{}Bill of Rights {} ELECTION LAWS {}PUBLIC OFFICERS {}PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAWS

(1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 12, 13, 14, 17, 21)

Sec.2. Searches and Seizures

I. What are the requisites for a valid issuance of search warrant or warrant of
arrest? Briefly discuss each. (10pts)

1. Warrant must be grounded on a probable cause
2. Probable cause be determined personally by the
judge
3. Determination of probable cause is by
examination under oath or affirmation of the
complainant and witness he may produce.
4. The warrant must particularly describe the place
to be searched and the persons or things to be
seized
Probable cause is for the purpose of issuing search warrant or warrant of arrest
Judge is mandated by the constitution to determine probable cause personally. He
can not abdicate the performance of that function to the prosecutor.
Complainant or his witnesses must have personal knowledge of the existence of a
crime and such personal knowledge is produce in writing in court through oath or
affirmation
For warrant of arrest, If the name of the person to be arrested is not known, a John
Doe warrant may be issued. A John Doe warrant will satisfy the constitutional
requirement of particularity of description if there is some descriptio personae
which is sufficient to enable the officer to identify the accused.

For a search warrant, search is limited to the things particularly described and
those which bear direct relation to the offense for which the warrant is being
issued. A vaguely described thing in the search warrant is a general warrant that is
ART 3 sec 2 of Constitution (Bill of rights)
not valid.

Sec.4. Freedom of Speech (ability to freely discuss)

 In connection to Sec 8 (Freedom of association)

II. What are “content-based” restrictions on free speech as distinguished from “content-
neutral” regulations? Is the Public Assembly Act (BP.880 a content-based restriction or
content neutral? Explain? (10pts)

Content based restriction is presumptive to be unconstitutional because it is concerned about

the content of the speech which is censorial in nature; in effect this restriction or kind of regulation
filters the speech to favor the government. It bears a heavy presumption of constitutional validity and
is given the strictest scrutiny in light of their inherent and invasive impact.
While on other hand, Content Neutral restriction is presumptive to be constitutional. It is not
concerned with the content of the speech, it is only concerned its incidents as to the effect of the
assembly to other people and property in the public places. Speech can be denied if the incidents of the
speech will affect a clear and present danger to public order, safety, convenience, morals and health. -
CHOMS

Public Assembly Act (BP.880) is a Content-Neutral restriction, it does not restrict the speech
itself or the expression of the people who wants to assemble in a public place, it only regulates the
time, place and manner of assemblies through issuance of permit to rally. This is a valid regulation of
peaceful assembly in public places which is protected by the constitution – the freedom of assembly.

 In connection to: MAXIMUM TOLERANCE

 Maximum tolerance means the highest degree or restraint that a peace keeping authority or officer must
observe during a public assembly or dispersal of the same. (The Calibrated Pre-emptive Response policy by the
arroyo admin in dealing with public assemblies is invalid because it darkens the freedom of association where police agents
may justify their abuses.)
Sec.5. Freedom of Religion (Absolute freedom of belief)

 In connection to: NON-ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE of FREDOM of RELIGION

III. The ang Ladlad-LGBT Party filed a petition in the Comelec for it to participate in the Party-
list elections. The Comelec disapproved its application holding that it is disqualified since
its members are “immoral” citing verses from the Bible and the Koran. Rule on this
decision of the COmelec, citing legal reasons. (10pts)

Under this non-establishment clause of freedom of religion, the Comelec,

as an agency of the government, is not supposed to use religion standards in its
decisions and actions. It contravene with the policy of neutrality between the
government and religion. The Comelec’s decision must rely on secular purposes
and in ways that have primarily secular effects.

 In connection to: The religious sect is prohibited to register as political party,

but there is no prohibition against a priest running as a candidate

Rights of the Suspect

Sec.13. (Right to Bail)

I. Explain why the ruling in USA v Judge Purganan which states that the “no bail rule
applies in extradition” was reexamined in the later case of Gov’t of Hong Kong
Special Admin Region v. Judge Olalia, and state what are the condition before an
extradite may be allowed to post bail during the pendency of an extradition
proceeding?

It is because of the modern trend in Public International law where an

individual person is no longer considered a mere object but rather a subject
thereof. The Philippines is Commitment to uphold FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN
RIGHTS, among which is the right to liberty which contemplates the effect of right
to bail.

The new rule is that an extraditee may be allowed to post bail during the
pendency of an extradition proceeding. Provided he must provided that 1. Once
granted bail he will not be a flight risk or a danger to the community and 2. That
there exist special, humanitarian and compelling circumstances that will justify
the grant of bail to him by clear and convincing evidence.

