Consti 2 Cases Section 12

Gamboa vs. Cruz [G.R. No. L56291, June 27, 1988]

FACTS:
Petitioner herein was arrested and was brought to the police station
because of vagrancy. The next day, the petitioner and with other 5
detainees were ask to line up. The complainant, meanwhile, during
the line up pointed to the petitioner herein as a suspect of robbery.
After that, he was asked to sit in front of the complainant while the
latter is being investigated. An information of robbery has been filed
against the herein petitioner.
During the arraignment, the prosecution offered and presented its
evidence. While on the other hand, the petitioner, with the assistance
of his counsel, instead preparing for his evidence, file a Motion to
Acquit or Demurrer of evidence. The petitioner filed this motion on the
ground that the conduct of the line up, without notice, and in the
absence of his counsel violated his constitutional right to counsel and
to due process. People vs. Macam [G.R. Nos. 9101112, November 24, 1994]
Facts:
ISSUE:
Whether or not the petitioners right to counsel and to due process Prosecutions version:
was violated during the line up. On Aug 18,1987, Eduardo Macam, Antonio Cedro, Eugenio Cawilan Jr.,
Danilo Roque and Ernesto Roque went to the house of Benito Macam
HELD: (uncle of Eduardo Macam) located at 43 Ferma Road QC. Upon the
No. The Rights to counsel and to due process is protected by the arrival of the accused, Benito invited the former to have lunch. Benito
constitution whether it be 1973 or 1987. asked his maid Salvacion Enrera to call the companions of Eduardo
who were waiting in a tricycle outside the house. A. Cedro, E. Cawilan
The right to counsel attaches upon the start of the investigation, or and D. Roque entered the house while E. Roque remained in the
when the investigating officers tries to elicit or ask information from tricycle. After all the accused had taken their lunch, Eduardo Macam
the accuse,even though the questions appeases to be innocent. At grabbed the clutch bag of Benito Macam and pulled out his uncles
this point of stage, the assistance of the counsel is needed in order to gun then declared a hold-up. They tied up the wife (Leticia Macam),
avoid the pernicious practice of extorting false or coerced admissions children, maid (Salvacion) and Nilo Alcantara and brought them to the
or confessions from the lips fo the person undergoing interrogation, room upstairs. After a while Leticia was brought to the bathroom and
for the commission of an offense. after she screamed she was stabbed and killed by A. Cedro. Benito,
Nilo and Salvacion was also stabbed but survived. The total value of
When the petitioner was asked to line up with other detainees, he was the items taken was P536, 700.00.
not asked any question nor to answer. The police line up is not wart of
custodial inquest, hence the petitioner was not entitled to right to Defenses version:
counsel. Danilo Roque stated that he being a tricycle driver drove the 4
accused to Benitos house for a fee of P50.00. Instead of paying him,
Under the 1973 and 1987 Constitution, the right to counsel attaches he was given a calling card by Eduardo Macam so that he can be paid
at the start of the investigation against the respondent, and even the following day. Upon arriving, he went with the accused inside the
before the adversary judicial proceedings against the accused begins. house to have lunch. Thereafter he washed the dishes and swept the
floor. When Eugenio Cawilan pulled a gun and announced the hold-up,
he was asked to gather some things and which he abided out of fear.
While the court finds no real need to afford a suspect the services of While putting the said thins inside the car of Benito (victim) he heard
counsel during a police line up, the moment there is a move to elicit the accused saying kailangan patayin ang mga taong yan dahil kilala
admissions or confessions, even a plain information which may appear ako ng mga yan. Upon hearing such phrase he escaped and went
innocent or innocuous at the time, from said suspect, he should then home using his tricycle. He also testified that his brother Ernesto
and there be assisted by counsel, unless he waives the right, but the Roque has just arrived from the province and in no way can be
waiver shall be made in writing and in the presence of the counsel. involved in the case at bar. On the following day, together with his
brother, they went to the factory of the Zesto Juice (owned by the
father of Eduardo Macam) for him to get his payment (50.00) . He and
his brother was suddenly apprehended by the security guards and
brought to the police headquarters in Q.C. They were also forced to compromise however this did not ensue. Two months after a crime of
admit certain things. estafa was charged against Ramos. Ramos pleaded not guilty.
Evidence by the prosecution contained Ramos written admission and
After which, he together with all the accused, in handcuffs and bore statement, to which defendants argued that the confession was taken
contusions on their faces caused by blows inflicted in their faces without the accused being represented by a lawyer. Respondent Judge
during investigation, was brought to the QC General Hospital before did not admit those stating that accused was not reminded of his
each surviving victims and made to line-up for identification. Eugenio constitutional rights to remain silent and to have counsel. A motion for
Cawilan was also charged with Anti-fencing Law but was acquitted in reconsideration filed by the prosecutors was denied. Hence this
the said case. appeal.

Issue: Whether or Not their right to counsel has been violated. WON Issue: Whether or Not the respondent Judge correct in making
the arrest was valid. WON the evidence from the line-up is admissible. inadmissible as evidence the admission and statement of accused.

