal Protection
embraced in the concept of due process
embodied in a separate clause to provide for a more specific guaranty against undue
favoritism or hostility from the government
DUE PROCESS CLAUSE attacks ARBITRARINESS in general
EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE attacks UNWARRANTED PARTIALITY OR
PREJUDICE
SUBSTANTIVE EQUALITY all persons or things similarly situated should be treated alike,
both as to rights conferred and responsibilities imposed.
EQUALITY IN ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW law be enforced and applied equally
A law which denies equal protection is the same with a law which permits such denial. (read
People vs Vera)
Requisites:
1. it must be based on substantial distinctions
2. it must be germane to the purposes of the law
3. it must not be limited to existing conditions only
- must be enforced as long as the problem sought to be corrected exists
4. it must apply equally well to all members of the class
- both as to rights conferred and obligations imposed
IX. Searches and Seizures
Diory Rabajante

Section 2, Article III deals with tangibles; embodies the castle doctrine (a man's house is
his castle; a citizen enjoys the right against intrusion and is master of all the surveys within the
domain and privacy of his own home.)
Section 3 (1), Article III deals with intangibles
Section 3 (2), Artivle III Exclusionary Rule (which embodies the Doctrine of the Fruit of the
Poisonous Tree)

available to natural and artificial persons, but the latter's books of accounts may be required
to open for examination by the State in the exercise of police power or power of taxation
The right is personal (Stonehill vs Diokno)
may be invoked only against the State (People vs Marti)
Only a judge may issue a warrant. EXCEPTION: orders of arrest may be issued by
administrative authorities but only for the purpose of carrying out a final finding of a
violation of a law
VALID WARRANTLESS SEARCHES [NOTE: each of these requires probable cause,
except stop and frisk]
1. searches incidental to lawful arrest (rule 126, Rules of Court) for dangerous weapons or
anything that may have been used or constitute in the commission of an offense
Requisites:
1. the item to be searched was within the arrestee's custody or area of immediate
control
2. the search was contemporaneous with the arrest
2. searches of moving vehicles
3. searches of prohibited articles in plain view
Requisites:
1. prior valid intrusion to a place
2. evidence was inadvertently discovered by the police who has the right to be there
3. evidence is immediately apparent
4. there is no further search
4. enforcement of customs law
5. consented searches
6. stop and frisk (limited protective search of outer clothing for weapons)
7. routine searches at borders and ports of entry
8. searches of businesses in the exercise of visitorial powers to enforce police regulations

- VALID WARRANTLESS ARREST:

1. in flagrante delicto
2. hot pursuit
3. the offender escaped from the penal establishment
Requisites of a valid warrant:
REQUISTES

ARREST WARRANT

SEARCH WARRANT

1. Probable Cause

such facts and circumstances

such facts and circumstances

Diory Rabajante

- must refer to 1 specific

offense

which would lead a reasonably

prudent man to believe that an
offense has been committed and
the person sought to be arrested
had committed it

2. Personal determination of
probable cause by the judge

the judge personally determines

the existence of probable cause;
it is not necessary that he should
personally examine the
complainant and his witnesses
(Soliven vs Makasiar)

which would lead a reasonably

prudent man to believe that an
offense has been committed and
the objects sought in the
connection of the offense are in
the place sought to be searched

the judge must personally

examine in the form of searching
questions and answers...
in writing and under oath...
the complainants and his
witnesses...
on facts personally known to
them...
-procedure; (1) personally
and attach to the record their
evaluate the fiscal's report, or (2) sworn statements and affidavits.
if [1] is insufficient, disregard it (Silva vs Presiding Judge)
and require the submission of
supporting affidavits of
witnesses
*PRELIMINARY INQUIRY
(task of the judge)
determination of probable cause
for the issuance of warrant of
arrest
*PRELIMINARY
IVESTIGATION PROPER (task
of the prosecutor)
ascertainment whether the
offender should be held for trial
or be released

3. After examination under oath not merely routinary but must be not merely routinary but must be
or affirmation of the complainant probing and exhaustive
probing and exhaustive
and the witnesses he may
produce
4. Particularity of description

GENERAL RULE: it must

contain the name/s of the
persons to be arrested
EXCEPTION: if there is some
descriptio personae which will
enable the officer to identify the
accused

GENERAL RULE: when the

description therein is as specific
as the circumstances will
ordinarily allow.
EXCEPTION: when no other
more accurate and detailed
description could have been
given.
Diory Rabajante

X. Liberty of Abode and Travel

Purpose of the Provision (Art. III, Sec. 6):
to further emphasize the individual's liberty as safeguarded in general terms by the due process
clause. Liberty under that clause includes the right to choose one's residence.
Limitations
1. LIBERTY OF ABODE - upon lawful order of the court
2. RIGHT TO TRAVEL - national security, public safety or public health as may be
provided by law
Caunca vs Salazar
82 Phil 851

Rubi vs Provincial
Board of Mindoro
1919
Villavicencio
Lukban
1919

vs

Salonga vs Hermoso
97 SCRA 121
Lorenzo vs Dir. of
Health
1927
Manotok vs CA
1986
Marcos vs Manglapus
1989

Philippine Association
of Service Exporters
vs Drilon
1988

Whether a maid had the right to transfer to another residence even if she had
not paid yet the amount advances by an employment agency:
Yes. The fortunes of business cannot be controlled by controlling a
fundamental human freedom.
Human dignity and freedom are essentially spiritual inseparable from the
idea of eternal. Money, power, etc. belong to the ephemeral and perishable.
The respondents were justified in requiring the members of certain nonChristian tribes to reside in a reservation, for their better education,
advancement and protection. The measure was a legitimate exercise of police
power.
Prostitutes, despite being in a sense lepers, are not chattels but Philippine
citizens, protected by the same constitutional guarantee of freedom of abode.
They may not be compelled to change their domicile in the absence of a law
allowing such.
the case became moot and academic when the permit to travel abroad was
issued before the case could be heard.
Laws for the segregation of lepers have been provided the world over and is
supported by high scientific authority. Such segregation is premised on the
duty to protect public health.
Bail posted in a criminal case, is a valid restriction on the right to travel. By
its nature, it may serve as a prohibition on an accused from leaving the
jurisdiction of the Philippines where orders of Philippine courts would have
no binding force.
The liberty of abode and the right to travel includes the right to leave, reside
and travel within ones country but it does not include the right to return to
ones country.
NOTE: Court warned that this case should not create a precedent because
Marcos was a class in himself.
Right to travel may be impaired in the interest of national security, public
health or public order, as may be provided by law.
An order temporarily suspending the deployment of overseas workers is
constitutional for having been issued in the interest of the safety of OFWs, as
provided by the Labor Code.
Diory Rabajante

XI. FREEDOM OF RELIGION

Religion defined
any specific system of belief, worship, conduct, etc., often involving a code of ethics and
philosophy (definition ni Cruz)
The aforesaid definition is comprehensive than that given in Aglipay vs Ruiz (a profession
of faith to an active power that binds and elevates man to his Creator). This is because
there are religions, which do not make reference to a God, e.g Buddhism, Atheism, etc.
(comment ko: The definition is too vague. It is too broad that it can even cover systems of
belief that we do not consider as religions. If we are to accept the definition, it would be
tantamount to calling different schools of thought, e.g. Analytic tradition, Existentialism,
as religions.)
TWO GUARANTEES CONTAINED IN SEC. 5:
1. Non-establishment clause
2. Free exercise of religious profession and worship
[1] NON-ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE
as stated by Cruz: there is no violation of this clause if:
1. the statute has a secular purpose
2. its prinipal effect is one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; and
3. it does not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion

reinforces Sec. 6, Art. II on the separation of church and State

other provisions which support this: Sec 2(5), Art. IX-C [a religious sect or denomination
cannot be registered as a political party], Sec 5(2), Art. VI [no sectoral representative
from the religious sector], and Sec 29 (2), Art. VI [prohibition against the use of public
money or property for the benefit of any religion, or of any priest, minister or ecclsiastic],
Sec. 28 (3), Art. VI [exemption from taxation of properties actually, directly and
exclusively used for religious purposes, Sec 4(2), Art XIV [citizenship requirement of
ownership of educational institutions except those owned by religious groups], Sec 29(2),
Art VI [appropriation allowed where the minister is employed in the armed forces, penal
institution or government-owned orphanage or leprosarium]

Scope: the state cannot set up a church, nor pass laws which aid one religion, aid all
religion, or prefer one religion...

