HUMAN RIGHTS COURSE OUTLINE TABLE Manila Packing and Export Forwarders.

When asked by the forwarder if they could

I. HUMAN RIGHTS LAWS IN THE PHILIPPINES examine and inspect the packages, Marti
The Old Struggle for Human Rights, New Problems Posed by
refused, assuring that the packages simply
Security by Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno Supreme Court contained books and cigars. However,
the proprietor opened the boxes for final
II. HUMAN RIGHTS, ITS ATTRIBUTES, ORIGIN AND THE THREE
GENERATIONS inspection as part of their SOP. Upon
opening, they suspected that the contents
A. Fundamental Powers of the State: were illegal drugs. The proprietor
1. Police Power
2. Eminent Domain reported the incident to NBI which
3. Taxation confirmed that the suspected content were
B. Fundamental Rights of the People marijuana. In the presence of the NBI
1. Classification of Rights: agents, the boxes were opened and found
1.1 As to Nature: Civil Political, Economic, Social, Cultural dried marijuana leaves inside. After Marti
1.2 As to Source: Natural, Constitutional, Statutory
1.3 Life, Liberty, Property was traced by NBI, he was charged with
violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act.Marti
C. Due Process
1. Substantive versus Procedural
assailed the admissibility of the drugs as
2. Standards of Review: evidence against him, which, according to
2.1 Clear and Present Danger Test him, is obtained in violation of his
2.2 Dangerous Tendency Test
2.3 Balancing of Interest Test constitutional rights against unreasonable
3. Levels of Scrutiny search and seizure and privacy of
3.1 Rational Basis Test
3.2 Intermediate Scrutiny Test
communication. Issue May an act of a
3.3 Strict Scrutiny Test private individual, allegedly in violation of
4. Facial Challenge: appellant's constitutional rights, be
4.1 Overbreadth
4.2 Void-for-Vagueness Test invoked against the State? 82 82 Ruling No
The Court ruled that in the absence of
D. Three Generations
1. Civil and Political Rights
governmental interference, the liberties
2. Economic, Social and Cultural Rights granted by the Constitution cannot be
3. International Instruments invoked against the State. The
Readings: constitutional right against unreasonable
- Art. II, Sec 5.; Art. III, Secs. 1 and 9, Philippine Constitution search and seizure refers to the immunity
- PBM Emp. Org. v. PBM Co., Inc. 51 SCRA 198 (1973) of one's person, whether citizen or alien,
- Simon v. CHR, G.R. No. 100150, 5 January 1994
- Baldoza v. Dimaano, 71 SCRA 152 (1976) from interference by government. Its
- David v. Arroyo, 489 SCRA 152 (2006) protection is directed only to governmental
- Southern Hemisphere Engagement Network, Inc. v. Anti-Terrorism Council
632 SCRA 146 (2010) action. This right do not require exclusion
- Alberto T. Muyot, Philippine Law and Jurisprudence on Human Rights, The of evidence obtained through a search by a
Institute of Human Rights, University of the Philippines Law Center, U.P. private citizen.In this case, the evidence
Law Center Printery, pages 1-5
was primarily discovered and obtained by a
III. STATE RESPONSIBILITY private person, acting in a private capacity
State guarantor of human rights
and without the intervention of State
authorities. Therefore, there is no reason
Rule of Law why it should not be admitted to prosecute
State actors him. Marti, however, alleged that the NBI
agents made an illegal search and seizure
International State Responsibility wrongful acts
of the evidence. The Court pointed out
Derivative State Responsibility Can a State be held responsible of that: a) It was the proprietor who made a
acts of another State? reasonable search of the packages in
CASE/WORDS/PHRASES compliance with SOP AND b) the mere
presence of the NBI agents did not convert
PP v. Andre Marti GR81561 January 18, 1991
the reasonable search effected into a
People of the Philippines vs. Andre warrantless search and seizure. Merely to
Marti G.R. No. 81561 January 18, 1991 observe and look at that which is in plain
Facts: sight is not a search. Marti further argued
Andre Marti and his wife Shirley that since the Constitution expressly
wanted to send packages to their friend in declares as inadmissible any evidence
Switzerland and contracted the services of obtained in violation of the constitutional
prohibition against illegal search and