 In connection to: Juan Ponce Enrile case (Enrile vs Sandigan Bayan)

Olalia ruling is applied to Enrile’s plunder case, a non bailable case. Enrile is grante bail.
1. Not flight risk or danger to community – shown by his voluntary surrender and his respect to court process through
earlier cases
2. Existence of special, humanitarian and compelling circumstances – shown by his aged which need medical attention.
The main purpose of bail is to guarantee the appearance of the accused at the trial or whenever so required by court.
Sec.19. (Prohibited Punishment and Political prisoners)

II. To bolster the fight against drug trafficking, Pres. Du30 wanted the death penalty to be re-
imposed, and he wanted the execution to be carried out by “hanging”. Discuss possible
constitutional/legal obstacle to his plan. (10 pts)

As to the death penalty, under the bill of rights, “…No death penalty be imposed,
unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the congress hereafter provides
for it.” The congress will have the power to provide guidelines and yardstick for the
imposition of death penalty the crime of drug trafficking.

As to the execution of death penalty by hanging, under the bill of rights, cruel,
degrading, and inhuman form of punishment is not allowed. The punishment must not
be so severe as to degrade the dignity of human beings. The constitutional guarantee to
prohibited punishment must not be oppressive, disproportionate to the nature of the
offense as to shock the senses of the community.

Citizenship (N/A)
Admin law (N/A)
Law on Public officers
I. In the more recent case of Conchita Carpio Morales v. CA, the Supreme Court abandoned the doctrine of
condonation although the abandonment was given prospective application only.

a. What is doctrine of condonation? (5pts)

A public official cannot be removed for administrative misconduct

committed during a prior term, since his re-election to office operates as
a condonation of the officer’s previous misconduct to the extent of
cutting off the right to remove him therefor.
b. Briefly explain why this doctrine was abandoned? (10 pts)

It is abandoned because it is simply has no Constitutional and Statutory basis at

all in our jurisdiction to support it. It goes against with the Constitutional Mandate that a
public office is a public trust and statutory provisions of Local Government code on
disqualified officials to re-election. Furthermore, its theory that people will be deprived
of their right to elect their preferred officer if not condoned is with no merit having no
legal basis at all, because election does not automatically implies condonation.
Election laws
I. The Constitutionality of the Biometrics law was challenged in the SC as it violated Sec. 1 Art. V
on Suffrage which essentially provides that “no literacy, property, or other substantive
requirements may be imposed in the exercise of suffrage”. Rule on the issue.

Biometrics law is Constitutional, because Biometrics validation is a mere aspect of the

registration procedure and does not violate any imposition on the right to Suffrage.

Enunciated in Kabataan partylist et al. vs COMELEC, It passed the strict scrutiny test
when it advances a compelling state interest as it eliminates electoral fraud and
establishes a clean, complete, permanent and updated list of voters with least
restrictive measures that in effect ensure results of the election will be reflective of
genuine will of the people.

Note: Good case because it tackles citizenship and election laws (Good Source of question in novBAR 2019)
II. X was a natural-born Filipino Citizen. Later, he became an American citizen. With the
enactment of RA 9225 (the Citizenship Retention and reacquisition Act of 2003), he reacquired
his Philippine citizenship by taking an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines
before an officer authorized to administer an oath in the Philippines. In the May 13, 2013
elections, he filed his certificate of candidacy for Mayor of his hometown. In compliance with
the requirement of RA 9225, he renounced his American citizenship at the time of the filing of
his COC. Later, it was ESTABLISED that he continued to travel the US using his American
passport. His citizenship qualification was questioned in a petition filed in the Comelec. While
the Petition was pending in the COMELEC, there came the election and he won and was
proclaimed and assumed office as Mayor.

a. Considering the foregoing, was his proclamation and assumption of office valid?
(10 pts)

NO, because of travelling to US using his American Passport is an effective recantation

of his renunciation of his foreign citizenship following the case of Maquiling v.
Comelec. In effect, he reverted to his prior status having dual citizenship and therefore
disqualified to run for Mayoralty pursuant to Local Government Code.

b. Assuming that his proclamation and assumption as Mayor was declared invalid,
who shall assume the position of Mayor: the vice-mayor, or his opponent who
obtained the second highest number of votes? (5pts)

The second highest number of votes will assume the position of mayoralty.
Following the rule on Maquiling v. Comelec, X’s disqualification surrounds his
citizenship and having a dual citizenship will bar him from being a candidate. His
Certificate of Candidacy will be void and having a void COC will have an effect of being
not candidate at all. Thus, X being not a candidate at all, the one who gathered the
second highest votes will assume the Mayoralty.
 Law on Public Corp (N/A)

Public International law.