Held: It is appropriate to extend the counsel guarantee to critical Held: No. Section 20 of the 1987 constitution provides that the right
stages of prosecution even before trial. A police line-up is considered a against self-incrimination (only to witnesses other than accused,
critical stage of the proceedings. Any identification of an unless what is asked is relating to a different crime charged- not
uncounseled accused made in a police line-up is inadmissible. present in case at bar).
HOWEVER, the prosecution did not present evidence regarding
appellants identification at the line-up. The witnesses identified the This is accorded to every person who gives evidence, whether
accused again in open court. Also, accused did not object to the in- voluntarily or under compulsion of subpoena, in any civil, criminal, or
court identification as being tainted by illegal line-up. administrative proceeding. The right is not to "be compelled to be a
witness against himself. It prescribes an "option of refusal to answer
The arrest of the appellants was without a warrant. HOWEVER, they incriminating questions and not a prohibition of inquiry." the right can
are estopped from questioning the legality of such arrest because they be claimed only when the specific question, incriminatory in character,
have not moved to quash the said information and therefore is actually put to the witness. It cannot be claimed at any other time.
voluntarily submitted themselves to the jurisdiction of the trial court It does not give a witness the right to disregard a subpoena, to decline
by entering a plea of not guilty and participating in trial. to appear before the court at the time appointed, or to refuse to
testify altogether. It is a right that a witness knows or should know. He
The court believed the version of the prosecution. Ernesto Roque, must claim it and could be waived.
while remaining outside the house served as a looked out.
Rights in custodial interrogation as laid down in miranda v. Arizona:
Wherefore, decision of lower court is Affirmed. Danilo Roque and the rights of the accused include:
Ernesto Roque is guilty of the crime of robbery with homicide as co-
conspirators of the other accused to suffer reclusion perpetua. 1) he shall have the right to remain silent and to counsel, and to be
informed of such right.
Things taken: 2 toygun, airgun riffle, CO2 refiller, TV, betamax tapes, 2) nor force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which
betamax rewinder, Samsonite attache case, typewriter, chessboard, vitiates the free will shall be used against him.
TOYOTA Crown Car Plate No. CAS-997, assorted jewelry. .22 gun and 3) any confession obtained in violation of these rights shall be
money. inadmissible in evidence.
People vs. Judge Ayson [G.R. No. 85215, July 7, 1989]
Facts: Felipe Ramos was a ticket freight clerk of the Philippine Airlines, The individual may knowingly and intelligently waive these rights and
assigned at its Baguio City station. It was alleged that he was involved agree to answer or make a statement. But unless and until such rights
in irregularities in the sales of plane tickets, the PAL management and waivers are demonstrated by the prosecution at the trial, no
notified him of an investigation to be conducted. That investigation evidence obtained as a result of interrogation can be used against
was scheduled in accordance with PAL's Code of Conduct and him.
Discipline, and the Collective Bargaining Agreement signed by it with
the Philippine Airlines Employees' Association (PALEA) to which Ramos
pertained. A letter was sent by Ramos stating his willingness to settle
the amount of P76,000. The findings of the Audit team were given to
him, and he refuted that he misused proceeds of tickets also stating
that he was prevented from settling said amounts. He proffered a
 demonstrated by the prosecution at thetrial, no evidence obtained as
a result of interrogation can be used against him.

People vs. Pinlac [G.R. Nos. 74123-24, September 26, 1988]

Facts: Felipe Ramos was a ticket freight clerk of the Philippine Airlines,
assigned at its Baguio Citystation. It was alleged that he was involved
in irregularities in the sales of plane tickets, the PALmanagement
notified him of an investigation to be conducted. That investigation
was scheduled inaccordance with PAL's Code of Conduct and
Discipline, and the Collective Bargaining Agreement signedby it with
the Philippine Airlines Employees' Association (PALEA) to which Ramos
pertained. A letter wassent by Ramos stating his willingness to settle
the amount of P76,000. The findings of the Audit teamwere given to
him, and he refuted that he misused proceeds of tickets also stating
that he wasprevented from settling said amounts. He proffered a
compromise however this did not ensue. Twomonths after a crime of
estafa was charged against Ramos. Ramos pleaded not guilty.
Evidence by theprosecution contained Ramos written admission and
statement, to which defendants argued that theconfession was taken
without the accused being represented by a lawyer. Respondent Judge
did notadmit those stating that accused was not reminded of his People vs. Bolanos [G.R. No. 101808, July 3, 1992]
constitutional rights to remain silent and tohave counsel. A motion for Facts: Oscar Pagdalian was murdered in Marble Supply, Balagtas
reconsideration filed by the prosecutors was denied. Hence this Bulacan. According to Pat. Rolando Alcantara and Francisco Dayao,
appeal.Issue: Whether or Not the respondent Judge correct in making deceased was with two companions on the previous night, one of
inadmissible as evidence the admissionand statement of whom the accused who had a drinking spree with the deceased. When
accused.Held: No. Section 20 of the 1987 constitution provides that they apprehended the accused they found the firearm of the deceased
the right against self-incrimination (only towitnesses other than on the chair where the accused was allegedly seated. They boarded
accused, unless what is asked is relating to a different crime charged- accused along with Magtibay, other accused on the police vehicle and
not presentin case at bar).This is accorded to every person who gives brought them to the police station. While in the vehicle Bolanos
evidence, whether voluntarily or under compulsion of subpoena, in admitted that he killed the deceased. RTC convicted him hence the
any civil, criminal, or administrative proceeding. The right is not to "be appeal.
compelled to be awitness against himself. It prescribes an "option of
refusal to answer incriminating questions and not aprohibition of
inquiry." the right can be claimed only when the specific question, Issue: Whether or Not accused-appellant deprived of his constitutional
incriminatory incharacter, is actually put to the witness. It cannot be right to counsel.
claimed at any other time. It does not give awitness the right to
disregard a subpoena, to decline to appear before the court at the
time appointed, Held: Yes. Being already under custodial investigation while on board
the police patrol jeep on the way to the Police Station where formal
or to refuse to testify altogether. It is a right that a witness knows or investigation may have been conducted, appellant should have been
should know. He must claim it andcould be waived.Rights in custodial informed of his Constitutional rights under Article III, Section 12 of the
interrogation as laid down in miranda v. Arizona: the rights of the 1987 Constitution, more particularly par. 1 and par. 3.
accused include:1) he shall have the right to remain silent and to
counsel, and to be informed of such right.2) nor force, violence,
threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiates the free will
shall be usedagainst him.3) any confession obtained in violation of
these rights shall be inadmissible in evidence.The individual may
knowingly and intelligently waive these rights and agree to answer or
make astatement. But unless and until such rights and waivers are

