CL - study of the equilibrium bet autho and liberty.

Bill of Rights
22 sec

first 11 - represent the rights of the people in general

12-22 - the rights of the accused

inherent powers
pp

ed

t

-----similarities -
all inherent, no express grant needed
necessary and indispensable
absent them no state will exist
interfere with private rights
all presuppose that there is equivalent compensation for private rights interfered
all are primarily legislative


---common limitations
-may not be arbitrarily exercise to the prejudice of the BOR
-subj at all times to the limitation and requirement of the consti in case of GAD
court may interfere

----distinctions
Pp broad it regulates liberty and property
Ed and t - affect only property
Pp and t - can only be exer by govt
Ed even by private entities
In taking of private prop in PP prop is destroyed for being obnoxious in order to
protect public welfare
Ed- taking is for public use just compensation
T taxes are to support the govt
Pp compensation is intangible altruistic feeling
T tangible
ED full value jc

PP
- Enables the state to prohibit what is hurtful to the comfort, safety and welfare
of society
- Attribute sovereignty to promote common welfare by restraining enjoyment
of liberty and use of property
- Make, ordain status for the general welfare of the people
- As the most pervasive, least limitable, most demanding
- The government cannot be compelled by mandamus to exercise PP
discretionary political question
- Test must have a lawful subject and lawful means


VALID DELEGATION to:
Pp pres, admin bodies, local leg bodies (gen welfare clause in LGC)

REQ OF VALID DELEGATION OF PP
- Express grant by law
- Exercise not contrary to law
- Should be within the territorial limit of the LGU concern exc if to protect local
water supply

MMDA not vested with PP not vested with legislative power

ED

-Taking in PP nobody will use the prop it being obnoxious will be destroyed
Destruction from necessity no compensation
-easement of right of way there is taking hence compensable napocor cases
since there is impairment of value and deprivation of ordinary use there is taking
already
-congress may exercise this power , by delegation, pres, admin, lgu, even private
enterprises performing public services

REQ FOR EXER OF ED
-Genuine necessity of public character if exer by congress this is a political
question; if exer by a mere delegate this is a justiciable question
-taking private property except money and choses in action if public
property already devoted to PU cannot be taken by a mere delegate congress may
exprop public property devoted to PU / religious worship
-taking must be in constitutional sense
Requisites: entry by expropriator, more than momentary, under a warrant or color
of authority, prop must be devoted to public use, utilization of prop, must be in a
such a way that owner is ousted or deprived of the beneficial use/enjoyment of the
property
-public use - not traditional (actual use of public); expanded to include, public
interest, benefit, welfare, convenience, even if not avail to public, indirect benefit is
sufficient

-lgu may exprop for public use or for the benefit of the poor and the landless; there
must be an ordinance(s19, LGC)

-just compensation full and fair equivalent of prop taken FMV + conseq damages
conseq benefits (only in case of partial exprop rendering the rest unusable)
-LGU cannot exprop without rendering a prior written valid offer
-cash or bond JC
-withdrawal of deposit by opposing landowner allowed even while there is a
pending question as to valuation
-reckoning time of JC time of filing of complaint for exprop; or taking (that
occurred prior filing of complaint prior incremental increase) whichever comes
first; char of prop at the time of taking
-title to prop pass until after full payment EXC CARP, mere payment in bonds or
depositing, DAR can require RD to tfr title in the name of the republic
-interest payment arise from law hence interest for loan or forbearance., not
appli,
-no payment / delay - where govt failed to pay within 5 years from finality of
decision - recovery of possession is in order
- right to repurchase/ reacq when purpose had been abandoned depend on the title
acq by exprop - if in fee simple - no such right; if there be agreement that in case
of abandonment the property owner can reacq so be it how much will prop
owner pay return jc + legal interest from default

T
-congress
-delegated to pres tariff powers
-lgu by direct autho conferred by the consti
-power to destroy?? It depends, if purely to raise rev cannot be confiscatory; if
used as implement of PP may include the power to destroy
-discretionary to congress whether to tax or otherwise (who, what to tax, what is
the purpose, amount of tax)
-inherent limit : public purpose; non-delegability; situs; exception of govt; intl comity
-constitutional limit: due process; equal protection; Avi,s28,non-impairment,
nonimprisonment for nonpayment of poll tax, must orig from hor, separation of
state and church, tax exemption ADE RCE; nonimpairment of sc jurn of tax cases;
tax exemption of rev and assets of educ instn ns, np;
-congress can revoke tax exemption at will if it so granted, unless the tax exemption
is supported by valuable consideration contractual tax exemption non
impairment of contract obligation
- double taxation- same subj, taxing autho, same pd and same purpose not
prohibited under the consti unless it becomes discriminatory therefore violative of
epc
-tax exemption strictly construed ag taxpayer claiming it EXC when congress grant
exemption to a natl govt instrumentality from local taxn, it be construed liberally
in favor of govt
-offsetting/compensation - not allowed