Rationale:
o to delineate boundaries between the 2 institutions; and
o to avoid encroachment by one against the other.
Diory Rabajante

o [Strong fences make good neighbors; Render unto Ceasar the things that are
Ceasar's and unto God the things that are God's.]

A union of Church and State would either:

o tend to destroy government and to degrade religion; or
o result in a conspiracy because of its composite strength

separation of church and state is not a wall of hostility

The Government is neutral. It protects all, but prefers none and disparages none.

Freedom of religion includes freedom from religion; the right to worship includes right
not to worship

- Two values sought to be protected by the non-establishment clause:

(a) Voluntarism the growth of a religious sect as a social force must come from the
voluntary support of its members because of the belief that both spiritual and secular
society will benefit if religions are allowed to compete on their own intrinsic merit
without benefit of official patronage.
(b) Insulation of the political process from interfaith dissension voluntarism cannot be
achieved unless the political process is insulated from religion and unless religion is
insulated from politics.
Engel vs Vitale

recitation by students in public schools in New York of a prayer composed by

the Board of Regents was unconstitutional
Everson vs Board of US Supreme Court sustained the law providing free transportation for all
Education
schoolchildren without discrimination, including those attending parochial
schools
Board of Education vs US Supreme Court sustained the law requiring the petitioner to lend
Allen
textbooks free of charge to all students from grades 7-12, including those
attending private schools
In Everson and Allen, the government aid was given directly to the student and parents, not to the
church-related school
Adong vs Cheong in line with the constitutional principle of equal treatment of all religions, the
Seng Gee
State recognizes the validity of marriages performed in conformity with the
rites of Mohammedan religion
Rubi vs Provincial the expression non-Christian in non-Christian tribes was not meant to
Board
discriminate. It refers to degree of civilization, not to the religious belief.
Islamic
Da'wah by arrogating to itself the task of issuing halal certifications, the State has, in
Council
of
the effect, forced Muslims to accept its own interpretation of the Qur'an and
Philippines vs Office Sunna on halal food.
of Exec. Sec.

Intramural Religious Dispute = outside the jurisdiction of the secular authorities

Diory Rabajante

Gonzales vs
Archbishop of Manila
Fonacier v CA

where a civil right depends upon some matter pertaining to ecclesiastical

affairs, the civil tribunal tries the civil right and nothing more.
where the dispute involves the property rights of the religious group, or the
relations of the members where the property rights are involved, the civil
courts may assume jurisdiction.

[2] FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE

2 aspects:
1. FREEDOM TO BELIEVE
absolute
includes not to believe
everyone has a right to his beliefs and he may not be called to account
because he cannot prove what he believes
2. FREEDOM TO ACT ACCORDING TO ONE'S BELIEFS
happens when the individual externalizes his beliefs in acts or omissions
subject to regulation; can be enjoyed only with proper regard to rights of
others
Justice Frankfurter: the constitutional provision on religious freedom
terminated disabilities, it did not create new privileges... its essence is freedom
from conformity to religious dogma, not freedom from conformity to law
because of religious dogma
German vs Barangan
SC found that petitioners were not sincere in their
profession of religious liberty and were using it
merely to express their opposition to the government
Ebralinag vs division SC reversed Gerona vs Sec. of Educ. , and upheld
Superintendent
of the right of petitioners to refute to salute the
Schools of Cebu
Philippine flag on account of their religious scruples.
People vs Zosa
invocation of religious scruples in order to avoid
military service was brushed aside by the SC
Victoriano vs Elizalde SC upheld the validity of RA 3350, exempting
Rope Workers Union
members of a religious sect from being compelled to
join a labor union
American Bible
the constitutional guarantee of free exercise carries
Society vs City of
with it the right to disseminate information, and any
Manila
restraint of such right can be justified only on the
ground that there is a clear and present danger of an
evil which the State has the right to prevent;
Hence, City ordinance imposing license fees to on
sale is inapplicable to the society
Tolentino vs Sec. of the free exercise clause does not prohibit imposing a
Finance
generally applicable sales and use tax on the sale of
religious materials;
the registration fee is not imposed for the exerise of
a privilege, but only for the purpose of defraying
Diory Rabajante

part of the cost of registration

Compelling State Interest test [Estrada vs Escritor]

the constitution's religion clause's prescribe not a strict bu a benevolent
neutrality (which recognizes that government must pursue its secular goals
and interests, but at the same time, strive to uphold religious liberty to the
greatest extent possible within flexible constitutional limits
benevolent neutrality could allow for accomodation morality based on
religion provided it does not offend the compelling state interest test.
two steps (as regards the test):
1. inquire whether respondent's right to religious freedom has been
burdened; and
2. ascertain respondent's sincerity in her religious belief.
solicitiations for religious purposes requires not a prior permit from DSWD as
it is not included in solicitations for charitable or public welfare purposes.
[Centeno vs Villalon-Pornillos]

RELIGIOUS TESTS

Purpose: to stop government's clandestine attempts to prevent a person from exercising his
civil or political rights because of his religious beliefs.
People vs Zosa

invocation of religious scruples in order to avoid military service was

brushed aside by the SC

XII. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Freedom of Speech at once the instrument and the guaranty and the bright consummate
flower of all liberty. (Wendell Philips)
Scope
Freedom of Expression is available only insofar as it is exercised for the discussion of
matters affecting the public interest. Purely private interest matters do not come within
the guaranty (invasion of privacy is not sanctioned by the Constitution).
covers ideas that are acceptable to the majority and the unorthodox view. (One of the
functions of this freedom is to invite dispute US Supreme Court; I may not agree
with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. - Voltaire)
The freedom to speak includes the right to silent. (This freedom was meant not only to
protect the minority who want to talk but also to benefit the majority who refuse to listen.
- Socrates)
Importance
The ultimate good desired is better reached by a free trade in ideas that the best test of truth is
Diory Rabajante

the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market; and that truth is
the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out.
Modes of Expression
Oral and written language
Symbolisms (e.g. bended knee, salute to the flag, cartoons)
ELEMENTS:
Freedom from previous restraint or censorship
Freedom from subsequent punishment
[1] FREEDOM FROM PREVIOUS RESTRAINT OR CENSORSHIP

embodied in Art. III, Sec. 4 [No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of
expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peacably to assemble and petition the
government for redress of grievances.]

CENSORSHIP conditions the exercise of freedom of expression upon the prior approval of
the government. Only those ideas acceptable to it are allowed to be disseminated.

CENSOR, therefore, assumes the role of arbiter for the people, usually applying his own
subjective standards in determining the good and the not. Such is anathema in a free society.