seizure, it matters not whether the CASE/WORDS/PHRASES
evidence was procured by police
North Sea Continental Shelf Case (West Germany vs. Denmark and
authorities or private individuals. The Court West Germany vs. Netherland, ICJ Feb. 20 1969)
answered that the Constitution, in laying Barcelona Traction Light and Power Company, (Belgium v. Spain)
down the principles of the government and Kuroda v. Jalandoni, GR No. L-2662 March 26, 1949
Pacta sunt servanda
fundamental liberties of the people, does States consent to be bound
not govern relationships between Customary law objective and subjective elements
individuals. Opinio Juris (Opino juris sivc necessitates)
Doctrine of Customary Law
Velasquez Rodriguez v. Honduras Inter-American Court of Human
Peremtory norms (jus cogens)
Rights, July 29, 1988 Series C, No. (1988)
Obligatio erga omnes
Delalic, it-965-21-a, Feb. 20, 2001
Universal Jurisdiction
Nicaragua v. United States of America International Court of Justice,
Actio popularis
Lune 27, 1988
General principles of law
Oposa v. Factoran GR101063, July 30, 1993
Yogyakarta Principles
The Writ of Kalikasan, A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC Rule 7
Incorporation Clause in 1987 Constitution
In Re Yamashita, 327 U.S. 1(1943)
International Criminal Court
Belgium v. Spain, (1970) ICJ Rep
Ad hoc criminal tribunals
Barcelona Traction case
Martens Clause
US v. Mexico, 4 RIAA (1926) Neer Claim
France v. Mexico, (1929) Caire Claim
V. INTERNATIONAL BILL OF RIGHTS
UK v. Albania, Corfu Channel Case, (1949) ICJ Rep
U.S. v. Iran (1980) ICJ Rep
a. Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Home Missionary Society Claim, US v. Great Britain
b. International Covenant on Civil and Political rights and 2
Chorgow Factory Case, Germany v. Poland PCIJ
protocols
North America Dredging Company Claim (1926)
c. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Chinese Flour Importer Assn. v. Price Stabilization Board 89 Phil 439
d. Rights and Freedoms under the International Bill of Rights
PP v. Chan Fook 42 Phil 230
e. Judicial Writs
Kwong Sing v. City of Manila 41 Phil 103
Writ of Habeas Corpus
Youmans Case, U.S. v. United Mexican State 1926
Writ of Amparo
U.S. vs. Panama, 6 United Rep, Intl. Arb Awards 308
Writ of Habeas Data
Texas Cattle Case, American Mexican Claims Com. 1948
f. Rights of foundling
Germany v. U.S. ICJ June 23, 2001, Las Grand Case
g. Rights of nationality
Buffalo Claim, Italy v. Venezuela, 10 UN Rep Intl. Arb Awards 234
(1908)
CASE/WORDS/PHRASES
Borovsky v. Com of Immigration, 90 Phil 107
Li Sien Giap v. Director of Lands, 59 Phil 687
Pretty v. UK (2346/02) European Court of Human Rights 2002
Radick v. Hutchins 95 US 210
Pp v. Cayat, GR No. L-45987, May 5, 1935
U.S. v. Guatemala, Shufeldt Claim, 1930, 5 Hackworth, p 485 2 UN
Beltran v. Sec. of Health GR No. 133640,1336611 and 139147, Nov.
Rep Arb Awards 1079
25, 2005
Sambiaggo Case, (Italy v. Venezuela) Venezuela Arbitration of 1903,,
Marcos v. Manlapus, GR No. 88211, Sept. 15, 1989 and Oct. 27, 1989
p 666\
American Bible Society v. City of Manila GR No. L-9637 April 30, 1957
Bolivar Railway Co v. Ralston, Venezuela Arb, of 1903 p 388
Tolentino v. Sec. of Finance GR No. 115455, Oct. 30,1995
U.S. v. Great Britain, US GB Claims Arb 1920 (Nielsen Report)
Sahin v. Turkey No. 44774/98 EC+HR, nov. 10, 2005
Rosa Gelbtrunk Claim, US v. El Salvadsor, Arb Tribunal 1902
Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire 315 US 568 (1942)
French Co. of Venezuela Railroad Case 10 UN Rep Intl Arb Awards
PP vs. Doriquez GR No. L-24444-45 July 29, 1968
285
Romualdez Marcos v. Comelec GR No. 119976, Sept. 18, 1995
Kummerov Case 10 UN Rep Intl arb Award 361
Aquino v. Comelec GR No. 120265, Sept.18, 1995
Dix Case 9 UN Rep Intl Arb awards 119
Agote v. Lorenzo 142675 July 22, 2005
Ambatielos Case Greece v. UK ICJ Rep 28, 952
PP vs. Ladjaalam GR No. 136149-51 Sept 19, 2000
Estonia v. Lithuania PCIJ
Poe Llamanzares v. Comelec GR 221697
Rhodore Forest Claim 3 UN Rep Intl Arb award 1406
Finnish Shipowners Claim 3 UN Rep Intl Arb awards 1484
VI. APPLICATION, ENFORCEMENT AND LIMITATIONS
Robert E. Brown Case 6 UN Rep Intl Arb awards 120
Debenture Holders of San Marco Co 1931, 5 UN Rep Arb awards 191
Domestic Application of IHRL
Panevetzus Saldutiskis Railway PCIJ ser. A/B no. 76 At. 16 (1939)
Monist Theory
Mavrommatic Palestine Concessions PCIJ ser A. No. 2 at 12 (1924)
Dualist Theory

