RIGHT TO INFORMATION U.S. v. Cara, G.R. No.
12632, September 13, 1917
Section 7. The right of the people to information on matters of public
concern shall be recognized. Access to official records, and to
documents and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or
decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for
policy development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such
limitations as may be provided by law.
CASES:
Subido v. Ozaeta, G.R. No. L-1631 February 27, 1948
Baldoza v. Dimaano, A.M. No. 1120-MJ, May 5, 1976
Legazpi v. Civil Service Commission, G.R. No. L-72119, May 29,
1987
Valmonte v. Belmonte, G.R. No. 74930 February 13, 1989
Echegaray v. Secretary, G.R. No. 132601, October 12, 1998
Chavez v. PCGG, G.R. No. 130716, December 9, 1998
Perez v. Estrada, A.M. No. 01-4-03-SC, June 29, 2001 (read also the
dissent of J. Puno)
Senate v. Ermita, G.R. No. 169777, April 20, 2006
Neri v. Senate Committee, G.R. No. 180643, March 25, 2008
THE NON-IMPAIRMENT CLAUSE
Section 10. No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.
CASES:
Pedro v. Provincial Board, G.R. No. 34163, September 18, 1931
Rutter v. Esteban, G.R. No. L-3708, May 18, 1953
Ilusorio v. CAR, G.R. No. L-20344, May 16, 1966
Ortigas & Co. v. Feati Bank, G.R. No. L-24670, December 14, 1979
Tiro v. Hontanosas, G.R. No. L-32312, November 25, 1983
Serrano v. Gallant Maritime Services, Inc., G.R. No. 167614, March 24,
2009
HABEAS CORPUS
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.
CASES:
Conde v. Rivera, G.R. No. L-21741, January 25, 1924
Alcantara v. Director of Prisons, G.R. No. L-6, November 29, 1945
Caunca v. Salazar, G.R. No. L-2690, January 1, 1949
Celeste v. People, G.R. No. L-31435, January 30, 1970
Gumabon v. Director of Prisons, G.R. No. L-30026, January 30, 1971
Zafra v. City Warden, G.R. No. L-49602 & L-49938, May 17, 1980
Ilagan v. Enrile, G.R. No. 70748, October 21, 1985
Lansang v. Garcia, G.R. No. L-33964, December 11, 1971 (reversing
Barcelon & Montenegro)
Garcia-Padilla v. Enrile, G.R. No. L-61388, April 20, 1983 (reversing
Lansang, reverting to Barcelon & Montenegro)
INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE
Section 18 (2). No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as
a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly
convicted.
CASES:
Robertson v. Baldwin, 165 US 275 (1897)
Pollock v. Williams, 322 US 4 (1944)
US v. Pompeya, G.R. No. L-10255, August 6, 1915
People v. Soza, G.R. No. L-45893, July 13, 1938
Kaisahan ng mga Manggagawa sa Kahoy v. Gotamco Sawmills,
G.R. No. L-1573, March 29, 1948
NON-IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT
Section 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a
poll tax.
CASES:
Sura v. Martin, G.R. No. L-25091, November 29, 1968
Lozano v. Martinez, G.R. No. L-63419, December 18, 1986
EX POST FACTO LAW
Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
CASES:
U.S. v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303 (1946)
Garner v. Board of Public Works, 341 U.S. 716 (1951)
Republic v. Fernandez, G.R. No. L-9141, September 25, 1956
People v. Ferrer, G.R. Nos. L-32613-14, December 27, 1972 (Read
also the dissent of J. Fernando)
Nuñez v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. L-50581-50617, January 30,
1982
Rodriguez v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-61355, February 18, 1983
Katigbak v. Solicitor General, G.R. No. L-19328, December 22, 1989
Republic v. Eugenio, G.R. No. 174629, February 14, 2008
CUSTODIAL RIGHTS
Section 12. (1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an
offense shall have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent
and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own
choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be
provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and
in the presence of counsel.
(2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means
which vitiate the free will shall be used against him. Secret detention
places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are
prohibited.
(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section
17 hereof shall be inadmissible in evidence against him.
(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of
this Section as well as compensation to the rehabilitation of victims of
torture or similar practices, and their families.
CASES:
People v. Cabrera, G.R. No. L-51858, January 31, 1985
People v. Galit, G.R. No. L-51770, March 20, 1985
Galman v. Pamaran, G.R. Nos. 71208-09, August 30, 1985
People v. Barros, G.R. No. 90640, March 29, 1994
People v. Compil, G.R. No. 95028, May 15, 1995
People v. Lucero, G.R. No. 97936, May 29, 1995
Dela Torre v. CA, G.R. No. 102786, August 14, 1998
People v. Figueroa, G.R No. 134056, July 6, 2000
People v. Tomaquin, G.R. No. 133188, July 23, 2004
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
1. Right to bail
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.
CASES:
Garcia-Padilla v. Enrile, G.R. No. L-61388, April 20, 1983
Enrile v. Salazar, G.R. No. 92163, June 5, 1990
Yap v. CA, G.R. No. 141529, June 6, 2001
Lavides v. CA, G.R. No. 129670, February 1, 2000
People v. Gako, G.R. 135045, December 15, 2000
Maguddatu v. CA, G.R. No. 139599, February 23, 2000
Victory Liner v. Bellosillo, A.M. No. MTJ-00-1321, March 10, 2004
Government of Hongkong v. Olalia, G.R. No. 153675, April 19, 2007
2. Right to criminal due process
Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense
without due process of law.
CASES:
Sales v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 143802, November 16, 2001
Salonga v. Paño, G.R. No. L-59524, February 18, 1985
Galman v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 72670, September 12, 1986
Martelino v. Alejandrino, G.R. No. L-30894, March 25, 1970
3. Rights during criminal prosecutions
Section 19 (1). Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel,
degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty
be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes,
the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already
imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
(2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading
punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard
or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt
with by law.