DUE PROCESS
- There should be a law prescribe in harmony with gen power of legislature
- Shall be reasonable in its operation
- Enforced in regular method
- Apply to all member of a class

PROC restriction on axn of judl and quasijudl bodies
- impartial and competent court
- jurisdiction over person and property
- opp to be heard - notice and hearing
- judgment rendered upon lawful hearing and evidence adduced
SUBS restriction to govt legislation whether a law is a valid exercise of
legislative power intrinsic validity of law
- lawful subj and
- lawful means

RELATIVITY OF DP dynamic, resilient, elastic, dp couched in vague language, to
allow court to give interpretation based on the peculiarities of the case - no precise
definition dp meaning is left to the det of the judiciary fair play, respect for
justice, respect for right of others

-appeal not part of DP, but if guaranteed by the consti, denial of appeal is denial of
DP

-administrative due process Ang tibay case - 7 cardinal req
o right to hearing
o tribunal must act on its own independent consideration of the law and facts of
controversy
o tribunal must consider evidence presented
o evidence must be substantial
o decision must have something to support itself
o decision must be based on evidence presented or at least disclosed in the
records
o rendered in a manner that the parties can know the various issues involved
and the reason for the decision

-instances where hearings are not nec
o when admin body exer quasi leg fxn
o abatement of nuisance perse
o provisional remedy ex parte
o preventive suspension
o bir warrants of distraint or levy
o committed a crime and attempt to flee the country dfa cancel passport
o bank run

DISTINCTION BET CONSTI AND STATUTORY DP
Consti protects indl from govt
Statutory provided by law. ie labor 2 notice rule

HIERARCHY OF RIGHTS
- human rights has preferred status over prop rights, the latter can be lost to
prescription, former is imprescriptible
- free expression and assembly enjoy preferred status important in preserving
civil and political institution

STANDARDS OF REVIEW
1. deferential review laws are upheld they rationally further a legitimate govt
interest without looking into how substantial it be/ avail means
2. intermediate review substantiality of govt interest is seriously inquired into as
well as availability of less restrictive means
3. strict scrutiny overriding or compelling govt interest, it should be the least
restrictive means - -if there be a lease restrictive means the law will be invalidated;
used in area of protected speech

VOID FOR VAGUENESS DOCTRINE
- law is vague when it lacks comprehensive standards that men of common
knowledge must necessarily guess at its common meaning and differs as to its
application
- gives law enforcer unbridled discretion in enforcing law in question; fail to
accord the people notice on what act to prevent
- if legn couched in imprecise language not nec void for vagueness if it
specify a standard though defectively phrased mere judicial
construction/interpretation will suffice, need not nullify
- can only be invoked ag species of legn which is utterly vague, cannot be
clarified by a saving clause or construction


EQUAL PROTECTION
- Equality among those who are equals - - similarly situated as to rights and
obligations
- What is prohibited is class or discriminatory legn favor or prej some when
they are similarly situated
- REQ OF CLASSN substantial distinction; germane to the purpose of law; not
limited to existing conditions only; apply to all members of the same class
- As a rule classification based on origin, age and parentage is not allowed ;
exc substantial distinction as to citizens and aliens in retail trade

DOCTRINE OF RELATIVE CONSTITUTIONALITY PRINC OF ALTERED
CIRCUMSTANCES
- A statute may be valid at one time as to certain particularities, but due to
certain changes in circumstances it becomes void for being violative of
equal protection

STANDARDS IN EPC
1. rational basis test guaranty by ep not violated by reasonable classification;
classifications are presumed valid classification must be germane to the law.
2. strict scrutiny test most rigid scrutiny; challenged statute applies classification
based on inherently suspect characteristics, ie race, gender, legitimacy ; If it
infringes fundamental constitutional rights presumption of constitutionality is
reversed legn is presumed unconstitutional unless the govt shows otherwise;
germane and narrowly tailored to attain legislative purpose.

