II.

CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS

Bill of Rights set of prescriptions setting forth the fundamental civil and political rights of the
individual, and imposing limitations on the powers of the government as a means of securing
the enjoyment of those rights.
Significance of the Bill of Rights
Government is powerful. When unlimited, it becomes tyrannical. The Bill of Rights is a
guarantee that there are certain areas of a person's life, liberty, and property which
governmental power may not touch.
Bill of Rights are generally self-implementing.
Classification of Rights
1. Political Rights granted by law to members of community in relation to their direct or
indirect participation in the establishment or administration of the government;
2. Civil Rights rights which municipal law will enforce at the instance of private individuals for
the purpose of securing them the enjoyment of their means of happiness;
3. Social and Economic Rights; and,
4. Human Rights.
A. DUE PROCESS
Section 1, Art. III. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due
process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.
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 on fair play
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.
When the State acts to interfere with life, liberty, or property, the presumption is that the action
is valid.
1. Life

 It is not just a protection of the right to be alive or to the security of one's limb against physical
harm. The right to life is the right to a good life... a life of dignity and... a decent standard of
living.
2. Liberty
(1) freedom to do right and never wrong (Mabini)
(2) right to be free from arbitrary personal restraint or servitude
3. 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 statue, it may be abolished by the legislature at any time.
Mere privileges are not property rights and are therefore revocable at will
Aspects of Due Process
1. Substantive Due Process
2. Procedural Due Process
As a substantive requirement, it is a prohibition of arbitrary laws.
As a procedural requirement, it relates chiefly to the mode of procedure which government
agencies must follow in the enforcement and application of laws. It is a guarantee of procedural
fairness.

Substantive Due Process

Substantive due process requires intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with the rights of
the person to his life, liberty or property
Requisites:
(a) Lawful Subject
(b) Lawful Means
Procedural Due Process
Procedural due process is the restriction on actions of judicial and quasi-judicial agencies of
government.
1. Judicial Due Process
Requisites:
(a) Impartial and Competent Court
(b) Jurisdiction lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant and/or property
(c) 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
Cases in which notice and hearing may be dispensed with without violating due
process:
abatement of nuisance per se

 preventive suspension of a civil servant facing administrative charges

cancellation of passport of a person sought for the commission of a crime
statutory presumptions
(d) Judgment rendered upon lawful hearing (Banco Espanol Filipino v. Palanca)
2. Administrative Due Process
Requisites:
(a) Right to a hearing
(b) Tribunal must consider the evidence presented
(c) Decision must have something to support itself
(d) Evidence must be Substantial
(e) Decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing, or at least contained in
the record and disclosed to the parties affected
(f) Tribunal, body, or any of its judges must act on its or his own independent consideration of
the facts and law of the controversy
(g) 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
In administrative proceedings, the quantum of proof required is only substantial evidence,
such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a
conclusion.
The law is vague when it lacks comprehensible standards that men of common intelligence
must necessarily guess as to its meaning and differ as to its application. It is repugnant to the
Constitution in two respects:
it violates due process for failure to accord persons fair notice of conduct to avoid; and,
it leaves law enforcers unbridled discretion in carrying out its provisions and becomes
arbitrary flexing of the Government muscle.
In Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, it was held that there was no violation of due process
because the nature of the charges against the petitioner is not uncertain and void merely
because general terms are used or because it employed terms that were not defined. The AntiPlunder law does not violate due process since it defines the act which it purports to punish,
giving the accused fair warning of the charges against him, and can effectively interpose a
defense against on his behalf.
A Connecticut statute making it a crime to use any drug or article to prevent conception
violates the right of marital privacy which is within the penumbra of specific guarantees of the
Bill of Rights.
Although the Bill of Rights does not mention privacy the Court ruled that that the right
was to be found in the "penumbras" of other constitutional protections. The First
Amendment has a penumbra where privacy is penumbra where privacy is protected
from governmental intrusion.
In Lochner v. New York, Lochner was charged with violation of the labor laws of New York for
wrongfully and unlawfully permitting an employee to work more than 60 hours in one week. The
statute allegedly violated mandates that no employee shall contract or agree to work more than
10 hours per day.
Issue: Whether the statute is unconstitutional.
Ruling: Yes.