I. What is “association”, or the concept of “associated states”? Is
it recognized by the 1987 Philippine Consti? Explain.

Association is formed when two states of unequal power voluntarily

established durable links. It is association between two sovereign states. It is
an international practice where it is used as a transitional device of former
colonies on their way to full independence.

No. It is not recognized under the 1987 Philippine Constitution. It does

not contemplate any state in its jurisdiction other than the Philippine State
and does not provide any transitory status that aims to prepare any part of
the Philippine territory for independence.

 In connection to: Recent developments… Philippines is signatory to Rome

Statute on December 28, 2000. Now Philippines renounce its membership to the
ICC because of conflicts between the Duterte Administration on its fight against
illegal drugs and Extra-Judicial Killings (EJK).

II. What is the International Criminal Court (ICC) and what

offenses fall under the jurisdiction of the court? (10 pts)

A court established by the Rome Statute, which shall have the power to
exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of
international concern. It covers the crime of genocide, crimes against
humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression defined in the Statute.

 In connection to: Recent developments… Philippines is signatory to Rome

Statute on December 28, 2000. Now Philippines renounce its membership to the
ICC because of conflicts between the Duterte Administration on its fight against
illegal drugs and Extra-Judicial Killings (EJK).
Sec 1. DUE PROCESS & No person shall be deprived of right to life, liberty and property without due process of law, nor shall
EQUAL PROTECTION any person be denied the equal protection of laws.
Sec 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against
SEARCHES unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and
AND no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined
SEIZURES 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 persons or
things to be seized.
Sec 3. 1. The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of
RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise, as prescribed by law.
COMMUNICATION AND 2. Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any
CORRESPONDENCE purpose in the any proceeding.
Sec 4. FREEDOM OF No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of press, or the right of
EXPRESSION the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.
Sec 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
FREEDOM OF thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination
RELIGION or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or
political rights.
Sec 6. LIBERTY OF The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be
ABODE AND impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired except
RIGHT TO TRAVEL in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may be provided by law.
Sec. 7. RIGHT TO The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access to
INFORMATION official records, and to documents and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or decisions,
AND ACCESS TO PUBLIC as well as to government research data used as basis for policy development, shall be afforded the
RECORDS citizen, subject to such limitations as may be provided by law.
Sec. 8. FREEDOM OF The right of the people including those employed in the public and private sectors, to form unions,
ASSOCIATION associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged.
Sec. 9. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.
EMINENT DOMAIN
limitations (not a right)
Sec. 10. No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.
CONTRACT CLAUSE or
NON‐
IMPAIRMENT CLAUSE
Sec. 11. Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal assistance shall not be denied
LEGAL ASSISTANCE AND to any person by reason of poverty.
FREE ACCESS TO
COURTS
Sec. 12. 1. Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed
of his rights 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 provide with one. These rights
Philippine cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel.
Miranda
Rights 2. No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate the freewill 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 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 and rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices, and their families.
Sec. 13. All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when
Right to 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
Bail impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. Excessive
bail shall not be required.
Sec. 14. 1. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law.
Rights of
2. In criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is
Accused proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed
of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have speedy, impartial, and
public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to
secure the attendance of witness 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.
Sec. 15. Habeas Privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in cases of invasion
Corpus or rebellion when the public safety requires it.

Sec. 16.
Right to Speedy All person shall have the right to speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial,
quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.
Disposition of cases
Sec. 17.
RIGHT AGAINST No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
SELF‐INCRIMINATION
Sec. 18. 1. No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.
RIGHT AGAINST
2. No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a crime
INVOLUNTARY whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.
SERVITUDE
Sec. 19. PROHIBITED 1. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment
PUNISHMENT inflicted. Neither shall the death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons
involving heinous crimes, the congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty
AND already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
POLITICAL 2. The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment against any
PRISONERS prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under
subhuman condition shall be dealt with by the law.
Sec. 20.
NON‐IMPRISONMENT No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of poll tax.
FOR DEBT
21. DOUBLE No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. If an act is
JEOPARDY punished by law an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar
to another prosecution for the same act.
22. EX POST
FACTO LAW NO ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
AND BILL OF ATTAINDER