Grosjean vs American
Press Co.
Burgos vs Chief of
Staff
Mutuc vs COMELEC
Sanidad vs
COMELEC

There need not be total suppression; even restriction of circulation constitutes

censorship
the search, padlocking and sealing of the offices of Metropolitan Mail and We
Forum by military authorities, resulting in the discontinuance of publication
of the newspapers, was held to be prior restraint
the COMELEC prohibition against the use of taped jingles in the mobile
units used in the campaign was held to be unconstitutional, as it was in the
nature of censorship
the Court annulled the COMELEC prohibition against radio commentators or
newspaper columnists from commenting on the issues involved in the
scheduled plebiscite on the organic law creating the Cordillera Autonomous
Region as an unconstitutional restraint on freedom of expression

But...
Gonzales vs
COMELEC

the Court upheld the validity of the law which prohibited, except during the
prescribed election period, the making of speeches, announcements or
commentaries for or against the election of any party or candidate for public
office.
JUSTIFICATION: the inordinate preoccupation of the people with politics
tended toward the neglect of the other serious needs of the nation and the
pollution of its suffrages.
Iglesia ni Cristo vs The Board of Review for Motion Pictures and Television (BRMPT) has the
CA
authority to review the petitioner's television program.
However, the Board acted with grave abuse of discretion when it gave an XDiory Rabajante

rating to the TV program on the ground of attacks against another religion.

Such a classification can be justified only if there is a showing that the tv
program would create a clear and present danger of an evil which the State
ought to prevent.
Primicias vs Fugosos The respondent mayor could only reasonably regulate, not absolutely
prohibit, the use of public places for the purpose indicated.
National Press Club the Supreme Court upheld the validity of Sec. 11(b), RA 6646, which
vs COMELEC
prohibited any person making use of the media to sell or to give free of
charge print space or air time for campaign or other political purposes except
to the COMELEC. This was held to be within the power of the COMELEC to
supervise the enjoyment or utilization of franchises for the operation of media
of communication and information, for the purpose of ensuring equal
opportunity, time and space, and the right to reply, as well as uniform and
reasonable rates of charges for the use of such media facilities.
Osmea vs
SC reaffirmed validity of RA 6646 as a legitimate exercise of police power.
COMELEC
The regulation is unrelated to the suppression of speech, as any restriction on
freedom of expression occasioned thereby is only incidental and no more
than is necessary to achieve the purpose of promoting equality.
NOTE: This is not inconsistent with the ruling in PPI vs COMELEC, because
in the latter, SC simply said that COMELEC cannot procure print space
without paying just compensation.
Adiong vs
COMELEC's resolution prohibiting the posting of decals, and stickers in
COMELEC
mobile units like cars and other moving vehicles was declared
unconstitutional for infringmenet of freedom of expression.
Besides, the constitutional objective of giving the rich and poor candidates'
equal opportunity to inform the electorate is not violated by the posting of
decals and stickers on cars and other vehicles.
Overbreadth doctrine = prohibits the government from achieving its
purpose by means that weep unnecessarily broadly, reaching constitutionally
protected as well as unprotected activity; the government has gone too far; its
legitimate interest can be satisfied without reaching so broadly into the area
of protected freedom.
Gonzales vs katigbak petitioner questioned the classification of the movie as for adults only. the
petition was dismissed because the Board did not commit grave abuse of
discretion.
[2] FREEDOM FROM SUBSEQUENT PUNISHMENT

embodied in Art. III, Sec. 18 (1) [No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political
beliefs and aspirations]

without this assurance, the individual would hesitate to speak for fear that he might be held to
account for his speech, or that he might be provoking the vengeance of the officials he may
have criticized.

not absolute; subject to police power and may be regulated (freedom of expression does not
Diory Rabajante

cover ideas offensive to public order)

- Obscenity
US vs Kottinger
People vs Go Pin

Pita vs CA
Miller vs California

SC acquitted accused who was charged of having offered for sale

pictures of half-clad members of non-Christian tribes, holding that he
had only presented them in their native attire
Accused was convicted for exhibiting nude paintings and pictures,
notwithstanding his claim that he had done so in the interest of art.
SC, noting that he has charged admission fees to the exhibition, held
that his purpose was commercial, not merely artistic.
SC declared that the determination of what is obscene is a judicial
function.
Test of Obscenity:
whether the average person, applying contemporary
community standards, would find that the work, taken as a
whole, appeals to the prurient interest
whether the work depicts, in a patently offensive way, sexual
conduct specifically defined by the applicable law
whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary,
artistic, political or scientific value

Justice Douglas, dissent: I do not think we, the judges, were ever
given the constitutional power to make definitions of obscenity.
Obscenity is a hodgepodge.
- The Courts should not apply a national standard but the standard of the community in which
the material is being tested.
- Criticism of Official Conduct
Lagunzad vs Sotto
the Court granted the petition to restrain the public exhibition of the
Vda. de Gonzales
movie Moises Padilla Story, because it contained fictionalized
embellishments.
Being a public figure does not destroy one's right to privacy.
Ayer Productions vs
the tribunal upheld the primacy of freedom of expression over
Judge Capulong
Enrile's right to privacy, because Enrile was a public figure and a
public figure's right to privacy is narrower than that of an ordinary
citizen. Besides, the movie Four Days of Revolution (sabi ni Cruz)
/ A Dangerous Life (sabi ni Nachura) / The Four Day Revolution
(sabi sa case) would not be historically faithful without including
therein the participation of Enrile in the EDSA revolution.
US vs Bustos
SC compared criticism of official conduct to a scalpel that relieves
the abscesses of officialdom
People vs Alarcon
newspaper publications tending to impede, obstruct, embarrass or
influence the courts in administering justice in a pending suit or
proceeding constitutes criminal contempt which is summarily
punishable by the courts.
In re Jurado
a publication that tends to impede, embarrass or obstruct the court
Diory Rabajante

In re Sotto
In re Tulfo
In re Laureta

Zaldivar vs
Sandiganbayan

and constitutes a clear and present danger to the administration of

justice is not protected by the guarantee of press freedom and is
punishable by contempt.
It is not necessary that publication actually obstructs the
administration of justice, it is enough that it tends to do so.
a senator was punished for contempt for having attacked a decision
of SC which he called incompetent and narrow-minded, and
announcing that he would file a bill for its reorganization
Tulfo's Sangkatutak na Bobo column was held contumacious.
Freedom of the press is subordinate to the decision, authority and
integrity of the judiciary and the proper administration of justice.
a lawyer was held in contempt and suspended from the practice of
law for wrting individual letters to members of the SC division that
decided a case against his client, arrogantly questioning their
decision
a member of the Bar who imputed charges of improper influence,
corruption and other misdeeds to members of the Supreme Court was
suspended from the practice of law as neither the right of free
speech nor the right to engage in political activities can be so
construed or extended as to permit any such liberties to a member of
the bar.

Right of students to free speech in school premises not absolute.

GENERAL RULE: a student shall not be expelled or suspended solely on the basis of articles
he has written
EXCEPTION: when the article materially disrupts class work or involves substantial disorder
or invasion of rights of others, the school has the right to discipline its students (in such a
case, it may expel or suspend the student)

Tests of valid governmental interference (criteria in determining the liability of the

individual for ideas expressed by him) :
1.