People vs. Andan [G.R. No. 116437, March 3, 1997]
Marianne Guevarra, a second-year nursing student at Fatima was on
her way to her school dormitory in Valenzuelal, Metro Manila when
Pablito Andan asked her to check the blood pressure of the
grandmother of Andans wife but there was nobody inside the house.
She was punched in the abdomen by Andan and was brought to the
kitchen where he raped her. She was left in the toilet until it was dark
and was dragged to the backyard. It was when Andan lifted her over
the fence to the adjacent vacant lot where she started to move. Andan
hit her head with a concrete block to silence her and dragged her
body to a shallow portion of the lot and abandoned it.
The death of Marianne drew public attention which prompted Baliuag
Mayor Cornelio Trinidad to form a team of police officers to solve the
case. Apart from the vacant lot, they also searched Andans nearby
house and found evidences linked to the crime. The occupants of the
house were interviewed and learned that accused-appellant was in
Barangay Tangos, Baliuag, Bulacan. A police team lead by Mayor
Trinidad located Andan and took him to the police headquarters where
he was interrogated where he said that Dizon killed the girl. The three
were then brought to Andans house where he showed the police
where the bags of Marianne were hidden. They were then brought
back to the police station while waiting for the result of the
investigation.
The gruesome crime attracted the media and as they were gathered
at the police headquarters for the result of the investigation, Mayor
Trinidad arrived and proceeded to the investigation room. Upon seeing
the mayor, appellant approved him and whispered a request that they
talk privately to which the mayor agreed. They went to another room
and there, the Andan agreed to tell the truth and admitted that he
was the one who killed Marianne. The mayor opened the door of the
room to let the public and the media representatives witness the
confession. Mayor Trinidad first asked for a lawyer to assist the
appellant but since no lawyer was available he ordered the
proceedings photographed and recorded in video. In the presence of
the media and his relatives, Andan admitted to the crime and
disclosed how he killed Marianne and that he falsely implicated Larin
and Dizon because of ill-feelings against them.
However, appellant entered a plea of not guilty during his
arraignment. He provided an alibi why he was at his fathers house at
another barangay and testified that policemen tortured and coerced
him to admit the crime but the trial court found him guilty and
sentenced him to death.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the admission of Andan to the mayor without the
assistance of counsel is in violation of the constitution and cannot be
admitted as evidence in court.
RULING:
Under these circumstances, it cannot be claimed that the appellants
confession before the mayor is inadmissible. A municipal mayor has
operational supervision and control over the local police and may be
deemed a law enforcement officer for purposes of applying Section 12
(1) and (3) of Article III of the Constitution. However, Andans
confession to the mayor was not made in response to any
interrogation by the latter. In fact, the mayor did not question
appellant at all and no police authority ordered the appellant to talk to
the mayor. It was the appellant who spontaneously, freely and
voluntarily sought the mayor for a private meeting. The mayor acted
as a confidant and not as a law enforcer and therefore did not violate
his constitutional rights.
Constitutional procedures on custodial investigation do not apply to a
spontaneous statement, not elicited through questioning by the
authorities, but given in an ordinary manner whereby appellant orally
admitted having committed the crime. What the constitution bars is
the compulsory disclosure of incriminating facts or confession. Hence,
we hold that appellants confession to the mayor was correctly
admitted by the trial court.
Andan was found guilty of the special complex crime of rape with
homicide.
Navallo vs. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 97214, July 18, 1994]
Petitioner herein is the Collecting and Disbursing Officer of the
Numancia Naitonal Vocational School in del Carmen, Surigao del
Norte. He was entrusted, as a Collecting and Disbursement Officer to
hold in trust moneys and/ properties of the government of the
Republic of the Philippines. That while being in the said position, he
intentionally, feloniously and without lawful authority appropriate and
misappropriate to his own private benefit, public funds he was holding
in trust for the Government of the Philippines in the total amount to
PHP16, 483.62. He as unable to account for the said amount during
the audit.

Warrant of arrest was issued to arrest the petitioner but he was

nowhere to be found. People vs. Dy [G.R. No. 74517, February 23, 1988]
Facts: Accused is the owner of Bennys Bar at Boracay Island and was
On December 10, 1978, Sandiganbayan was created pursuant to PD sentenced with murder before the trial court for shooting a Swiss
No 1606, conferring to it original and exclusive jurisdiction over crimes national in his bar. The accused contends the court erred in admitting
committed by public officers embraced in Title VII of the RPC the presentation of the prosecution of evidence that he came to a
police officer and made a confession on the crime and informed said
November 1984, when the petitioner herein was finally arrested. He officer where to find the gun he used, a statement the accused denied
was released on provisional liberty upon the approval of the bail bond. to have done. They assail its admissibility to the court on the grounds
When arraigned by the RTC, he pleaded not guilty. Upon motion of the that such statement was not made in writing and is in violation of the
prosecution, the RTC transferred the case and transmitted its records due process required in custodial investigation.
to the Sandiganbayan. Special Prosecutor Quiones-Marcos however
opined that since Navallo had already been arraigned before the case Issue: Whether or not the evidence presented by the prosecution be
was transferred to the Sandiganbayan, the RTC should continue taking admissible to warrant guilt of the accused.
cognizance of the case. That matter was referred to the Office of the
Ombudsman which held otherwise. The information was however Held: In view of the documentary evidence on record the defense lost
docketed in Sandiganbayan. A new order of arrest for the petitioner its credibility before the court. An oral confession made by the
was issued by the Sandiganbayan. accused to the officer and telling him the gun is in his bar which he
wants to surrender can be held admissible in court as evidence
Navallo filed a motion to quash contending that since he had already against him. This is because such confession was made unsolicited by
been arraigned by the RTC, the attempt to prosecute him before the the police officer and the accused was not under investigation when
Sandiganbayan would constitute double jeopardy. he made the oral confession. Therefore there is no need to invoke
compliance of the proper procedure in a custodial investigation at the
Issue: Whether or not the right to counsel be invoked during the COA case at bar. The rule on RES GESTAE is applicable where a witness
audit who heard the confession is competent to satisfy the substance of
what he heard if he heard and understood it. An oral confession need
Held: No, the right to counsel could not be invoked during the COA not be repeated verbatim, but in such a case it must be given in
audit since the procedure is not within the ambit of custodial substance. Thus the oral confession made by the accused outside the
investigation. A person may be subject to malversation of funds even ambit of custodial investigation can be admissible in court and was
in the absence of direct proof of misappropriation as long as there is given due credence to warrant the judgment of the accused being
evidence of fund shortage which the petitioner failed to explain with guilty of the crime.
convincing justification.