International Application of IHRL

IV. SOURCES OF INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW
States Consent to be bound Enforcement Mechanism
Against Individual
a. Human Rights treaties
-domestic enforcement
b. Customary law; Jus cogens, erga omnes, Actio popularis
-international enforcement
c. General Principles of Law
Incorporation clause in the 1987 Constitution Sec. 2
Art. II States
d. Judicial Decisions and Teachings -Court Action
International Court of Justice -Diplomatic means
International Criminal Court -Retorsion
Ad hoc criminal tribunal -Countermeasures
Regional Courts -Military intervention
Hybrid or internationalized courts
Martens Clause Restrictions and Limitations
 Parameters to restrict exercise of human rights Sanchez v. People GR 179090, June 5, 2009
Proportionality test Araneta v. People GR 274205, Junr 27, 2008

Derogation XI. THE PROTECTION OF WOMENS RIGHTS UNDER PHIL LAWS

Conditions allowing derogation of human rights
Read international conventions and domestics laws on womens rights
Ang Ladlad v. Comelec GR No. 190582 Apr 8, 2010
CASE/WORDS/PHRASES
XII. THE RIGHTS OF MIGRANT WORKERS
Piandong v. Phil Case No. 869-1999, Human Rights Committee
PBM Emp. Org v. PBM Co., Inc. 51 SCRA 189 (1973) Read international conventions and domestics laws on migrant
Simon CHR GR 100150, 5 Jan 1994 workers
Carino v. Commission on Human Rights 204 SCRA 483
EPZA vs. CHR, 208 SCRA 125 XIII. THE RIGHTS OF DISABLED PERSONS
Baldoza v. Dimaano 71 SCRA 152 (1976)
David v. Arroyo, 489 SCRA 160 (2006 Read international conventions and domestics laws on disabled
Southern Hemisphere Engagement Network Inc. v. Anti-Terrorism persons
Council 632 SCRA 146 (2010)
Orquiola v. Tandang Sora Devt. Corp, 386 SCRA 201 (2002) XIV. THE RIGHT AGAINST TORTURE
Govt. of HK v. Olalia, GR 153875, 19 April 2007
PP vs. Andre Marti 193 SCRA 57 (1991) Torture define
Waterhouse Drug v. NLRC GR 113271 (16 Oct 1997) Non-refoulement
Zulueta v. CA 253 SCRA 699
Gamboa v. Chan 677 SCRA 385 (2012) Read international conventions and domestics laws on TORTURE
MMDA v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay 18 Dec 2008 GR
171947-48 XV. THE RIGHT AGAISNT ENFORECED DISAPPEARANCES
In re Yamashita 327 US 1 (1946)
Enforced disappearance
VII. MONITORING SYSTEMS 2 components
Persons responsibility
Charter Based
1503 Procedures Read international conventions and domestics laws on enforced
1235 Procedures disappearances
Kurt v. Turkey (15/1997/799/1002) May 25, 1998 European Court of
Treaty Based Human Rights
Human Rights Committee Velasquez Rodriguez v. Honduras July 27, 1988 Inter American Court
Monitoring bodies of Human Rights

CASE/WORDS/PHRASES XVI. THE INTENATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

Four Principles
Piandong v. The Phil Case No. 869-1999 Human Rights Committee The Crimes
Baroy v. The Phil Case No. 1045-2002 HRC Organs
Pimentel v. The Phil Case 1320-2004 HRC Command
Marcellana and Gumanoy v. The Phil Case 1560 2007 HRC
Lumanog and Santos v. The Phil 1466-2006 HRC Elements of Crimes pdf
Larranaga v. The Phil 1421-2005 HRC
La Grand (Germany v. USA) Rome Statue
Weiss v. Austria
Bondarenko v. Belarus Prosecutor V. Alfred Musema ICTR-96-13-T, January 27, 2000
Jong Kyu Song v. Rep of Korea
Tae-Hoon Park v. Rep of Korea XVII. INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW
Keun Tae Kim v. Rep of Korea
Ajaz et al. v. Rep of Korea Definition
Toala v. New Zealand 2 Components
Joslin v. New Zealand Application
Winata et al. v. Australia Origin
A v. Australia Geneva Convention
C v. Australia Hague Conventions
G.T. v. Australia Fundamental Rules of IHL
Sahid et al. v. New Zealand IHL v. IHRL
Rogerson v. Australia Protected Persons
Love et al. v. Australia ICRC
Gillot v. France Current Issues
Koi v. Portugal
Read what is International Humanitarian Law? ICRC
VIII. THE UNITED NATIONS Tadic, IT-94-1 July 15, 1999 Intl Criminal Tribunal of Former
Yugoslavia
Purposes Delalic IT-965-21-a Feb 20, 2001
Organs
Offices, Agencies, Programmes, Subsidiary
Bodies

IX. MILLENIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

X. PHILIPPINE LAWS ON PROMOTING THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD

Read all laws on Childrens rights