a.

7 Right to security
Art. 17, ICCPR
Article 17
1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy,
family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and
reputation.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or
attacks.
Art. III, Sec. 2 and 3
, Phil. Constitution
Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any
purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue
except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination
under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
Section 3. (1) The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be
inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires
otherwise, as prescribed by law.
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be
inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.
Purpose and Importance of the guaranty
Alvero v. Dizon, 76 Phil. 637 (1946)
To Whom Directed
People vs. Andre Marti, 193 SCRA 57 (1991)
Zulueta vs. Court of Appeals, [G.R. No. 107383. February 20, 1996.]
Who May Invoke the Right?
Bache and Co., vs. Ruiz, 37 SCRA 323 (1971)
Stonehill v. Diokno, 20 SCRA 383 (1967)
Objects of Seizure
Rule 126, Sec. 3, Rules of Court (ROC)
Warrantless searches
Section 3. Personal property to be seized. A search warrant may be issued for the
search and seizure of personal property:
(a) Subject of the offense;
(b) Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds, or fruits of the offense; or
(c) Used or intended to be used as the means of committing an offense. (2a)
Valid Waiver
People vs. Omaweng, 213 SCRA 462 (1992)
Lopez vs. Comm. of Customs, 68 SCRA 320 (1975)
Veroy vs. Layague, 210 SCRA 97 (1992)

Incident to lawful arrest

Rule 126, Section 13, Rules of Court
Section 13. Search incident to lawful arrest. A person lawfully arrested may be
searched for dangerous weapons or anything which may have been used or constitute
proof in the commission of an offense without a search warrant. (12a)
People v. Malmstedt, 198 SCRA 401 (1991)
People vs. Libnao, et. al., G.R. No. 136860, January 20, 2003
Plain view doctrine
Padilla v. CA, 269 SCRA 402 (1997)
a.8

Procedural guarantees in civil and criminal trials

Articles 9, 14, 15 ICCPR

Article 9
1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be subjected
to arbitrary arrest or detention. No one shall be deprived of his liberty except on
such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as are established by law.
2. Anyone who is arrested shall be informed, at the time of arrest, of the reasons for
his arrest and shall be promptly informed of any charges against him.
3. Anyone arrested or detained on a criminal charge shall be brought promptly
before a judge or other officer authorized by law to exercise judicial power and shall
be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release. It shall not be the general
rule that persons awaiting trial shall be detained in custody, but release may be
subject to guarantees to appear for trial, at any other stage of the judicial
proceedings, and, should occasion arise, for execution of the judgement.
4. Anyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to
take proceedings before a court, in order that that court may decide without delay on
the lawfulness of his detention and order his release if the detention is not lawful.
5. Anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an
enforceable right to compensation.
Article 14
1. All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of
any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law,
everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent
and impartial tribunal established by law. The press and the public may be excluded
from all or part of a trial for reasons of morals, public order (ordre public) or national
security in a democratic society, or when the interest of the private lives of the
parties so requires, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in
special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice; but
any judgement rendered in a criminal case or in a suit at law shall be made public
except where the interest of juvenile persons otherwise requires or the proceedings
concern matrimonial disputes or the guardianship of children.
2. Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall have the right to be presumed
innocent until proved guilty according to law.
3. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, everyone shall be entitled

to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality: (a) To be informed promptly

and in detail in a language which he understands of the nature and cause of the
charge against him;
(b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence and to
communicate with counsel of his own choosing;
(c) To be tried without undue delay;
(d) To be tried in his presence, and to defend himself in person or through legal
assistance of his own choosing; to be informed, if he does not have legal assistance,
of this right; and to have legal assistance assigned to him, in any case where the
interests of justice so require, and without payment by him in any such case if he
does not have sufficient means to pay for it;
(e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him and to obtain the
attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions
as witnesses against him;
(f) To have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the
language used in court;
(g) Not to be compelled to testify against himself or to confess guilt.
4. In the case of juvenile persons, the procedure shall be such as will take account
of their age and the desirability of promoting their rehabilitation.
5. Everyone convicted of a crime shall have the right to his conviction and sentence
being reviewed by a higher tribunal according to law.
6. When a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence and
when subsequently his conviction has been reversed or he has been pardoned on
the ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has
been a miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of
such conviction shall be compensated according to law, unless it is proved that the
non-disclosure of the unknown fact in time is wholly or partly attributable to him.
7. No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again for an offence for which he
has already been finally convicted or acquitted in accordance with the law and penal
procedure of each country.
Article 15
1 . No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or
omission which did not constitute a criminal offence, under national or international
law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than
the one that was applicable at the time when the criminal offence was committed. If,
subsequent to the commission of the offence, provision is made by law for the
imposition of the lighter penalty, the offender shall benefit thereby.
2. Nothing in this article shall prejudice the trial and punishment of any person for
any act or omission which, at the time when it was committed, was criminal
according to the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations.
Article III, Sections 14 -17, 1987 Phil. Constitution
Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due
process of law.
(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the
contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to

be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a
speedy, impartial, and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have
compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of
evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may proceed
notwithstanding the absence of the accused provided that he has been duly notified
and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.
Section 15. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended
except in cases of invasion or rebellion when the public safety requires it.
Section 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases
before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.
Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Presumption of Innocence
Proof beyond reasonable doubt
People vs. Dramayo, 42 SCRA 59 (1971)
RIGHT TO BAIL
Art. III, Sec. 13
Section 13. All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion
perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by
sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be provided by law. The
right to bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
is suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required.
Bail Defined
Rule 114, Section 1, ROC
Section 1. Bail defined. Bail is the security given for the release of a person in
custody of the law, furnished by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance
before any court as required under the conditions hereinafter specified. Bail may be
given in the form of corporate surety, property bond, cash deposit, or recognizance.
(1a)
Herras Teehankee vs. Rovira, 75 Phil. 634 (1945)
People of the Philippines vs. Sandiganbayan and Jingoy Estrada,
G.R. No. 158754. 10 August 2007

PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION

Art. III, Sec. 17
Scope covers compulsory testimonial incrimination
United States vs. Tan Teh, 23 Phil. 145 (1912)
In what proceedings available
Pascual vs. Board of Medical Examiners, 28 SCRA 344 (1969)
Galman vs. Pamaran, 138 SCRA 274 (1985)

Right to speedy, impartial and public trial

Speedy trial
Acebedo vs. Sarmiento , G.R. No. L-28025 December 16, 1970
Olbes vs. Danilo Buemio , G.R. 173319, Dec. 4, 2009
Public trial
Garcia vs. Domingo, 52 SCRA 143 (1970)
Perez v. Estrada, A.M. No. 01-4-03-SC, June 29, 2001
Impartial trial
Tumey vs. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927)
Soriano vs. Angeles, G.R. No. 109920, August 31, 2000
Right to confront witnesses
U.S. v. Javier, 37 Phil. 449 (1918)