People vs. Alicando [G.R. No. 117487, December 12, 1995]

Facts: Appellant was charged with the crime of rape with homicide of
Khazie Mae Penecilla, a minor, four years of age, choking her with his (a) Any person arrested detained or under custodial investigation shall
right hand. The incident happened after appellant drank liquor. A at all times be assisted by counsel.
neighbor, Leopoldo Santiago found the victims body and the parents
and police were informed. Appellant was living in his uncle's house (b) Any public officer or employee, or anyone acting under his
some five arm's length from Penecilla's house. Appellant was arrested order or his place, who arrests, detains or investigates any person for
and interrogated by PO3 Danilo Tan. He verbally confessed his guilt the commission of an offense shall inform the latter, in a language
without the assistance of counsel. On the basis of his uncounselled known to and understood by him, of his rights to remain silent and to
verbal confession and follow up interrogations, the police came to have competent and independent counsel, preferably of his own
know and recovered from appellant's house, Khazie Mae's green choice, who shall at all times be allowed to confer privately with the
slippers, a pair of gold earrings, a buri mat, a stained pillow and a person arrested, detained or under custodial investigation. If such
stained T-shirt all of which were presented as evidence for the person cannot afford the services of his own counsel, he must be
prosecution. He was arraigned with the assistance of Atty. Rogelio provided with a competent and independent counsel by the
Antiquiera of the PAO. Appellant pleaded guilty. The RTC convicted investigating officer.lawphi1
him. Hence an automatic review for the imposition of death penalty.
(c) The custodial investigation report shall be reduced to writing
Issue: Whether or not due process during the custodial investigation by the investigating officer, provided that before such report is signed,
was accorded to the accused. or thumbmarked if the person arrested or detained does not know
how to read and write, it shall be read and adequately explained to
Held: Due process was not observed in the conduct of custodial him by his counsel or by the assisting counsel provided by the
investigation for the accused. He was not informed of his right to a investigating officer in the language or dialect known to such arrested
counsel upon making his extrajudicial confession and the information or detained person, otherwise, such investigation report shall be null
against him was written in a language he could not understand and and void and of no effect whatsoever.
was not explained to him. This is in violation of section 1(a) of Rule
116, the rule implementing the constitutional right of the appellant to (d) Any extrajudicial confession made by a person arrested,
be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. detained or under custodial investigation shall be in writing and
The lower court also violated section 3 of Rule 116 when it accepted signed by such person in the presence of his counsel or in the latter's
the plea of guilt of the appellant without conducting a search inquiry absence, upon a valid waiver, and in the presence of any of the
on the voluntariness and full understanding of the accused of the parents, elder brothers and sisters, his spouse, the municipal mayor,
consequences of his plea. Moreover the evidences admitted by the the municipal judge, district school supervisor, or priest or minister of
court that warranted his convicted were inadmissible because they the gospel as chosen by him; otherwise, such extrajudicial confession
were due to an invalid custodial investigation that did not provide the shall be inadmissible as evidence in any proceeding.
accused with due process of the law. Thus the SC annulled the
decision of the imposition of the death penalty and remanded the (e) Any waiver by a person arrested or detained under the
case back to the lower for further proceeding. provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, or under custodial
investigation, shall be in writing and signed by such person in the
Republic Act No. 7438 April 27, 1992 presence of his counsel; otherwise the waiver shall be null and void
and of no effect.
AN ACT DEFINING CERTAIN RIGHTS OF PERSON ARRESTED,
DETAINED OR UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION AS WELL AS (f) Any person arrested or detained or under custodial
THE DUTIES OF THE ARRESTING, DETAINING AND investigation shall be allowed visits by or conferences with any
INVESTIGATING OFFICERS, AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR member of his immediate family, or any medical doctor or priest or
VIOLATIONS THEREOF religious minister chosen by him or by any member of his immediate
family or by his counsel, or by any national non-governmental
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the organization duly accredited by the Commission on Human Rights of
Philippines in Congress assembled:: by any international non-governmental organization duly accredited
by the Office of the President. The person's "immediate family" shall
Section 1. Statement of Policy. It is the policy of the Senate to value include his or her spouse, fianc or fiance, parent or child, brother or
the dignity of every human being and guarantee full respect for sister, grandparent or grandchild, uncle or aunt, nephew or niece, and
human rights. guardian or ward.

Section 2. Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or Under Custodial As used in this Act, "custodial investigation" shall include the practice
Investigation; Duties of Public Officers. of issuing an "invitation" to a person who is investigated in connection
with an offense he is suspected to have committed, without prejudice perpetual absolute disqualification shall also be imposed upon the
to the liability of the "inviting" officer for any violation of law. investigating officer who has been previously convicted of a similar
offense.
Section 3. Assisting Counsel. Assisting counsel is any lawyer, except
those directly affected by the case, those charged with conducting The same penalties shall be imposed upon a public officer or
preliminary investigation or those charged with the prosecution of employee, or anyone acting upon orders of such investigating officer
crimes. or in his place, who fails to provide a competent and independent
counsel to a person arrested, detained or under custodial investigation
The assisting counsel other than the government lawyers shall be for the commission of an offense if the latter cannot afford the
entitled to the following fees; services of his own counsel.

(a) The amount of One hundred fifty pesos (P150.00) if the (b) Any person who obstructs, prevents or prohibits any lawyer,
suspected person is chargeable with light felonies;lawphi1alf any member of the immediate family of a person arrested, detained or
under custodial investigation, or any medical doctor or priest or
(b) The amount of Two hundred fifty pesos (P250.00) if the religious minister chosen by him or by any member of his immediate
suspected person is chargeable with less grave or grave felonies; family or by his counsel, from visiting and conferring privately with
him, or from examining and treating him, or from ministering to his
(c) The amount of Three hundred fifty pesos (P350.00) if the spiritual needs, at any hour of the day or, in urgent cases, of the night
suspected person is chargeable with a capital offense. shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of not less than four (4) years
nor more than six (6) years, and a fine of four thousand pesos
The fee for the assisting counsel shall be paid by the city or (P4,000.00).lawphi1
municipality where the custodial investigation is conducted, provided
that if the municipality of city cannot pay such fee, the province The provisions of the above Section notwithstanding, any security
comprising such municipality or city shall pay the fee: Provided, That officer with custodial responsibility over any detainee or prisoner may
the Municipal or City Treasurer must certify that no funds are available undertake such reasonable measures as may be necessary to secure
to pay the fees of assisting counsel before the province pays said fees. his safety and prevent his escape.

