JOSE B.L. REYES v.

RAMON BAGATSING
G.R. No. L-65366 (1983)
OConnor, J.

TOPIC. Freedom of expression and peaceful assembly; Liberty to discuss

and meet without censorship unless there is clear danger of a

substantive evil

FACTS. Retired Justice JBL Reyes in behalf of the members of the AntiBases Coalition sought a permit to rally from Luneta Park until the
front gate of the US embassy, which is less than two blocks apart. Then
Manila mayor Ramon Bagatsing has denied the permit. The mayor
claimed that there have been intelligence reports that indicated that
the rally would be infiltrated by lawless elements. He also issued City
Ordinance No. 7295 to prohibit the staging of rallies within the 500
feet radius of the US embassy. Bagatsing pointed out that it was his
intention to provide protection to the US embassy from such lawless
elements pursuant to Art. 22 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic
Relations, as affirmed by our constitutional provision to adhere to
generally accepted principles of international law.
ISSUE. Whether or not the denial of a public rally on a public park and
the US Embassy is a violation of constitutional guarantee to free
speech and assembly.
RESOLUTION. Yes.
ARGUMENTS & HOLDING
SUPREME COURT: The invocation of the right to freedom of peaceable
assembly carries with it the implication that the right to free speech
has likewise been disregarded. It is settled law that as to public places,
especially so as to parks and streets, there is freedom of access. Nor is
their use dependent on who is the applicant for the permit, whether an
individual or a group. There can be no legal objection, absent of clear
and present danger of a substantive evil, on the choice of Luneta and
US Embassy as the place for the peaceful rally. Time immemorial
Luneta has been used for purposes of assembly, communicating
thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions. Moreover,
denial of permit for a rally in front of the US Embassy is justified only
in the presence of a clear and present danger to life or property of the
embassy.
The denial of their rally does not pass the clear and present danger
test. The mere assertion that subversives may infiltrate the ranks of
the demonstrators does not suffice. In this case, no less than the police
chief assured that they have taken all the necessary steps to ensure a
peaceful rally. Further, the ordinance cannot be applied yet because
there was no showing that indeed the rallyists are within the 500 feet
radius (besides, theres also the question of whether or not the mayor
can prohibit such rally but, as noted by the SC, that has not been
raised as an issue in this case).