ARTICLE III – BILL OF RIGHTS

Section 1. 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.

Aspects of “Due Process”:

1. Procedural due process – refers to the mode of procedure which government agencies must follow in
the enforcement and application of laws.
2. Substantive due process – asks whether the government has adequate reason for taking life, liberty or
property. Law is rationally related to the legitimate government purpose.

Note: PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS:

1. A law which hears before it condemns.
2. Due process of law contemplates notice and opportunity to be heard before judgment is rendered
affecting one’s person or property (Lopez v. Dir. of Lands)
3. Due process depends on circumstances; it varies with the subject matter and the necessities of the
situation.

Requisites of PROCEDURAL due process:

For JUDICIAL proceedings: CODE: C J N O H

1. A court or tribunal clothed with judicial power to hear and determine the matter before it.
2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant or over the property which is the
subject of the proceedings.
3. The defendant must be given notice and an opportunity to be heard.
4. Judgment must be rendered upon a lawful hearing.

Acquiring jurisdiction
1. Actions in personam: summons served personally, if he refuse to receive, tender it to him. Exception:
a. If cannot be summoned personally, leave copies of summon on defendant’s domicile with
some person of sufficient age and discretion residing therein
b. Leave copies of summon at defendant’s office with competent person in charge.
NOTE: Return report shall state why personal service is impossible before resorting to substitution
2. Actions in rem: Notice was given by publication in a newspaper and this is the only form of notice
which the law requires.

NOTE FOR JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS:

1. The right of a party to confront and cross-examine in a judicial litigation, whether crim or civ, or in
admin or quasi-judicial proceeding, is a fundamental right to due process. EXCEPT, when a party had
the opportunity to cross-examine but failed to avail himself of it, right to cross-exam is forfeited.

For ADMINISTRATIVE proceedings: CODE: H E D S H I P

 1. The right to a hearing, which includes the right to present one’s 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. Evidence supporting the conclusion must be substantial.
5. The decision must be based on the evidence presented at the hearing or at least contained in the
record and disclosed to the parties affected.
6. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its or his own independent consideration of the law
and facts of the controversy, and not simply accept the views of a subordinate in arriving at a decision.
7. The board or body should, in all controversial questions, render its decision in such a manner that
the parties to the proceeding can know the various issues involved and the reasons for the decision
rendered.

Note:
1. What is required is not actual hearing, but a real opportunity to be heard.
2. The requirement of due process can be satisfied by subsequent due hearing.
3. Violation of due process: when same person reviews his own decision on appeal.
4. Notice and hearing are required in judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings, but not in the promulgation of
executive, administrative or legislative function.

For SCHOOL DISCIPLINARY proceedings: CODE: W A In A D P

1. The student must be informed in writing of the nature and cause of any accusation against them.
2. The student shall have the right to answer the charges against him, with the assistance of counsel if
desired.
3. The student has the right to be informed of the evidence against him.
4. The student has the right to adduce evidence in his own behalf.
5. The evidence must be duly considered by the investigating committee or official designated by the
school authorities to hear and decide the case.
6. The penalty imposed must be proportionate to the offense.

Note:
1. The school has a contractual obligation to afford its students a fair opportunity to complete the course a
student has enrolled for.
2. Exceptions:
1. Serious breach of discipline; or
2. Failure to maintain the required academic standard.
3. Proceedings in student disciplinary cases may be summary; cross-examination is not
essential

Instances when hearings are NOT necessary:

1. When administrative agencies are exercising their quasi-legislative functions.
2. Abatement of nuisance per se.
3. Granting by courts of provisional remedies.
 4. Cases of preventive suspension.
5. Removal of temporary employees in the government service.
6. Issuance of warrants of distraint and/or levy by the BIR Commissioner.
7. Cancellation of the passport of a person charged with a crime.
8. Issuance of sequestration orders (considered a provisional remedy).
9. Judicial order which prevents an accused from travelling abroad in order to maintain the effectivity of the
court’s jurisdiction.
10. Suspension of a bank’s operations by the Monetary Board upon a prima facie finding of liquidity
problems in such bank.

Note:
1. The right to counsel is a very basic requirement of substantive due process and has to be observed
even in administrative and quasi-judicial bodies.
2. The right to appeal is a statutory privilege that may be exercised only in the manner in accordance
with law.

Requisites of SUBSTANTIVE due process: CODE: I M

1. The INTERESTS of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular class, requires the
interference by the government and
2. The MEANS employed are necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly oppressive
upon individuals.

NOTE: Publication of laws of general application is a requirement of due process. Before a person may be
bound by law, he must first be officially and specifically informed of its contents.