Clear and Present Danger Rule

- most libertarian
- whether the words are used in such circumstances and of such a nature as to create a
clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that the State has
the right to prevent.
- the substantive evil must be extremely serious and the degree of imminence extremely
high before utterances can be punished
- CLEAR = causal connection with the danger of the substantive evil arising from the
utterance
- PRESENT = time element; imminent and immediate danger (the danger must not only
be probable but also inevitable)
Terminiello vs
City of Chicago

(speech inside an auditorium with 800 persons)

speech is often provocative and challenging. hence,
Diory Rabajante

Primicias vs
Fugosos

Navarro vs
Villegas

Reyes vs
Bagatsing

2.

Dangerous Tendency Doctrine

- if the words uttered create a dangerous tendency of an evil which the State has the right
to prevent, then such words are punishable.
- Justice Holmes, critique of this doctrine: Every idea is an incitement. If believed, it is
acted on unless some other belief outweighs it, or some failure of energy stifles the
movement at its birth.
Bayan vs
Executive
Secretary Ermita
Cabansag vs
Fernandez
People vs Perez

3.

fighting words are not sufficient to convict a person

absent a clear and present danger of a serious substantive
evil
The respondent mayor could only reasonably regulate, not
absolutely prohibit, the use of public places for the purpose
indicated.
the condition of Manila at that time did not justify the
mayor's fears. there was no clear and present danger.
decided in 1947
(compare with Primicias case)
SC sustained respondent mayor's act of refusing to issue a
permit enabling students to hold a public rally. Mayor feared
the rally would result to public disorder.
- decided in 1970
the denial of a permit to hold a public rally was invalid as there
was no showing of the probability of a clear and present
danger of an evil that might arise as a result of the meeting.
The burden of proving such eventually rests on the Mayor.

6. the Calibrated Pre-emptive Response Policy is null and

void. Respondents are enjoined from using it and to strictly
observe the requirements of maximum tolerance.
It is not necessary that some definite or immediate acts of
force or violence be advocated. It is sufficient that such acts be
advocated in general terms.
A mere tendency toward the evil was enough.
Accused declared: The Filipinos like myself must use bolos
for cutting off (Governor-General) Wood's head for having
recommended a bad thing for the Filipinos, for he has killed
our independence.
He was sentenced to jail.

Balance of Interest Test

- when particular conduct is regulated in the interest of public order, and the regulation
results in an indirect, conditional, partial abridgment of speech, the duty of the courts is to
determine which of the two conflicting interests demands the greater protection under the
circumstances presented.
- Justice Black, critique: it, in effect, allows the courts to decide that this freedom may
not be enforced unless they believe it is reasonable to do so.
Diory Rabajante

CLEAR AND PRESENT

DANGER RULE

DANGEROUS TENDENCY
RULE

BALANCE OF INTEREST
RULE

liberty is preferred

Authority is preferred

the issue is resolved in the light

of the peculiar circumstances
obtaining in each particular case

Assembly and Petition

public issues are better resolved after an exchange of view among citizens meeting with each
other for the purpose.
not subject to previous restraint or censorship
regulated by BP 880 (Public Assembly Act)
Tanada vs
Bagatsing
Malabanan vs
Ramento

Villar vs TIP

Non vs Dames

PBM
Employees
Assoc vs PBM

SC sustained the petitioner's motion compelling the mayor of Manila to issue a

permit to hold a rally, but changed the meeting place to Ugarte Field, a private
park
(several students were suspended for 1 year for conducting demonstration in
the premises of a university outside the area permitted by the school
authorities)
SC emphasized that the students did not shed their constitutional rights to free
speech at the schoolhouse gate, and permitted the students to re-enroll and
finish their studies.
(several students were barred from re-enrollment for participating in
demonstrations)
while the Court upheld the academic freedom of institutions of higher
learning, which includes the right to set academic standards to determine
under what circumstances failing grades suffice for expulsion of students, it
was held that this right cannot be utilized to discriminate against those who
exercise their constitutional rights to peaceful assembly.
SC abandons its ruling in Alcuaz vs PSBA (that enrolment of a student is a
semester-to-semester contract and the school may not be compelled to renew
the contract) upholding the primacy of freedom of expression, because the
students do not shed theur constitutionally protected rights at the school gate.
right to free assembly and petition prevails over economic rights.

Tests of a lawful assembly

Purpose Test
- ideally, the test should be the purpose for which the assembly is held, regardless of the
auspices under which it is organized
Auspices Test
- Evengelista vs Earnshaw: the mayor of Manila prohibited the members of the
Communist Party from holding any kind of meeting, revoking all permits previously
granted by him on the ground that the party had been found (by the fiscal's office) to be
Diory Rabajante

an illegal association.
Right of Association

Art. III, Sec. 8

deemed embraced in freedom of expression because the organization can be used as a vehicle
for the expression of views that have a bearing on public welfare.
SSS Employees
Assoc vs CA
Victoriano vs
Elizalde Rope
Workers' Union
Occena vs
COMELEC
In re Edillon

right to organize does not carry with it right to strike

right of association was not violated where political parties were prohibited
from participating in the barangay elections to insure the non-partisanship of
the candidates.
Bar integration does not compel the lawyer to associate with anyone.
Integration does not make a lawyer a member of any group of which he is not
already a member.

Access to Information
- the citizenry has a right to know what is going on in the country and in his government so he
can express his views thereon knowledgeably and intelligently

Valmonte v
Belmonte
1989
Baldoza v
Dimaano
1976
Legaspi v Civil
Service
Commission
1987
Chavez v
PCGG
1998

Echegaray case

The people have a right to access official records but they cannot compel
custodians of official records to prepare lists, abstracts, summaries and the
like, such not being based on a demandable legal right.
Judges cannot prohibit access to judicial records. However, a judge may
regulate the manner in which persons desiring to inspect, examine or copy
records in his office, may exercise their rights.
Personal interest is not required in asserting the right to information on matters
of public concern.
What matters constitute public concern should be determined by the court
on a case to case basis.
Public concern (def.) writings coming into the hands of public officers in
connection with their official functions
Ill-gotten wealth is, by its nature, a matter of public concern.
Privileged communication: (1) national security, (2) trade secrets, (3) criminal
matters pending in court,
SC held that making the Lethal Injection Manual inaccessible to the convict
was unconstitutional.
Diory Rabajante

XIII. THE IMPAIRMENT CLAUSE

Art. III, Sec. 10 of the Constitution
Purpose
- to safeguard the integrity of valid contractual agreements against unwarranted interference by
the State.
Contract defined
- any lawful agreement on property or property rights, whether real or personal, tangible or
intangible.
- does not cover:
(a) License (merely a permit or privilege to do what otherwise would be unlawful and is not
a contract with the government
(b) Marriage contract (regarded as social institution subject at all times to regulation by the
legislature and to change of the original conditions).
(c) Public office (public office is a public trust). EXCEPTION: where the salary has already
been earned, in which case it will be deemed a vested property right that cannot be
withdrawn or reduced.
Impairment
- retroactive
- anything that diminishes the efficacy of the contract
- right of a party is changed to his prejudice
- when a law:
(a) Changes the terms of a contract between parties
(b) Imposes new conditions
(c) Dispenses those expressed
(d) Authorizes for its satisfaction something different from that provided in its terms.
** A mere change in PROCEDURAL REMEDIES which does not change the substance of the
contract, and which still leaves an efficacious remedy for enforcement does NOT impair the
obligation of contracts.
Limitations
Police Power
- when a contract suffers from congenital infirmity, i.e. a contract which affects the
public welfare
Eminent Domain
Power of Taxation
- Tax exemptions are not contractual and so may be revoked at will by the legislature.
EXCEPTION: where a law grants a tax exemption in exchange for valuable
consideration, such exemption is considered a contract and cannot be repealed
because of the impairment clause.