In the absence of any lawyer, no custodial investigation shall be Section 5. Repealing Clause. Republic Act No. No. 857, as amended,
conducted and the suspected person can only be detained by the is hereby repealed. Other laws, presidential decrees, executive orders
investigating officer in accordance with the provisions of Article 125 of or rules and regulations, or parts thereof inconsistent with the
the Revised Penal Code. provisions of this Act are repealed or modified accordingly.

Section 4. Penalty Clause. (a) Any arresting public officer or Section 6. Effectivity. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days
employee, or any investigating officer, who fails to inform any person following its publication in the Official Gazette or in any daily
arrested, detained or under custodial investigation of his right to newspapers of general circulation in the Philippines.
remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel
preferably of his own choice, shall suffer a fine of Six thousand pesos Approved: April 27, 1992.lawphi1
(P6,000.00) or a penalty of imprisonment of not less than eight (8)
years but not more than ten (10) years, or both. The penalty of
CONSTI 2 CASES SECTION 10
is a prewar obligation contracted and that he is a war sufferer, having
Rutter vs. Esteban [G.R. No. L3708, May 18, 1953] . filed his claim with the Philippine War Damage Commission for the
Facts: On August 20,1941 Rutter sold to Esteban two parcels of land losses he had suffered as a consequence of the last war; and that
situated in the Manila for P9,600 of which P4,800 were paid outright, under section 2 of RA 342(moratorium law), payment of his obligation
and the balance was made payable as follows: P2,400 on or before cannot be enforced until after the lapse of eight years. The complaint
August 7, 1942, and P2,400 on or before August 27, 1943, with was dismissed. A motion for recon was made which assails the
interest at the rate of 7 percent per annum. To secure the payment of constitutionality of RA 342.
said balance of P4,800, a first mortgage has been constituted in favor
of the plaintiff. Esteban failed to pay the two installments as agreed
upon, as well as the interest that had accrued and so Rutter instituted Issue: Whether or Not RA 342 unconstitutional on non-impairment
an action to recover the balance due, the interest due and the clause grounds.
attorney's fees. The complaint also contains a prayer for sale of the
properties mortgaged in accordance with law. Esteban claims that this
Held: Yes. The moratorium is postponement of fulfillment of
obligations decreed by the state through the medium of the courts or Feati Bank and Trust Co. later bought said lots from Emma Chavez in
the legislature. Its essence is the application of police power. The the name of Republic Flour Mills. Ortigas and Co. claims that the
economic interests of the State may justify the exercise of its restrictions were imposed as part of its general building scheme
continuing and dominant protective power notwithstanding designed for the beautification and development of the Highway Hills
interference with contracts. The question is not whether the legislative
Subdivision which forms part of its big landed estate. Feati Bank, on
action affects contracts incidentally, or directly or indirectly, but the other hand, maintains that the area along the western part of
whether the legislation is addressed to a legitimate end and the EDSA from Shaw Boulevard to Pasig River has been declared a
measures taken are reasonable and appropriate to that end. commercial and industrial zone, per Resolution No. 27 s-1960 of the
Municipal Council of Mandaluyong, Rizal. Later on, Feati Bank
However based on the Presidents general SONA and consistent with commenced construction on the said lots for a building devoted to
what the Court believes to be as the only course dictated by justice, banking purposes. It refused to comply with the demands of Ortigas &
fairness and righteousness, declared that the continued operation and Co. to stop the said construction.
enforcement of RA 342 at the present time is unreasonable and
oppressive, and should not be prolonged should be declared null and ISSUE:
void and without effect. This holds true as regards Executive Orders
Nos. 25 and 32, with greater force and reason considering that said Whether or not Resolution No. 27 s-1960 can nullify or supersede the
Orders contain no limitation whatsoever in point of time as regards contractual obligations assumed by the defendant.
the suspension of the enforcement and effectivity of monetary
obligations. HELD:

Yes. While non-impairment of contracts is constitutionally guaranteed,

the rule is not absolute, since it has to be reconciled with the
legitimate exercise of police power, i.e. the power to prescribe
regulations to promote the health, morals, peace, education, good
order or safety of the general welfare of the people. This general
welfare clause shall be liberally interpreted in case of doubt, so as to
give more power to local governments in promoting the economic
conditions, social welfare and material progress of the people in the
community. The only exceptions under Section 12 of the Local
Autonomy Act (R.A. 2264) are existing vested rights arising out of a
contract between a province, city or municipality on one hand and a
third party on the other hand. Said case is not present in this petition.

Resolution No. 27 s-1960 declaring the western part of EDSA as an

industrial and commercial zone was passed in the exercise of police
power to safeguard or promote the health, safety, peace, good order
and general welfare of the people in the locality.

Ortigas & Co. Ltd. Partnership vs. Feati Bank & Trust Co. [G.R.
No. L-2: December 14, 1979]
Ortigas and Co. is engaged in real estate business developing and
selling lots to the public. It sold to Augusto Padilla and Natividad
Angeles Lots Nos. 5 and 6, Block 31 of the Highway Hills Subdivision,
Mandaluyong by sale on instalments. The vendees then transferred
their rights and interests over the aforesaid lots in favour of one
Emma Chavez. The agreements of sale on instalment and the deeds
of sale contained the restriction that The parcel of land subject of this
deed of sale shall be used by the Buyer exclusively for residential
purposes, and she shall not be entitled to take or remove soil, stones
or gravel from it or any other lots belonging to the Seller.
Lozano vs. Martinez [G.R. No. L-63419, December 18, 1986] 1. Whether or not BP 22 is violative of the constitutional provision on
Petitioners, charged with Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 (BP 22 for short), non-imprisonment due to debt
popularly known as the Bouncing Check Law, assail the law's 2. Whether it impairs freedom of contract
constitutionality. 3. Whether it contravenes the equal protection clause