The statute is unconstitutional. The statute interferes with the liberty of a person and the right of
free contract between employer and employee by determining the hours of labor in the
occupation of a baker without reasonable ground for doing so.
The general right to make a contract in relation to ones business is a liberty protected by the
14th amendment.
The state may interfere with and regulate both property and liberty rights to prevent the
individual from making certain kinds of contracts in its exercise of police power which relates to
safety, health, morals and general welfare of the society. In this instance, the 14th amendment
cannot interfere.
The trade of a baker is not an alarmingly unhealthy one that would warrant the states
interference with rights to labor and contract.
Doctrine: The rule must have a more direct relation, as means to an end, and the end itself
must be appropriate and legitimate, before an act can be held to be valid which interferes with
the general right of an individual to be free in his person and in his power to contract in relation
to his own labor.
Our cases include Court of Industrial Relations (Ang Tibay vs. CIR) as an administrative court
which exercises judicial and quasi-judicial functions in the determination of disputes between
employers and employees. National Telecommunications Company (PHILCOMSAT vs. Alcuaz),
National Labor Relations Commission or NLRC (DBP vs. NLRC) and school tribunals (Ateneo
vs. CA-Board of Discipline, Alcuaz vs. PSBA, Non vs. Judge Dames, Tinker vs. Des Moines
Community School District) also are clothed with quasi-judicial function. It is a question of
whether the body or institution has a judicial or quasi-judicial function that makes it bound by the
due process clause. (Judicial function is synonymous to judicial power which is the authority to
settle justiciable controversies or disputes involving rights that are legally enforceable and
demandable or the redress of wrongs for violations of such rights. It is a determination of what
the law is and what the legal rights of the parties are with respect to a matter in controversy).
In Ang Tibay vs. CIR, the Court laid down cardinal requirements in administrative proceedings
which essentially exercise a judicial or quasijudicial function. These are:
(1) the right to a hearing, which includes the right to present ones case and submit evidence in
support thereof
(2) The tribunal must consider the evidence presented
(3) The decision must have something to support itself
(4) The evidence must be substantial. Substantial evidence means such a reasonable evidence
as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion
(5) The decision must be based on the evidence presented at the hearting or at least contained
in the record and disclosed to the parties affected
(6) The tribunal or body of any of its judges must act on its own independent consideration of
the law and facts of the controversy and not simply accept the views of a subordinate
(7) The Board or body should, in all controversial questions, render its decision in such manner
that the parties to the proceeding can know the various issues involved and the reason for the
decision rendered.
B. EQUAL PROTECTION
Section 1, Art. III. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due

process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.
The Equality Protection Clause is a specific constitutional guarantee of the Equality of the
Person. The equality it guarantees is legal equality or, as it is usually put, the equality of all
persons before the law.
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
Requisites of Valid Classification:
(a) it must be based on substantial distinctions
(b) it must be germane to the purposes of the law
(c) it must not be limited to existing conditions only
must be enforced as long as the problem sought to be corrected exists
(d) it must apply equally well to all members of the class
both as to rights conferred and obligations imposed
In De Guzman v. Comelec, petitioners theorize that Sec. 44 of RA 8189 is violative of the
equal protection clause because it singles out the City and Municipal Election Officers of the
COMELEC as prohibited from holding office in the same city or municipality for more than four
years. The Court held that the law is valid. The singling out of election officers in order to
ensure the impartiality of election officials by preventing them from developing familiarity with
the people of their place of assignment.
In Ormoc Sugar Central v. Ormoc City, Ormoc City imposes a tax on Ormoc Sugar Central
by name. Ormos Sugar Central is the only sugar central in Ormoc City. The Court held that such
ordinance is not valid for it would be discriminatoory against the Ormoc Sugar Central which
alone comes under the ordinance.