Diory Rabajante

Clemons
Nolting
1922

v The following impair the obligation of a contract:

1. A law which changes the terms of a legal contract with respect to:
a. time or mode of performance
b. conditions that which imposes new or dispenses with
expressed conditions
2. A law which authorizes for the satisfaction of a contract something
different from that provided in its terms
A law which compels a creditor to accept Philippine pesos when a debt in US
currency is owing impairs the obligation of the contract.
Charles River The state is never presumed to surrender its police power.
Bridge
v A franchise granted to a company to collect tolls from a bridge is subject to the
Warren Bridge
duty and power of the state to provide for the improvement of an important
1837
line of travel.
Home Building
& Loan Assoc.
v Blaisdell
1934

The legislature cant bargain away public health, morals & safety. The police
power is considered a reserved power.
The legislature may not impair the obligation of a contract but may modify,
according to its wisdom, the remedy with which the obligations may be
enforced.
remedy modes of proceeding and forms to enforce the
contract provided it does not seriously impair the value of the
right
The reservation of state authority is read into and deemed part of contracts.
Stone
v A statute which subsequently outlaws gambling does not impair the obligation
Mississippi
of contract. A lottery charter is only a privilege which may be revoked by the
1879
exercise of the police power of the state, gambling being an appropriate
subject of regulation.
Manila Trading There is no vested right in remedies or modes of procedure. The legislature
v Reyes
may modify particular remedies for the enforcement of a contract without
1935
interfering with the obligation of the contract.
Rutter
v Police power may only be invoked against the impairment of contracts if:
Esteban
1. justified by an emergency furnished the proper occasion for the
1953
exercise of the reserved power of the state
2. temporary in nature operation limited to the exigency which called it
forth, which period may be reduced by the court
3. exercised upon reasonable conditions
4. impairment refers only to remedy and not to substantive right
5. addressed to a legitimate purpose the protection of the basic interests
of society
Ilusoria v CAR The prohibition in the Constitution refers only to contracts with respect to
1966
property. It does not apply to statutes relating to public subjects within the
domain of the general legislative powers of the state and involving the right
and public welfare of the entire community affected by it.
A law which allows tenants to change their contracts from tenancy to
leasehold system does not impair the obligation of contracts because it was
Diory Rabajante

enacted pursuant to social justice precepts of the constitution.

Ortigas v Feati Zoning laws, promulgated in the exercise of police power, justify nullification
Bank
of contractual obligations.
1979
Conference of Contracts of labor are explicitly subject to the police power.
Maritime
CC1700: Relations between capital and labor are not merely contractual but
Manning
are impressed with public interest and must yield to the common good
Agencies
v
POEA
1995

XIV. EX POST FACTO LAWS

Art. III, Sec. 22 of the Constitution
Prohibition against Ex Post facto Laws - the equivalent of the impairment clause in
criminal matters
Kinds
1) One which makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent
when done, criminal, and punishes such action.
2) One which aggravates the crime or makes it greater than when it was committed.
3) One which changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than that which the law
annexed to the crime when it was committed.
4) One which alters the legal rules of evidence and receives less testimony than the law required
at the time of the commission of the offense in order to convict the accused.
5) One which assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only BUT, in effect, imposes a
penalty or deprivation of a right, which, when done, was lawful.
6) One which deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful protection to which he has
become entitled such as the protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation
of amnesty.
Characteristics [CPR]
[C] must refer to criminal matters
[P] prejudicial to the accused
[R] retroactive in application
BILL OF ATTAINDER
A legislative act that inflicts punishment without trial.
Essence is the substitution of legislative fiat for a judicial determination of guilt
BA EPF
BA= Bill of Attainder; EPF = Ex Post Facto Law
Diory Rabajante

(All Bills of Attainder are Ex Post Facto Laws)

Elements of Bill of Attainder
1. There must be a law.
2. The law imposes a penal burden on a named individual or easily ascertainable members
of a group.
3. There is a direct imposition of penal burden without judicial trial.
XV. NON-IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT
Art. III, Sec. 20 of the Constitution
For HUMANITARIAN reasons an added guaranty of the liberty of persons against
their incarceration for the enforcement of purely private debts because of their misfortune
of being poor
Debt defined
Any civil obligation arising from a contract
Expressed or implied
Resulting in any liability to pay in money
Scope of guaranty against imprisonment for non-payment of debt
** If an accused fails to pay the fine imposed upon him, this may result in his subsidiary
imprisonment because his liability is ex delicto and not ex contractu.

Diory Rabajante

** A FRAUDULENT debt may result in the imprisonment of the debtor if:

1. The fraudulent debt constitutes a crime such as estafa and
2. The accused has been duly convicted.
POLL TAX
GENERAL RULE: Non-payment of taxes is punishable with imprisonment.
EXCEPTION: Failure to pay a poll tax
Poll tax defined
A specific sum levied upon every person belonging to a certain class without regard to his
property or occupation
XVI. INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE
Sec. 18, Art III, Constitution
Involuntary Servitude defined
The condition of one who is compelled by force, coercion, or imprisonment, and against
his will, to labor for another, whether he is paid or not.
Includes:
1. Slavery civil relation in which one man has absolute power over the life, fortune
and liberty of another
2. Peonage a condition of enforced servitude by which the servitor is restrained of
his liberty and compelled to labor in liquidation of some debt or obligation, real
or pretended, against his will
General Rule
No involuntary service in any form shall exist.
Exceptions
1. Punishment for a crime for which the party shall have been duly convicted (Sec. 18,
Art. III)
2. Personal military or civil service in the interest of national defense (Sec. 4, Art. II)
3. Naval enlistment remain in service until the end of voyage so that the crew would not
desert the ship, making it difficult for the owners to recruit new hands to continue the
voyage (Robertson vs Baldwin)
4. Posse comitatus in pursuit of persons who might have violated the law, the
authorities might command all male inhabitants of a certain age to assist them (US vs
Pompeya)
5. Return to work order in industries affected with public interest (Kapisanan ng
Manggagawa sa Kahoy vs Gotamco)
6. Patria Potestas unemancipated minors are obliged to obey their parents so long as
they are under parental power and to observe respect and reverence to them always
(Art. 311, Civil Code)
Diory Rabajante

US vs
Pompeya

Pollock
vs
Williams

An Act providing for the method by which the people of the town may be called
upon to render assistance for the protection of the public and the preservation of
peace and good order is constitutional. It was enacted in the exercise of the police
power of the state and does not violate the constitutional prohibition on involuntary
servitude.
No indebtedness warrants a suspension of the right to be free from compulsory
service, and no state can make the quitting of work any component of a crime, or
make criminal sanctions available for holding unwilling persons to labor.