BP 22 punishes a person "who makes or draws and issues any check Held:
on account or for value, knowing at the time of issue that he does not
have sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank for the 1. The enactment of BP 22 is a valid exercise of the police power and
payment of said check in full upon presentment, which check is is not repugnant to the constitutional inhibition against imprisonment
subsequently dishonored by the drawee bank for insufficiency of funds for debt. The gravamen of the offense punished by BP 22 is the act of
or credit or would have been dishonored for the same reason had not making and issuing a worthless check or a check that is dishonored
the drawer, without any valid reason, ordered the bank to stop upon its presentation for payment. It is not the non-payment of an
payment." The penalty prescribed for the offense is imprisonment of obligation which the law punishes. The law is not intended or designed
not less than 30 days nor more than one year or a fine or not less than to coerce a debtor to pay his debt. The thrust of the law is to prohibit,
the amount of the check nor more than double said amount, but in no under pain of penal sanctions, the making of worthless checks and
case to exceed P200,000.00, or both such fine and imprisonment at putting them in circulation. Because of its deleterious effects on the
the discretion of the court. public interest, the practice is proscribed by the law. The law punishes
the act not as an offense against property, but an offense against
The statute likewise imposes the same penalty on "any person who, public order.
having sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank when he
makes or draws and issues a check, shall fail to keep sufficient funds Unlike a promissory note, a check is not a mere undertaking to pay an
or to maintain a credit to cover the full amount of the check if amount of money. It is an order addressed to a bank and partakes of a
presented within a period of ninety (90) days from the date appearing representation that the drawer has funds on deposit against which the
thereon, for which reason it is dishonored by the drawee bank. check is drawn, sufficient to ensure payment upon its presentation to
the bank. There is therefore an element of certainty or assurance that
An essential element of the offense is "knowledge" on the part of the the instrument will be paid upon presentation. For this reason, checks
maker or drawer of the check of the insufficiency of his funds in or have become widely accepted as a medium of payment in trade and
credit with the bank to cover the check upon its presentment. Since commerce. Although not legal tender, checks have come to be
this involves a state of mind difficult to establish, the statute itself perceived as convenient substitutes for currency in commercial and
creates a prima facie presumption of such knowledge where payment financial transactions. The basis or foundation of such perception is
of the check "is refused by the drawee because of insufficient funds in confidence. If such confidence is shaken, the usefulness of checks as
or credit with such bank when presented within ninety (90) days from currency substitutes would be greatly diminished or may become nil.
the date of the check. To mitigate the harshness of the law in its Any practice therefore tending to destroy that confidence should be
application, the statute provides that such presumption shall not arise deterred for the proliferation of worthless checks can only create
if within five (5) banking days from receipt of the notice of dishonor, havoc in trade circles and the banking community.
the maker or drawer makes arrangements for payment of the check
by the bank or pays the holder the amount of the check. The effects of the issuance of a worthless check transcends the
private interests of the parties directly involved in the transaction and
Another provision of the statute, also in the nature of a rule of touches the interests of the community at large. The mischief it
evidence, provides that the introduction in evidence of the unpaid and creates is not only a wrong to the payee or holder, but also an injury
dishonored check with the drawee bank's refusal to pay "stamped or to the public. The harmful practice of putting valueless commercial
written thereon or attached thereto, giving the reason therefor, "shall papers in circulation, multiplied a thousand fold, can very wen pollute
constitute prima facie proof of "the making or issuance of said check, the channels of trade and commerce, injure the banking system and
and the due presentment to the drawee for payment and the dishonor eventually hurt the welfare of society and the public interest.
thereof ... for the reason written, stamped or attached by the drawee
on such dishonored check." 2. The freedom of contract which is constitutionally protected is
freedom to enter into lawful contracts. Contracts which contravene
The presumptions being merely prima facie, it is open to the accused public policy are not lawful. Besides, we must bear in mind that
of course to present proof to the contrary to overcome the said checks can not be categorized as mere contracts. It is a commercial
presumptions. instrument which, in this modem day and age, has become a
convenient substitute for money; it forms part of the banking system
Issue: and therefore not entirely free from the regulatory power of the state.

3. There is no substance in the claim that the statute in question
denies equal protection of the laws or is discriminatory, since it
penalizes the drawer of the check, but not the payee. It is contended
that the payee is just as responsible for the crime as the drawer of the
check, since without the indispensable participation of the payee by
his acceptance of the check there would be no crime. This argument is
tantamount to saying that, to give equal protection, the law should
punish both the swindler and the swindled. The petitioners posture
ignores the well-accepted meaning of the clause equal protection of
the laws. The clause does not preclude classification of individuals,
who may be accorded different treatment under the law as long as the
classification is not unreasonable or arbitrary.
control powers, but because no law allowed her to exercise
disciplinary authority.
In those case that this Court denied the President the power (to
suspend/remove) it was not because that the President cannot
exercise it on account of his limited power, but because the law
lodged the power elsewhere. But in those cases in which the law gave
him the power, the Court, as in Ganzon v. Kayanan, found little
difficulty in sustaining him.
We reiterate that we are not precluding the President, through the
Secretary of Interior from exercising a legal power, yet we are of the
opinion that the Secretary of interior is exercising that power
oppressively, and needless to say, with a grave abuse of discretion.
As we observed earlier, imposing 600 days of suspension which is not
a remote possibility Mayor Ganzon is to all intents and purposes, to
make him spend the rest of his term in inactivity. It is also to make, to
all intents and purposes, his suspension permanent.