Fernando v st scholastica sc used rational relationship test perimeter wall
chever - means employed is oppressive, in the nature of taking and not exer of pp..
valid exer of ed - must have JC. Violative of right to privacy

Rep v BPI inclusion of conseq damages in payment of JC


RIGHT AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURE

- Requirement for a valid sw/woa:
1. probable cause facts and circ antecedent to the issuance of the warrant that in
themselves sufficient for a cautious person to rely on them and to act pursuant
thereof.
2. determined personally by the judge whether there is pc or not, by examining the
applicant and witnesses he may produce.
3. particularity of description of the place to be searched and the person or things to
be seized - gen warrant (broad, gen in char, sweeping description autho officer to
undertake fishing expedition seizing anything and everything related to the
offense) is not allowed, must be issued for a specific offense EXC sw valid for several
violations of the dangerous drugs act offenses are closely related and belonging to
the same class.
Name of the person to be arrested is indicated. John doe not enough, must
include some descriptio personae to guide the officer.
Expresses conclusion of fact particularity complied

Search warrant det by judge personally examine applicant/witnesses in the form
of searching questions in writing and under oath must be based on the personal
knowledge of complainant and witnesses if lying may be charged with perjury
--affidavits not allowed (hearsay in essence)

Police has personal knowledge because of surveillance conducted PC is established

Warrant of Arrest - no need for personal examination prosecutor already had
initial findings of PC; judge must make a personal determination by evaluation or
review of records if satisfied with finding of PC he will issue woa
--Mere reliance to certification of fiscal/ insufficient

WARRANTLESS SEARCHES
- Visual search of moving vehicle
- Search as an incident to a valid/lawful arrest including the permissible area
to which he has control
- Search of passengers in airport security measures
- When there is a valid express waiver-made voluntarily and intelligently
- Stop and frisk search precede an arrest (terry search) limited protective
search of outer clothing
- Customs search
- Searches under exigent and emergency circumstances
- For fire, sanitary and building regulations
- Plain view doctrine req: 1. Law enforcer has prior justification for intrusion
PC , SW, or WOA; 2. In the course of his search, he inadvertently came upon
the thing visible to the eye exc if the package proclaim its contents

Extensive search of veh in checkpoint if there is PC based on reasonable belief that
the motorist is a law offender or contents of the veh used in an offense only a pc
can render a belief reasonable

WARRANTLESS ARREST
- in flagrante delicto, S5r113 committed, is committing, attempting to commit
in the presence of police officer there must be an overt act indicative of
felonious enterprise in the presence or within the view of the police officer,
includes those heard by the policemen
- hot pursuit when an offense has just been committed and arresting off has pc
to believe based on his personal knowledge of facts and circ indicating the
person to be arrested has committed the offense: req: 1. Immediacy; 2. Personal
knowledge.
- Escapee of prisoner or detainee
- Waiver req: person knew of such right and knowingly not invoking it
applying for bail not barred from questioning legality of arrest so long as
prior plea (arraignment); waiver of invalid arrest does not extend to illegal
search on your person another waiver is needed

Can the place in the warrant be amendment/modify because of the personal
knowledge of the police officer? No, authority is limited in the place indicated in
the warrant.

Particularity of persons to be searched mistake in the name of person in the
warrant had personal knowledge of the true identity search considered valid

Immigration commissioner can also issue woa to implement final order execution
and not for prosecution ADMINISTRATIVE ARREST

Nature of sw proceeding solely for possession of personal prop to be used as ev, not
criminal, not initiation of prosecution

Drug, alcohol and blood test: for students constitutional within the prerog of
educational institutions compliance with certain rules; govt ees and officers
constitutional reasonableness is still the touchstone of the govt intrusion
administrative search swift and informal procedure, pc is not required;

Cannot invoke right against reasonable searches and seizure against a private
individual or entity note state action doctrine


RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN COMMUNICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE
- Exc upon lawful order of the court or when public safety and order requires
otherwise as provided for by law
- Zones of Privacy: s1, s2, s3, s6, s8, s17
- Opening of mail by jail warden-no distinction bet detainee and prisoner, for no
reasonable expectation of privacy rights higher interest of maintaining
security in prison facility that that of right to privacy so long as the letter is
not confidential comm bet lawyer and detainee, prison officer must not read
them, otherwise mere inspection.
- Anti-wiretapping law to secretly overhear conversation unless authorized
by all parties, cannot possess any recording of such communication; cannot
even replay them, nor communicate the contents thereof to others or to make
transcriptions of the same
Use of telephone extension to overhear a private conversation not
included.
Even a party to the communication can also be liable
- A person by contracting marriage does not shed his right to privacy note
diff with s2 and s3
- Writ of Habeas Data remedy avail to any person, whose right to privacy in
l, l, s by unlawful act or omission of public or private indl or entity engage
gathering storing or collecting data, p,f,h,c of the aggrieved person ---may not
be used to protect purely property and commercial concerns.
Reliefs: updating, rectification, suppression or destruction of
database or info or files kept by respondent
In case of threats may include injunctive relief