XVII. THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

Sec. 15, Art. III
Writ of Habeas Corpus defined
A writ issued by a court
directed to a person detaining another
commanding him
to produce the body of the prisoner
at a designated time and place
with the day and cause of his caption and detention
to do, to submit to, and receive whatever the court or judge awarding the writ shall
consider in his behalf
*** The writ is a prerogative writ employed to test the validity of detention
*** to secure the detainees release
*** The action shall take precedence in the calendar of the court and must be acted upon
immediately
When available (enumeration not exclusive)
restoration of liberty of an individual subjected to physical restraint
may be availed of where, as a consequence of a judicial proceeding:
1. there has been deprivation of a constitutional right resulting in the restraint of the
person
2. the court has no jurisdiction to impose the sentence, or
3. an excessive penalty has been imposed, since such sentence is void as to the
excess.
May be extended to cases by which rightful custody of any person is withheld from the
person entitled thereto
When moral restraint is exerted (Caunca vs Salazar)
Right was accorded a person was sentenced to a longer penalty than was subsequently
meted out to another person convicted of the same offense. (Gumabon vs Director of
Prisons)
Unlawful denial of bail
Diory Rabajante

When not available (enumeration not exclusive)

the person alleged to be restrained is in the custody of an officer under a process issued
by the court which has jurisdiction to do so
desaparecidos (disappeared persons) persons could not be found; remedy is to refer the
matter to Commission on Human Rights
Procedure
Need to comply with writ; disobedience thereof constitutes contempt
Who may suspend the privilege
The President
Grounds for Suspension of the privilege
1. invasion or rebellion
2. when public safety requires it
-- read Article VII, Sec. 18 of the Constitution
Lansang doctrine (Lansang vs Garcia)
SC has the power to inquire into the factual basis of the suspension of the privilege of the
writ
Constitutionalized in Article VII, Sec. 18 of the Consti.

XVIII. SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF CASES

Sec. 16, Art. III
Related concepts and provisions
Right to speedy trial (Sec. 14, Art. III)
Speedy trial
Refers to trial phase only
Criminal cases only

Speedy disposition of cases

Refers to disposition of cases (All
phases)
Judicial, quasi-judicial or admin.
Proceedings

Periods for decision for courts (Sec. 15, Art. VIII)

SC: 24 months from submission
All lower collegiate courts: 12 months unless reduced by SC
All other lower courts: 3 months
Periods for decision for Constitutional Commissions (Sec 7, Art. IX-A)
60 days from date of submission for decision or resolution
Factors considered in determining whether the right is violated
1. Length of delay
Diory Rabajante

2. Reason of delay
3. Assertion of the right or failure to assert it
4. Prejudice caused by delay
Remedy in case there has been unreasonable delay in resolution of a case
Dismissal through mandamus

XIX. RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED

Criminal process includes:
a) Investigation prior to the filing of charges
b) Preliminary examination and investigation after charges are filed
c) Period of trial
CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
- Sec. 14, paragraph 1 of Art. III
- REQUIRES:
1. Impartial and competent court in accordance with procedure prescribed by law
2. Proper observance of all the rights accorded the accused under the Constitution
and the applicable statutes
(example of statutory right of the accused: right to Preliminary investigation)
- MISTRIAL may be declared if shown that proceedings were held under circumstances
as would prevent the accused from freely making his defense or the judge from freely
arriving at his decision
- When a law not published and a person is impleaded for violation of such law --
violation of due process
- When appeal is permitted by law but there is denial thereof -- violation of due process
SELF-INCRIMINATION
- Sec. 17, Art. III
- Based on:
1. HUMANITARIAN reasons it is intended to prevent the State, with all its
coercive powers, from extracting from the suspect testimony that may convict him
2. PRACTICAL reasons a person subjected to such compulsion is likely to perjure
himself for his own protection
- AVAILABLE TO:
Diory Rabajante

Criminal prosecutions, government proceedings, including civil actions and

administrative or legislative investigations

- MAY BE CLAIMED BY:

1. ACCUSED at all times; there is a reasonable assumption that the purpose of his
interrogation will be to incriminate him
2. WITNESS only when an incriminating question is asked, since the witness has
no way of knowing in advance the nature or effect of the question to be put to him
- He cannot invoke right to self-incrimination when:
a) The question is relevant and otherwise allowed even if the
answer may tend to incriminate him or subject him to civil
liability
b) the question relates to past criminality for which the witness can
no longer be prosecuted
c) he has been previously granted immunity under a validly enacted
statute
- Only natural persons can invoke this right. Judicial persons are subject to the visitorial
powers of the state in order to determine compliance with the conditions of the charter
granted to them.
- SCOPE:
- Testimonial Compulsion
- Production of Documents, Papers and Chattels. EXCEPTION: when books of
accounts are to be examined in the exercise of police power and power of
taxation.
- What is PROHIBITED is the use of physical or moral compulsion to extort
communication from the witness or to otherwise elicit evidence which would not exist
were it not for the actions compelled from the witness.
- The right does NOT PROHIBIT
the examination of the body of the accused or the
use of findings with respect to his body as physical evidence. Hence, the fingerprinting
of an accused would not violate the right against self-incrimination. However, obtaining
a sample of the handwriting of the accused would violate this right if he is charged for
falsification.
- The accused cannot be compelled to produce a private document in his possession which
might tend to incriminate him. However, a third person in custody of the document may
be compelled to produce it.
- WAIVER:
-

Either:
a) Directly, or
b) By failure to invoke it PROVIDED the waiver is certain and unequivocal
and intelligently and willingly made.
Diory Rabajante

CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION
- Sec. 12, Art. III
- called the Miranda Doctrine (Miranda vs Arizona)
- CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION defined
- Any questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken
into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.
- BEGINS as soon as the investigation is no longer a general inquiry unto an
unsolved crime, and direction is then aimed upon a particular suspect who has been
taken into custody and to whom the police would then direct interrogatory questions
which tend to elicit incriminating statements.
- Shall include the practice of issuing an INVITATION to a person who is
investigated in connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed,
without prejudice to the liability of the inviting officer for any violation of law.
- EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION IS ADMISSIBLE when:
a) Voluntary
b) With assistance of counsel
c) In writing, and
d) Express
- RIGHTS UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION
a) To be informed of right to remain silent and to counsel
b) To be reminded that if he waives his right to remain silent, anything he says can and
will be used against him
c) To remain silent
d) To have competent and independent counsel preferably of own choice
e) To be provided with counsel if the person cannot afford the services of one
f) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation or any other means which vitiate the
free will shall be used against him
g) Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of
detention are prohibited
h) Confessions or admissions obtained in violation of these rights are inadmissible as
evidence (exclusionary rule)
- WHAT RIGHTS MAY BE WAIVED
[*** waiver must be in writing and in the presence of counsel]
a) Right to remain silent
b) Right to Counsel
- WHAT RIGHTS CANNOT BE WAIVED
a) Right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to counsel
b) Right to counsel when making the waiver of the right to remain silent or to counsel
Diory Rabajante

- Right to counsel de parte is not unlimited. Accused cannot repeatedly ask for
postponement. He must be provided with counsel de oficio.
- RA 7309: victims of unjust imprisonment may file their claims with the Board of Claims
under DOJ
- HEARSAY EXCEPTION: any of several deviations from the hearsay rule; allowing the
admission of otherwise inadmissible statements because the circumstances surrounding the
statements provide a baiss for considering the statements reliable.
- RES GESTAE: The declaration of the accused acknowledging guilt made to the police desk
officer after the crime was committed may be given in evidence against him by the police
officer to whom the admission was made, as part of the res gestae.
- TERMINATION OF RIGHTS UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION: When Charges
are filed against the accused (in such case, Sections 14 and 17 come into play).
BAIL
- Sec. 13, Art. III
- BAIL defined
- Security given for the release of a person in custody of law, furnished by him or a
bondsman, to guaranty his appearance before any court as may be required
- FORMS:
a) Corporate Surety
b) Property Bond
c) Cash Deposit
d) Recognizance
- WHO MAY INVOKE: a person under detention even if no formal charges have yet been
filed (Rule 114, Rules of Court)
- WHO ARE NOT ENTITLED
1) Persons charged with offenses PUNISHABLE by RECLUSION PERPETUA or
DEATH, when evidence of guilt is strong
2) Persons CONVICTED by the trial court. Bail is only discretionary pending
appeal.
3) Persons who are members of the AFP facing a court martial.
- OTHER RIGHTS IN RELATION TO BAIL
1) The right to bail shall NOT be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus is suspended.
2) Excessive bail shall not be required.
- FACTORS IN FIXING AMOUNT OF BAIL
Diory Rabajante