Ganzon vs. Inserto [G.R. No. L-56450, July 25, 1983

FACTS:
Ganzon, after having been issued three successive 60-day of
suspension order by Secretary of Local Government, filed a petition for
prohibition with the CA to bar Secretary Santos from implementing the
said orders. Ganzon was faced with 10 administrative complaints on
various charges on abuse of authority and grave misconduct. NDC vs PVB 192 SCRA 257 [1990]
Facts: The particular enactment in question is Presidential Decree No.
ISSUE: 1717, which ordered the rehabilitation of the Agrix Group of
Whether or not the Secretary of Local Government (as the alter ego of Companies to be administered mainly by the National Development
the President) has the authority to suspend and remove local officials. Company. The law outlined the procedure for filling claims against the
Agrix Companies and created a claims committee to process these
RULING: claims. Especially relevant to this case, and noted at the outset, is
The Constitution did nothing more, and insofar as existing legislation section 4(1) thereof providing that all mortgages and other liens
authorizes the President (through the Secretary of Local Government) presently attaching to any of the assets of the dissolved corporations
to proceed against local officials administratively, the Constitution are hereby extinguished. Earlier, the Agrix Marketing Inc. had
contains no prohibition. The Chief Executive is not banned from executed in favor of private respondent Philippine Veterans Bank a
exercising acts of disciplinary authority because she did not exercise real estate mortgage dated July 7, 1978 over three parcels of land
situated in Los Baos, Laguna. During the existence of the mortgage,
Agrix went bankrupt. It was the expressed purpose of salvaging this
and the other Agrix companies that the aforementioned decree was
issued by President Marcos. A claim for the payment of its loan credit
was filed by PNB against herein petitioner, however the latter alleged
and invoked that the same was extinguished by PD 1717. BPI vs SEC [G.R. No. 164641, December 20 2007]
For resolution is a petition seeking to nullify the 30 January 2004
Issue: Whether or not Philippine Veterans Bank as creditor of Agrix is Decision[1] of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 77309[2]
still entitled for payment without prejudice to PD 1717. upholding the Securities and Exchange Commissions (SEC) approval of
the rehabilitation of the ASB Group of Companies (ASB Group) in SEC
Held: Yes. A mortgage lien is a property right derived from contract En Banc Case No. EB-726.[3]
and so comes under the protection of Bill of rights so do interests on
loans, as well s penalties and charges, which are also vested rights The antecedent facts are as follows:
once they accrue. Private property cannot simply be taken by law
from one person and given to another without just compensation and
The Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI), through its predecessor-in-
any known public purpose. This is plain arbitrariness and is not
interest, Far East Bank and Trust Company (FEBTC), extended credit
permitted under the constitution.
accommodations to the ASB Group[4] with an outstanding aggregate
principal amount of P86,800,000.00, secured by a real estate
The court also feels that the decree impairs the obligation of the
mortgage over two (2) properties located in Greenhills, San Juan.[5]
contract between Agrix and the private respondent without
On 2 May 2000, the ASB Group filed a petition for rehabilitation and
justification. While it is true that the police power is superior to the
suspension of payments before the SEC, docketed as SEC Case No.
impairment clause, the principle will apply only where the contract is
05-00-6609.[6] Thereafter, on 18 August 2000, the interim receiver
so related to the public welfare that it will be considered congenitally
submitted its Proposed Rehabilitation Plan (Rehabilitation Plan)[7] for
susceptible to change by the legislature in the interest of greater
the ASB Group. The Rehabilitation Plan provides, among others, a
number.
dacion en pago by the ASB Group to BPI of one of the properties
mortgaged to the latter at the ASB Group as selling value of
Our finding in sum, is that PD 1717 is an invalid exercise of the police
P84,000,000.00 against the total amount of the ASB Groups exposure
power, not being in conformity with the traditional requirements of a
to the bank. In turn, ASB Group would require the release of the other
lawful subject and a lawful method. The extinction of the mortgage
property mortgaged to BPI, to be thereafter placed in the asset pool.
and other liens and of the interest and other charges pertaining to the
Specifically, the pertinent portion of the plan reads:
legitimate creditors of Agrix constitutes taking without due process of
law, and this is compounded by the reduction of the secured creditors
to the category of unsecured creditors in violation of the equal x x x ASB plans to invoke a dacion en pago for its #35 Eisenhower
protection clause. Moreover, the new corporation being neither owned property at ASBs selling value of P84 million against the total amount
nor controlled by the government, should have been created only by of the ASBs exposure to the bank. In return, ASB requests the release
general and not special law. And in so far as the decree also interferes of the #27 Annapolis property which will be placed in the ASB
with purely private agreements without any demonstrated connection creditors asset pool. [8]
with the public interest, there is likewise an impairment of the
obligation of the contract. The dacion would constitute full payment of the entire obligation due
to BPI because the balance was then to be considered waived, as per
the Rehabilitation Plan.[9]

BPI opposed the Rehabilitation Plan and moved for the dismissal of the
ASB Groups petition for rehabilitation.[10] However, on 26 April 2001,
the SEC hearing panel issued an order[11] approving ASB Groups
proposed rehabilitation plan and appointed Mr. Fortunato Cruz as
rehabilitation receiver.