Requirements of a valid ordinance:

1. Must not contravene the Constitution or any statute
2. Must not be unfair or oppressive
3. Must not be partial or discriminatory
4. Must not prohibit, but may regulate trade
5. Must be general and consistent with public policy
6. Must not be unreasonable

When is a law VAGUE?

1. When it lacks COMPREHENSIBLE STANDARDS

2. That men of ordinary intelligence must necessarily GUESS as to its meaning
3. And differ as to its application

A vague statute is repugnant with the constitution because:

1. Violates due process for failure to accord persons fair notice to avoid such conduct.
2. Gives law enforcers unbridled discretion in carrying out its provision.

GENERAL TEST OF THE VALIDITY OF ORDINANCE ON SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS

 1. Rational test basis – laws or ordinance are upheld if they rationally further a legitimate governmental
interest. Standard analysis of equal protection challenge.
2. Immediate review – governmental interest is extensively examined and the availability of a less
restrictive measure is considered.
3. Strict scrutiny – focus is on the presence of compelling, rather than substantial, governmental interest
and the absence of less restrictive means for achieving that interest. It test laws dealing with regulation
of speech, gender, race, as well as other fundamental rights.

POLICE POWER: The power to prescribe regulations to promote health, morals, peace, good order, safety
and general welfare.

VALID POLICE POWER

1. Interest of the public generally, as distinguished from those of particular class, requires interference
from the state.
2. Means employed are reasonably necessary to attain the objective to be accomplished
3. Not confiscatory, oppressive or prohibitive

Equal Protection of the law

The equality that it guarantees is legal equality or the equality of all persons before the law. It does not
demand absolute equality. It merely requires that all persons shall be treated alike, under like circumstances
and conditions both as to privileges conferred and liabilities enforced.

Requisites for valid classification for purposes of the equal protection clause

The classification must: CODE: SGEE

1. Rest on SUBSTANTIAL DISTINCTIONS
2. Be GERMANE to the purposes of the law
3. Not limited to existing conditions only
4. APPLY EQUALLY to all members of the SAME CLASS.

Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no
search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined
personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the
witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the person or
things to be seized.

Protection given by Section 2 is aimed only against searches initiated by the State. If search has been effected
by a private individual, the person who has been searched cannot invoke a violation of his constitutional right
under section 2 of the Bill of Rights.

General Rule: Search and seizures are unreasonable unless authorized by a validly issued search warrant or
warrant of arrest
SEARCH WARRANT: A search warrant is an order in writing, issued in the name of the People of the
Philippines by a judge and directed to a peace officer commanding him to search for personal property and
bring it before the court.

Requisites for a valid warrant: CODE: P J E D

1. It must be issued upon PROBABLE CAUSE.
2. The existence of probable cause is determined personally by the JUDGE.
3. The judge must EXAMINE UNDER OATH the complainant and the witnesses he may produce.
4. The warrant must PARTICULARLY DESCRIBE the place to be searched and person or things to be
seized.
Definition of “PROBABLE CAUSE”

For the issuance of a warrant of arrest:

Probable cause refers to such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent
man to believe that an offense has been committed by the person sought to be arrested.

For the issuance of a search warrant:

Probable cause would mean such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and
prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed and that the objects sought in connection with the
offense are in the place to be searched.

Note: Probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant does NOT require that the probable guilt of a
specific offender be established, unlike in the case of a warrant of arrest.
Existence of probable cause “DETERMINED PERSONALLY BY THE JUDGE”

The judge is NOT required to personally examine the complainant and his witnesses. What the Constitution
underscores is the exclusive and personal responsibility of the issuing judge to satisfy himself of the existence
of probable cause (Soliven v. Makasiar, 167 SCRA 394).

To be sure, the Judge must go beyond the prosecutor’s certification and investigation report whenever
necessary (Lim v. Felix).

If judges solely rely on prosecutor’s certification in determining probable cause, he has not personally
determined probable cause. Thus, warrant issued through this is unconstitutional.

Procedure:
1. The judge personally evaluates the report and supporting documents submitted by the fiscal regarding
the existence of probable cause and, on the basis thereof, issue a warrant of arrest or
2. If on the basis thereof, the judge finds no probable cause, he may disregard the fiscal’s report and
require the submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses to aid him in arriving at the conclusion as to
the existence of probable cause.

Examination “UNDER OATH OR AFFIRMATION OF THE COMPLAINANT AND WITNESSES”

 1. The oath required must refer to the truth of the facts within the personal knowledge of the complainant
or his witnesses because the purpose is to convince the judge of the existence of probable cause
(Alvarez v. CFI, 64 Phil. 33).
2. The true test of sufficiency of an affidavit to warrant the issuance of a search warrant is whether it has
been drawn in such a manner that perjury could be charged thereon and affiant be held liable for the
damages caused (Alvarez v. CFI).