4. Ability to post bail

5. Nature of the offense
6. Penalty imposed by law
7. Character and reputation of the accused
8. Health of the accused
9. Strength of the evidence
10.
Probability of appearing at the trial
11.
Forfeiture of previous bail bonds
12.
Whether accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested
13.
If accused is under bond in other cases
- IMPLICIT LIMITATIONS ON THE RIGHT TO BAIL
1. The person claiming the right must be in actual detention or custody of the law.
2. The constitutional right is available only in criminal cases, not, e.g. in
deportation and extradition proceedings.
- Note:
1. Right to bail is not available in the military.
2. Apart from bail, a person may attain provisional liberty through recognizance.
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
- Sec. 14
- Burden of proof to establish the guilt of the accused is with the prosecution.
- Conviction depends on the strength of prosecution, not on the weakness of the defense
- The presumption may be overcome by contrary presumption based on the experience of
human conduct. (e.g unexplained flight may lead to an inference of guilt, as the wicked
flee when no man pursueth, but the righteous are as bold as a lion.)
- The constitutional presumption will not apply as long as there is some rational
connection between the fact proved and the ultimate fact presumed, and the inference of
one fact from proof of another shall not be so unreasonable as to be a purely arbitrary
mandate. Cooley
- No inference of guilt may be drawn against an accused for his failure to make a
statement of any sort.
- EQUIPOISE RULE evidence of both sides are equally balanced, in which case the
constitutional presumption of innocence should tilt the scales in favor of the accused.
RIGHT TO BE HEARD BY HIMSELF AND COUNSEL
- Indispensable in any criminal prosecution where the stakes are the liberty or even the life
Diory Rabajante

of the accused
- ASISTANCE OF COUNSEL begins from the time a person is taken into custody and
placed under investigation for the commission of a crime.
- This is not subject to waiver.
Right to counsel means the right to EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION.
If the accused appears at arraignment without counsel, the judge must:
Inform the accused that he has a right to a counsel before arraignment
Ask the accused if he desires the aid of counsel
If the accused desires counsel, but cannot afford one, a counsel de oficio must be
appointed
If the accused desires to obtain his own counsel, the court must give him a
reasonable time to get one.
NATURE AND CAUSE OF ACCUSATION
- Sec. 14
- PURPOSES OF THE RIGHT
1) To furnish the accused with a description of the charge against him as will enable
him to make his defenses
2) To avail himself of his conviction or acquittal against a further prosecution for the
same cause
3) To inform the court of the facts alleged.
- CONTROLLING FACTOR
The description and not the designation of the offense is controlling
(The real nature of the crime charged is determined from the recital of facts in the
information. It is not determined based on the caption or preamble thereof nor from the
specification of the provision of law allegedly violated.)
- If the information fails to allege the material elements of the offense, the accused cannot
be convicted thereof even if the prosecution is able to present evidence during the trial
with respect to such elements.
- VOID FOR VAGUENESS RULE accused is denied the right to be informed of the
charge against him and to due process as well, where the statute itself is couched in such
indefinite language that it is not possible for men of ordinary intelligence to determine
therefrom what acts or omissions are punished and hence, shall be avoided.
- Estrada vs Sandiganbayan: the doctrine merely requires a reasonable degree of certainty
and not absolute precision or mathematical exactitude.
THE TRIAL

FACTORS IN DETERMINING WHETHER THERE IS VIOLATION

1) Time expired from the filing of the information
Diory Rabajante

2)
3)
4)
5)

Length of delay involved

Reasons for the delay
Assertion or non-assertion of the right by the accused
Prejudice caused to the defendant.

EFFECT OF DISMISSAL BASED ON VIOLATION OF THIS RIGHT

If the dismissal is valid, it amounts to an acquittal and can be used as basis to claim
double jeopardy. This would be the effect even if the dismissal was made with the
consent of the accused

REMEDY IF THE RIGHT IS VIOLATED

1. He can move for the dismissal of the case.
2. If he is detained, he can file a petition for the issuance of writ of habeas corpus.

SPEEDY TRIAL
Free from vexatious, capricious and oppressive delays
To relieve the accused from needless anxieties before sentence is pronounced upon
him

IMPARTIAL TRIAL
The accused is entitled to the cold neutrality of an impartial judge. It is an
element of due process.

PUBLIC TRIAL
The attendance at the trial is open to all irrespective of their relationship to the
accused. However, if the evidence to be adduced is offensive to decency or public
morals, the public may be excluded.
The right of the accused to a public trial is not violated if the hearings are conducted
on Saturdays, either with the consent of the accused or if failed to object thereto.

RIGHT TO BE PRESENT AT TRIAL

A. The right to be present covers the period from ARRAIGNMENT to
PROMULGATION of sentence.
B. Trial may proceed notwithstanding absence of accused, provided 3 requisites are met.
Note, that TRIAL IN ABSENTIA is allowed only if the accused has been validly
arraigned.
1. Accused has already been arraigned
2. Accused has been duly notified of the trial; and
3. His failure to appear is unjustifiable.
C. The accused may waive the right to be present at the trial by not showing up.
However, the court can still compel the attendance of the accused if necessary for
identification purposes. EXCEPTION: If the accused, after arraignment, has
Diory Rabajante

stipulated that he is indeed the person charged with the offense and named in the
information, and that any time a witness refers to a name by which he is known, the
witness is to be understood as referring to him.
D. Trial in Absentia is mandatory upon the court whenever the accused has been
arraigned.
E. There is also Promulgation in Absentia (only in cases of light offenses)

While the accused is entitled to be present during promulgation of judgment, the absence
of his counsel during such promulgation does not affect its validity

The trial in absentia does not abrogate the provisions of the Rules of Court regarding
forfeiture of bail bond if the accused fails to appear at his trial.

A court has the power to prohibit a person admitted to bail from leaving the Philippines
as this is a necessary consequence of the nature and function of a bail bond

THE RIGHT OF CONFRONTATION

To meet the witnesses face to face

PURPOSES OF THE RIGHT

To afford the accused an opportunity to cross-examine the witness

To allow the judge the opportunity to observe the deportment of the witness

FAILURE OF THE ACCUSED TO CROSS-EXAMINE A WITNESS

If the failure of the accused to cross-examine a witness is due to his own fault or was
not due to the fault of the prosecution, the testimony of the witness should be excluded.

WHEN THE RIGHT TO CROSS-EXAMINE IS DEMANDABLE

It is demandable only during trials. Thus, it cannot be availed of during preliminary
investigations.

PRINCIPAL EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RIGHT

1. The admissibility of dying declarations
2. Trial in absentia under Section 14(2)

With respect to child testimony

Testimony of witness who was not cross-examined is not admissible as evidence for
being hearsay.

If a prosecution witness dies before his cross-examination can be completed, his direct
testimony cannot be stricken off the record, provided the material points of his direct
testimony had been covered on cross.
Diory Rabajante

The right to confrontation may be waived.