BPI filed a petition for review[12] of the 26 April 2001 order before the
SEC en banc, imputing grave abuse of discretion on the part of the
hearing panel. It argued that the Order constituted an arbitrary
violation of BPIs freedom and right to contract since the Rehabilitation
Plan compelled BPI to enter into a dacion en pago agreement with the
ASB Group.[13] The SEC en banc denied the petition.[14]
BPI then filed a petition for review[15] before the Court of Appeals
(CA), claiming that the SEC en banc erred in affirming the approval of
the Rehabilitation Plan despite being violative of BPIs contractual
rights. BPI contended that the terms of the Rehabilitation Plan would
impair its freedom to contract, and alleged that the dacion en pago
was a mode of payment beneficial to the ASB Group only.[16]
The CA dismissed the petition for lack of merit. It held that considering
that the dacion en pago transaction could proceed only proceed upon
the mutual agreement of the parties, BPIs assertion that it is being
coerced could not be sustained. At no point would the Rehabilitation
Plan compel secured creditors such as BPI to agree to a settlement
agreement against their will, the CA added. Moreover, BPI could refuse
to accept any arrangement contemplated by the receiver and just
assert its preferred right in the liquidation and distribution of the
assets of the ASB Group.[17] BPI filed a motion for reconsideration,
but the same was denied for lack of merit.[18]
Before this Court, BPI asserts that the CA erred in ruling that the
approval by the SEC of the ASB Groups Rehabilitation Plan did not
violate BPIs rights as a creditor.[19] It maintains its position that the
dacion en pago is a form of coercion or compulsion, and violative of
the rights of secured creditors.[20] It asserts that in order for the
Rehabilitation Plan to be feasible and legally tenable, it must reflect
the express and free consent of the parties; i.e, that the conditions
should not be imposed but agreed upon by the parties. By approving
the Rehabilitation Plan, the SEC hearing panel totally disregarded the
efficacy of the mortgage agreements between the parties, and
sanctioned a mode of payment which is solely for the unilateral
benefit of the ASB Group.[21] This is so because in the event that the
secured creditors such as itself would not agree to dacion en pago, the
ASB Groups obligations would be settled at the selling prices of the
mortgaged properties to be dictated by the ASB Group,[22] rendering
BPIs status as a preferred creditor illusory.[23]
BPI further claims that despite its rejection of the Rehabilitation Plan,
no effort was made to resolve the impasse on the valuation of the
mortgaged properties. With no repayment scheme for secured
creditors not accepting the Rehabilitation Plan, the same has become
discriminatory.[24] Moreover, any interference on the rights of the
secured creditors must not be so indefinite and open-ended as to
effectively deprive secured creditors of their right to their security,[25]
BPI adds.
In its Comment,[26] the SEC, through the Office of the Solicitor
General, claims that the terms and conditions of the Rehabilitation
Plan do not violate BPIs right as a creditor because the dacion en pago
transaction contemplated in the plan can only proceed upon mutual
agreement of the parties. Moreover, being a secured creditor, BPI
enjoys preference over unsecured creditors, thus there is no reason
for BPI to fear the non-payment of the loan, or the inability to assert
its preferred right over the mortgaged property.[27]
On the other hand, private respondents maintain that the non-
impairment clause of the Constitution relied on by BPI is a limit on the
exercise of legislative power and not of judicial or quasi-judicial power.
The SECs approval of the Rehabilitation Plan was an exercise of
adjudicatory power by an administrative agency and thus the non-
impairment clause does not apply.[28] In addition, they stress that
there is no coercion or compulsion that would be employed under the
Rehabilitation Plan. If dacion en pago fails to materialize, the
Rehabilitation Plan contemplates to settle the obligations to secured
creditors with mortgaged properties at selling prices.[29] Finally, they
claim that BPI failed to submit any valuation of the mortgage
properties to substantiate its objection to the Rehabilitation Plan,
making its objection thereto totally unreasonable.[30]
The petition must be denied.
The very same issues confronted the Court in the case of Metropolitan
Bank & Trust Company v. ASB Holdings, et al.[31] In this case,
Metropolitan Bank & Trust Company (MBTC) refused to enter into a
dacion en pago arrangement contained in ASBs proposed
Rehabilitation Plan.[32] MBTC argued, among others, that the forced
transfer of properties and the diminution of its right to enforce its lien
on the mortgaged properties violate its constitutional right against
impairment of contracts and right to due process. The Court ruled that
there is no impairment of contracts because the approval of the
Rehabilitation Plan and the appointment of a rehabilitation receiver
merely suspends the action for claims against the ASB Group, and
MBTC may still enforce its preference when the assets of the ASB
Group will be liquidated. But if the rehabilitation is found to be no
longer feasible, then the claims against the distressed corporation
would have to be settled eventually and the secured creditors shall
enjoy preference over the unsecured ones. Moreover, the Court stated
that there is no compulsion to enter into a dacion en pago agreement,
nor to waive the interests, penalties and related charges, since these
are merely proposals to creditors such as MBTC, such that in the event
the secured creditors refuse the dacion, the Rehabilitation Plan
proposes to settle the obligations to secured creditors with mortgaged
properties at selling prices.
Rehabilitation proceedings in our jurisdiction, much like the
bankruptcy laws of the United States, have equitable and
rehabilitative purposes. On the one hand, they attempt to provide for
the efficient and equitable distribution of an insolvent debtors
remaining assets to its creditors; and on the other, to provide debtors
with a fresh start by relieving them of the weight of their outstanding
debts and permitting them to reorganize their affairs.[33] The
rationale of P.D. No. 902-A, as amended, is to effect a feasible and
viable rehabilitation,[34] by preserving a foundering business as going
concern, because the assets of a business are often more valuable
when so maintained than they would be when liquidated.[35]
The Court reiterates that the SECs approval of the Rehabilitation Plan
did not impair BPIs right to contract. As correctly contended by private
respondents, the non-impairment clause is a limit on the exercise of
legislative power and not of judicial or quasi-judicial power.[36] The
SEC, through the hearing panel that heard the petition for approval of
the Rehabilitation Plan, was acting as a quasi-judicial body and thus,
its order approving the plan cannot constitute an impairment of the
right and the freedom to contract.
Thus, if BPI does not find the dacion en pago modality acceptable, the
ASB Group can propose to settle its debts at such amount as is
equivalent to the selling price of the mortgaged properties. If BPI still
refuses this option, it can assert its rights in the liquidation and
distribution of the ASB Groups assets. It will not lose its status as a
secured creditor, retaining its preference over unsecured creditors
when the assets of the corporation are finally liquidated.[40]

Besides, the mere fact that the Rehabilitation Plan proposes a dacion
en pago approach does not render it defective on the ground of WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the petition is DENIED and the
impairment of the right to contract. Dacion en pago is a special mode Decision dated 30 January 2004 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP
of payment where the debtor offers another thing to the creditor who No. 77309 is AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioner.
accepts it as equivalent of payment of an outstanding debt.[37] The
undertaking really partakes in a sense of the nature of sale, that is,
the creditor is really buying the thing or property of the debtor, the
payment for which is to be charged against the debtors debt. As such,
the essential elements of a contract of sale, namely; consent, object
certain, and cause or consideration must be present.[38] Being a form
of contract, the dacion en pago agreement cannot be perfected
without the consent of the parties involved.

We find no element of compulsion in the dacion en pago provision of

the Rehabilitation Plan. It was not the only solution presented by the
ASB to pay its creditors. In fact, it was stated in the Rehabilitation Plan
that:

x x x. If the dacion en pago herein contemplated does not materialize

for failure of the secured creditors to agree thereto, the rehabilitation
plan contemplates to settle the obligations (without interest, penalties
and other related charges accruing after the date of the initial
suspension order) to secured creditors with mortgaged properties at
ASB selling prices for the general interest of the employees, creditors,
unit buyers, government, general public and the economy.[39]