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, SPEECH, RIGHT TO FORM ASSOCIATION, OF
RELIGION, ACCESS TO INFO ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC CONCERN

- protected speech not limited to oral; nonverbal which conveys a message is a
form of expression
- GARCI TAPES- does the violation of ra 4200, warrants suppression of freedom
of speech, press? This are laws of great significance, their violation in itself
will not support violation of free speech and press there must be overriding
compelling state rationales for the suppression. There is more harm to suppress
freedom than prevention of violation of law.
- The people are kept from undue interference in their thoughts and belief by
the govt
- Limitations on freedom of expression: within the bounds of laws enacted for
social interests and equally important individual rights
- 4 ASPECTS
-freedom fr om censorship or prior restraint
-freedom from subseq punishment
-freedom of access of info
-freedom of circulation
- there is no need for complete suppression
- PRIOR RESTRAINT clearance or approval from govt prohibited
The prohibition is not absolute; 4 exceptions pornography, false adv,
misleading; when nation is at war; primary req of decency ag obscene
publication;
- Subseq not absolute may be properly regulated in the higher interest of
public ie libel, obscenity,
- DOCTRINE OF FAIR COMMENT valid defense in libel and slander case if
directed ag PO imputation in his public capacity not actionable, to be so,,
false allegation of fact, or based on false supposition; opinion based on est
facts.. EXC bf, or reckless disregard of whether it is true or not
- Fair comment within scope of qual priv communication
- Content based v content neutral the latter req substantial govt interest t, p
,m nothing to do with substance, subj to intermediate approach test; the
former subj to strict scrutiny-due its tendency to suppress or curtail the right
itself, should not be vague, not overbroad, comes to court with heavy
presumption of unconstitutionality, gauge by clear and present danger rule.

FACIAL CHALLENGE challenge of statute in court, that the legn always and
under all circ unconstitutional allowed only in area of freedom of expression and
under all fundamental rights raising rights of 3
rd
parties not before the court
- examination of the entire law, not only on the basis of actual application over the
parties involve, but in the future would prevent others to exercise constitutionally
protected activities
-there is 3
rd
party standing
-this is not allowed in penal laws, as a rule, criminal statutes have gen in terrorem
effect. In the area of CL the court cannot take chances, as in that of area of free
speech.

AS APPLIED - consider extant facts affecting only actual existing litigants

DESINI: aiding or abetting cyber libel - prohibition encroaches on freedom of
speech facial challenge is allowed in this case despite it being a penal law for it
involve foe; also void for being vague.

OVERBREADTH DOC Allows challenge of a law although as applied to him it
may be constitutional, although it might be unconstl as to others not before the
court. A type of facial challenge, means so broad that it swifts and affects protected
and unprotected activity.
-most distinct feature exception to some constitutional requirement, ie locus
standing, the law invalidates the entire law, until a proper court construe it
narrowly.. ie cyber libel committed only by original author

Clear and present danger more libertarian, liberty and autho is favored whether
the word are used as to create a clear and present danger that bring about
substantive evil which the state has a right to repress
--question of proximity and degree

Dangerous tendency test whether the sppech restrained has a rational tendency to
create the evil apprehended. Mere tendency is enough

Balancing of interest test neutral; which of these 2 conflicting interest should be
favored - case to case basis exer of judicial discretion

O brien test when speech and nonspeech elements are combined in the same course
of conduct, whether there is suff govt interest to limit the nonspeech, incidentally
restricts the speech element.

Commercial speech comm which no more that proposes a commercial trxn - to
enjoy protection must not be false or misleading; should not propose an illegal trxn
-comm speech is also a protected form of expression. Prohibiting commercial
electronic communication is unconstitutional.

-broadcast media same treatment as print media? No. broadcast media more
regulated than print

-govt speech govt may adv or restrict its own speech
-private speech the right to freely speaks ones mind is a highly regarded freedom
-Hecklers veto - arises when an acting party right to foe is restricted to prevent a
reacting partys reaction.

FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY AND PETITION

-Is permit a req? no. the permit is only when you are using a public place, not a
permit on your right to assemble or exer your right.
-permit system cannot be discriminatory
-880 clear and present danger is used; burden of proof is with the mayor, denial
must be communicated in adv with the applicant
-private prop consent of the owner is req not permit

-PURPOSE TEST looking into purpose rather than organizers, participants
-HOSPICES TEST- Look into backer, participant, organizers

--bp 880 content neutral; not overbroad; no prior restraint; content not relevant;
subjected to clear and present danger standard constitutional
--CPR illegal; the law req maximum tolerance highest degree of restraint

FREEDOM OF RELIGION
-reinforce separation of state and church
-S5 2 Guaranties:
1. non-est clause: state is prohibited to set up a church; cannot aid one or all rel or
prefer one over the other --- complete neutrality
2. freedom of religion profession and worship

--compelling state interest when it comes to freedom of rel before it is justified to
infringe said freedom

3 steps in det compelling state interest
1. Has the statute or govt action created a burden in the free exercise of religion?
--court will look into sincerity of the belief
2. is there a sufficiently compelling state interest?
3. has the state use the least intrusive means possible?

uch Escritor case: her conjugal arrangement cannot be penalized, for it is
accordance with her church fundamental right of freedom of religion there must
be compelling state reason, that it will erode foundation of the state applied
benevolent neutrality accommodation.
INC members are exempted to join union.
Ang LADLAD application for registration as a PL denied on religious
grounds there was violation of NON EST CLAUSE neutrality exists not only bet
believers, but also as to believers and nonbelievers.
Ebralinag case: flag ceremony by exempting this small group from saluting
the flag will not shake up this part of the globe, will not result to a nation of
unpatriotic people having no love for the country.
Centeno case: solicitation for construction of chapel judge angeles filed a
criminal axn against him collection for rel purpose not covered. He was
acquitted.
Govt has no business on interfering on matters which are religious or
ecclesiastical.
If not ecclesiastical no rel with practice of faith (secular) the state can
interfere
CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR: individual who claim to right to refuse to join
military or to render military service on the ground of freedom of belief, thought or
religious freedom. Before to be considered as such, there are req: person is opposed to
war in any form, must show that this opposition is based on religious training and
belief, must show that it is sincere.


Right against unreasonable searches and seizure
ramon Martinez v PP in flagrante delicto arrest violating city ordinance-
witnesses said that he was doing nothing, no breach of the peace invalid arrest
hence incidental arrest likewise illegal --inadmissible evidence.
Pp v nazareno villareal police 10 meters away on a motorcycle, allegedly spotted
appellant scrutinizing something in his hand shabu not possible to spot due to
distance, s and seizure was declared invalid
George antiquera v pp
Sesbreno v ca meter reader turned upside down owner not around pinapasok
ni inday valid priv indl and with valid justification.
LIBERTY OF ABODE

-silverio case: out on bail restricted right to travel, cannot leave the country
without court permission bound by the condition of bail under jur of court
-marcos v manglapus right to return to ones country not among the
constitutionally guaranteed rights, however, the covenant of civil and political
rights as a GAPOIL - incorporation clause, deemed included in the law of the
land.. however, they must be prevented for it ag national security.

LIMITATIONS liberty of abode: within the limits prescribed by law, upon
lawful order of court; right to travel: interest of national security, public safety or
public health, as may be provided by law

RIGHT TO INFO ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC CONCERN

-accessshall be afforded to citsubj to such limitations as may be provided by law
--must be for a lawful purpose and subj to reasonable regulation set by the
custodian.
--right to info includes those during negotiation stage government contract.
--EXC matters recog as priv info rooted in sep of powers, national security,
military, diplomatic secrets, intergovt exchanges prior to consultation (diplomatic
negotiations), matters re investigation and prosecution of criminals, trade and
industrial secrets, other banking transactions, IP code, other confidential info

FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION
-includes the right not to associate
-govt ees has the right to form union no right to strike t and c provided for by
law; higher interest that public service should not be jeopardized
NON-IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACT
-no law may be passed which will impair obli of contract so long as legislative in
nature.. court decn, quasi jud not included.
-Police power is superior to the non-impairment clause, the latter protect only
property rights, while the former protects gen welfare
-taxation is superior than the non-impairment clause exc if exemption is with
consideration
-franchise not protected
FREE ACCESS TO COURT provided for in ROC