COMPULSORY PROCESS
The accused is entitled to the issuance of subpoena ad testificandum and subpoena duces
tecum for the purpose of compelling the attendance of witness and the production of
evidence that he may need for his defense.
Failure to obey punishable as contempt of court.
There are exceptional circumstances when the defendant may ask for conditional
examination, provided the expected testimony is material of any witness under
circumstances that would make him unavailable from attending the trial.
PROHIBITED PUNISHMENTS

When is a penalty cruel, degrading and inhuman?

1. A penalty is cruel and inhuman if it involves torture or lingering suffering. Ex. Being
drawn and quartered.
2. A penalty is degrading if it exposes a person to public humiliation. Ex. Being tarred
and feathered, then paraded throughout town.
STANDARDS USED
1. The punishment must not be so severe as to be degrading to the dignity of human
beings.
2. It must not be applied arbitrarily.
3. It must not be unacceptable to contemporary society
4. It must not be excessive, i.e. it must serve a penal purpose more effectively than a less
severe punishment would.

EXCESSIVE FINE
A fine is excessive, when under any circumstance, it is disproportionate to the offense.
Note: Fr. Bernas says that the accused cannot be convicted of the crime to which the
punishment is attached if the court finds that the punishment is cruel, degrading or
inhuman.
Reason: Without a valid penalty, the law is not a penal law.

DOUBLE JEOPARDY
*** 2 Kinds of Double Jeopardy:
1.
When a person is put twice in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense
(1st sentence of Section 21)
2.
When a law and an ordinance punish the same act (2nd sentence of Sec. 21)
Diory Rabajante

I. SAME OFFENSE
Requisites for a valid defense of double jeopardy: [ATS]
1)
[A] First jeopardy must have attached prior to the second.
2)
[T] The first jeopardy must have terminated.
3)
[S] The second jeopardy must be for the same offense as that in the first.
When does jeopardy ATTACH: (1st requisite) [CICAV]
1)
[C] A person is charged
2)
[I] Under a complaint or information sufficient in form and substance to sustain a
conviction
3)
[C] Before a court of competent jurisdiction
4)
[A] After the person is arraigned
5)
[V] Such person enters a valid plea.
When does jeopardy NOT attach:
1)
If information does not charge any offense
2)
If, upon pleading guilty, the accused presents evidence of complete self-defense,
and the court thereafter acquits him without entering a new plea of not guilty for accused.
3)
If the information for an offense cognizable by the RTC is filed with the MTC.
4)
If a complaint filed for preliminary investigation is dismissed.
When does first jeopardy TERMINATE: (2ND REQUISITE)
1)
2)
3)
4)

Acquittal
Conviction
Dismissal W/O the EXPRESS consent of the accused
Dismissal on the merits.

Examples of termination of jeopardy:

1)
Dismissal based on violation of the right to a speedy trial. This amounts to an
acquittal.
2)
Dismissal based on a demurrer to evidence. This is a dismissal on the merits.
3)
Dismissal on motion of the prosecution, subsequent to a motion for reinvestigation
filed by the accused.
4)
Discharge of an accused to be a state witness. This amounts to an acquittal.
When can the PROSECUTION appeal from an order of dismissal:

If dismissal is on motion of the accused. Exception: If motion is based on violation of

the right to a speedy trial or on a demurrer to evidence.
If dismissal does NOT amount to an acquittal or dismissal on the merits
If the question to be passed upon is purely legal.
If the dismissal violates the right of due process of the prosecution.
Diory Rabajante

If the dismissal was made with grave abuse of discretion. (Certiorari is applicable only
when correcting errors of jurisdiction, but not in order to correct findings or conclusions
of the court)

What are considered to be the SAME OFFENSE:

1)
Exact identity between the offenses charged in the first and second cases.
2)
One offense is an attempt to commit or a frustration of the other offense.
3)
One offense is necessarily included or necessary includes the other.
Note: where a single act results in the violation of different laws or different provisions of
the same law, the prosecution for one will not bar the other so long as none of the
exceptions apply.
II.

SAME ACT

Double jeopardy will result if the act punishable under the law and the ordinance are the
same. For there to be double jeopardy, it is not necessary that the offense be the same.

SUPERVENING FACTS
1)
Under the Rules of Court, a conviction for an offense will not bar a prosecution
for an offense which necessarily includes the offense charged in the former information
where:
a) The graver offense developed due to a supervening fact arising from the same
act or omission constituting the former charge.
b) The facts constituting the graver offense became known or were discovered
only after the filing of the former information.
c) The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the consent of the
fiscal and the offended party.
2)
Under (1)(b), if the facts could have been discovered by the prosecution but were
not discovered because of the prosecutions incompetence, it would not be considered a
supervening event.
Effect of appeal by the accused:
If the accused appeals his conviction, he WAIVES his right to plead double jeopardy. The
whole case will be open to review by the appellate court. Such court may even increase
the penalties imposed on the accused by the trial court.

XX. FREE ACCESS TO THE COURTS

Diory Rabajante

Sec. 11, Art. III

Social Justice Provision, implemented by the Rules of Court provision allowing pauper
suits
Additional guarantee: Adequate legal assistance

XXI. CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES

Who are citizens of the Philippines?
1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of the 1987 Constitution
2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines.
3) Those born before January 17, 1973 of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship
upon reaching the age of majority.
4) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.
Modes of acquiring citizenship:
1) Jus Soli acquisition of citizenship on the basis of place of birth
2) Jus Sanguinis acquisition of citizenship on the basis of blood relationship
3) Naturalization the legal act of adopting an alien and clothing him with the privilege of a
native-born citizen.
Note: The Philippines follows (2) and (3)
Election of citizenship under the 1987 Constitution:
Prior to the 1973 Constitution, if a Filipina married an alien, she lost her Filipino citizenship.
Hence, her child would have to elect Filipino citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.
Under the 1973 Constitution, however, children born of Filipino mothers were already
considered Filipinos. Therefore, the provision on election of citizenship under the 1987
Constitution only applies to those persons who were born under the 1935 Constitution. In order
for the children to elect Filipino citizenship, the mothers must have been Filipinos at the time of
their marriage. So, if your mother was a Filipina who married an alien under the 1935
constitution and you were born before January 17, 1973, you can elect Filipino citizenship upon
reaching the age of majority.
When must the election be made:
The election must be made within a reasonable period after reaching the age of majority.
Effects of naturalization:

The legitimate minor children of the naturalized father become Filipinos as well.
The wife also becomes a Filipino citizen, provided that she does not have any
disqualification which would bar her from being naturalized.
Diory Rabajante

Natural-born citizens:
1) Citizens of the Philippines from birth who do not need to perform any act to acquire or
perfect their Philippine citizenship.
2) Those who elect Philippine citizenship under Art. IV, Sec. 1(3) of 1987 Constitution.
Marriage of Filipino with an alien:
1) General Rule: The Filipino RETAINS Philippine citizenship
2) Exception: If, by their act or omission they are deemed, under the law, to have renounced it.
Examples of renunciation of Philippine citizenship:
1) Voluntarily obtaining foreign passport
2) Pledging allegiance to another country (ex. by becoming a naturalized citizen of another
country)

Re-acquisition of citizenship
Natural-born Filipinos who are deemed to have lost their citizenship may re-acquire the same via
repatriation proceedings. This involves taking an oath of allegiance and filing the same with the
civil registry.
How may one lose citizenship:

By naturalization in a foreign country

By express renunciation of citizenship
By subscribing oath or allegiance to a foreign Constitution
By serving in the armed forces of an enemy country
By being a deserter of the armed forces of ones country

How may one reacquire citizenship:

1. By direct act of Congress
2. By naturalization
3. By repatriation

Diory Rabajante