Section 14. (2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be [a]
presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the
right [b] to be heard by himself and counsel, [c] to be informed of
the nature and cause of the accusation against him, [d] to have a
speedy, impartial, and public trial, [e] to meet the witnesses face to
face, and [f] 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.
CASES:
People v. Dionisio, G.R. No. L-25513, March 27, 1968
People v. Echegaray, G.R. No. 139180, July 31, 2001
6. Right against double jeopardy
Section 21. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for
the same offense. If an act is punished by a law and an ordinance,
conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another
prosecution for the same act.

3.a. Right to be presumed innocent CASES:

CASES:
People v. Sunga, G.R. No. L-57875, July 5, 1983
People v. Tempongko, G.R. No. L-69668, October 2, 1986
Dizon-Pamintuan v. People, G.R. No. 111426, July 11, 1994
People v. Mirantes, G.R. No. 92706, May 21, 1992
People v. Regulacion, G.R. No. L-33489, March 18, 1983
People v. Arciaga, G.R. No. L-38179, June 16, 1980
People v. Solis, G.R. No. L-33957, March 15, 1984
People v. Amarela, G.R. Nos. 225642-43, January 17, 2018
Galman v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 72670, September 12, 1986
Tan v. Barrios, G.R. No. 85481-82, October 18, 1990
People v. City Court of Manila, G.R. No. L-36342 April 27, 1983
People v. Saley, G.R. No. 121179, July 2, 1998
People v. Tac-an, G.R. No. 76338-39, February 26, 1990
Perez v. CA, G.R. No. L-80838, November 29, 1988
People v. Relova, G.R. No. L-45129, March 6, 1987
CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES

3.b. right to be heard by himself and counsel A.
CASES:
People v. Lumague, 111 SCRA 515
People v. Malunsing, G.R. No. L-29015, April 29, 1975
3.c. right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation
CASES:
People v. Alcalde, G.R. 139225, May 29, 2002
People v. Dy, G.R. 115236, January 29, 2002 B.
People v. Valdesancho, G.R. 137051, May 30, 2001
People v. Cachapero, G.R. No. 153008, May 20, 2004
People v. Ostia, G.R. No. 131804, February 26, 2003
3.d. right to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial
CASES:
Solar Team Entertainment v. How, G.R. No. 140863, August 22, 2000
Valencia v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 165996, October 17, 2005
Domondon v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 166606, November 29, 2005
Perez v. Estrada, A.M. No. 01-4-03-SC, June 29, 2001
C.
3.e. right to confrontation and to have compulsory process
CASES:
People v. Ramos, G.R. No. L-59318, May 16, 1983
Combate v. San Jose, G.R. No. L-68566, April 15, 1985
People v. Bardaje, G.R. No. L-29271, August 29, 1980 D.
4. Right against self-incrimination E.
Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against
himself.
F.
CASES:
U.S. v. Tan Teng, G.R. No. 7081, September 7, 1912
Beltran v. Samson, G.R. No. 32025, September 23, 1929
Chavez v. CA, G.R. No. L-29169, August 19, 1968
People v. Rondero, G.R. No. 125687, December 9, 1999
People v. Gallarde, G.R. No. 133025, Feb 17, 2000
Galman v. Pamaran, G.R. Nos. 71208-09, August 30, 1985
Filipino citizenship under the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions
CASES:
Re Application for Admission to the Phil. Bar of Vicente Ching,
Bar Matter No. 914
Republic v. Sagun, G.R. No. 187567, February 15, 2012
Tecson v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434, March 3, 2004 (the FPJ
citizenship case)
Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 221697, March 08,
2016 (the Grace Poe citizenship case)
Filipino citizenship under the 1987 Constitution
1. Those who are Filipino citizens at the time of the adoption of
the 1987 Constitution;
2. Those whose fathers or mothers are Filipino citizens;
3. Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who
elect Filipino citizenship upon reaching the age of majority;
and
CASES:
In Re: Florencio Mallare, A.M. No. 533 September 12, 1974
Co v. Electoral Commission, G.R. Nos. 92191-92, July 30,
1991
4. Those who are naturalized in the accordance with law.
Loss and Reacquisition of Citizenship
CASES:
Jacot v. Dal, G.R. No. 179848, November 27, 2008
Maquiling v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 195649, April 16, 2013
Reyes v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 207264, June 25, 2013
Dual Citizenship and Dual Allegiance
CASE: Mercado v. Manzano, G.R. No. 135083, May 26, 1999
Naturalization
1. Procedure
2. Effects
3. Revocation
Mixed Marriages

5. Right against prohibited punishments