PARTICULARITY OF DESCRIPTION (SEARCH WARRANT)

1. A search warrant may be said to particularly describe the things to be seized when the description
therein is as specific as the circumstances will ordinarily allow or
2. When the description expresses a conclusion of fact – not of law – by which the warrant officer may
be guided in making the search and seizure or
3. When the things described are limited to those which bear a direct relation to the offense for
which the warrant is being issued (Bache and Co. v. Ruiz, 37 SCRA 823).

AIM OF PARTICULARITY
1. Aid law enforcers to readily identify properties to be seized.
2. Leave peace officers with no discretion regarding the articles to be seized.

NOTE: After the items described in the search warrant has been found, there is no more right for further
search. Evidence during such further search is inadmissible.

JOHN DOE WARRANT

A “John Doe” warrant can satisfy the requirement of particularity of description if it contains a descriptio
personae such as will enable the officer to identify the accused (People v. Veloso, 48 Phil. 159)

GENERAL WARRANT

A general warrant is one that does not allege any specific acts or omissions constituting the offense charged in
the application for the issuance of the warrant. It contravenes the explicit demand of the Bill of Rights that the
things to be seized be particularly described.

RULES ON WITNESSES
Search can only be effected in the presence of the lawful occupant of the premises, except:
1. In the absence of lawful occupant, any member of his family.
2. In the absence of lawful occupant and his family, two witness of sufficient age and discretion
residing in the same locality.

VALID WARRANTLESS SEARCH

1. Search made as an incident to lawful arrest
An officer making an arrest may take from the person arrested:
  Any money or property found upon his person which was used in the commission of
the offense or
 Was the fruit thereof or
 Which might furnish the prisoner with the means of committing violence or escaping
or
 Which may be used in evidence in the trial of the case
The search must be made simultaneously with the arrest and it may only be made in the area within
the area of his immediate control.
2. Search of moving vehicles
 This exception is based on exigency. Thus, if there is time to obtain a warrant in order to search
the vehicle, a warrant must first be obtained.
 The search of a moving vehicle must be based on probable cause.
3. Seizure of goods concealed to avoid customs duties/authorized under the Tariffs and Customs
Code
 The Tariffs and Customs Code authorizes persons having police authority under the Code to
effect search and seizures without a search warrant to enforce customs laws.
 Exception: A search warrant is required for the search of a dwelling house.
 Searches under this exception include searches at borders and ports of entry. Searches in these
areas do not require the existence of probable cause.
4. Seizure of evidence in plain view
 Prior valid intrusion from valid warrantless arrest.
 Evidence inadvertently discovered
 Evidence immediately apparent
 Mere seizure of evidence without further search
5. Waiver of right
Requisites of a valid waiver:
 The right exists.
 The person had actual or constructive knowledge of the existence of such right.
 There is an actual intention to relinquish such right.
 The right against unreasonable searches and seizures is a personal right. Thus, only the person
being searched can waive the same.
 Waiver requires a positive act from the person. Mere absence of opposition is not a waiver.
 The search made pursuant to the waiver must be made within the scope of the waiver.
6. Stop and frisk
 When a policeman observes suspicious activity which leads him to believe that a crime is about to
be committed, he can investigate the suspicious looking person and may frisk him for weapons as
a measure of self-protection. Should he find, however, a weapon on the suspect which is
unlicensed, he can arrest such person then and there for having committed an offense in the
officer’s presence.
 Probable cause not essential, only genuine reason to stop a suspicious person.
7. Emergency and Exigency

Note:
 1. Checkpoints: as long as the vehicle is neither searched nor its occupants subjected to a body search
and the inspection of the vehicle is limited to a visual search = valid search (Valmonte V. De Villa)
2. Carroll rule: warrantless search of a vehicle that can be quickly moved out of the locality or jurisdiction
3. The 1987 Constitution has returned to the 1935 rule that warrants may be issued only by judges, but the
Commissioner of Immigration may order the arrest of an alien in order to carry out a FINAL deportation
order.
VALID WARRANTLESS ARRESTS
1. When the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is about to commit an
offense in the presence of the arresting officer. (Inflagrante delicto)
2. When an offense has in fact just been committed and the arresting officer has personal knowledge of
facts indicating that the person to be arrested has committed it. (Hot pursuit doctrine)
3. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place
where he is serving final judgment or temporarily confined while his case is pending, or has escaped
while being transferred from one confinement to another. (Fugitive)

Waiver of an invalid arrest:

When a person who is detained applies for bail, he is deemed to have waived any irregularity which may have
occurred in relation to his arrest.

Hot pursuit

A. The pursuit of the offender by the arresting officer must be continuous from the time of the commission of
the offense to the time of the arrest.

B. There must be no supervening event which breaks the continuity of the chase.