Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes 11-8-11 Political law is that branch of public law which deals with the

operation and organization of the governmental organs of the State and defines the relationship between the State and the inhabitants of its territory.

Relationship:

Authority or power ......rights (limitation to one another) Obligation Rights

Branches of Political Law:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Constitutional law Election law Law on Public Officers Administrative law Law on Public Corporations

Public law is that branch of law which deals with the State, state agencies, and the protection of State interests. Branches:

1. Political law 2. Criminal law 3. International law

Private law is that branch of law which deals with the relationship between and among individuals. Branches:

1. Civil law 2. Commercial law

Constitutional law is the study of the Constitution and the principles growing out of the interpretations of the provisions of the Constitution. (General definition)

Constitution + Jurisprudence 1|P a ge

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes

Constitution is the body of rules and maxims in accordance with which the powers of sovereignty are habitually exercised.

Is the Constitution the source of the state s power? NO

Constitutional law study of the balance between powers of the state and the rights of the individuals. (Specific definition)

3 Types of Constitutionalism:

1. British 2. Continental 3. American

Judicial review is the power of courts to declare that a law or executive act is not in accord with the Constitution.

Requisites of Judicial review:

1. 2. 3. 4.

Actual case Legal standing (direct injury test) or Locus standi Filed at the earliest opportunity Very lis mota

Transcendental importance lack of legal standing is ignored Moot and academic cases will be decided if it is capable of repetition and evading review.

Effect of declaration of Constitutionality: - Doctrine of Operative Fact

2|P a ge

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes 11-14-11 [Agustin vs. Edu, 88 SCRA 195]

Letter of instruction 229 for an early warning device for motor vehicles. The EWDs are required to be triangular because the Philippines are a signatory of the 1968 Vienna Convention. EWDs should be installed when the cars are stalled or disabled for 30 minutes at the rear and at the front of the motor vehicle to signal approaching motorists of their presence.

Police power is the power to prescribe regulations to promote the health, morals, peace, education, good order or safety, and general welfare of the people. It is that inherent and plenary power in the State which enables it to prohibit all things hurtful to the comfort, safety and welfare of society. (description)

[Churchill vs. Rafferty, 32 Phil 580]

The police power of the State, so far, has not received a full and complete definition.

Police power should not be defined because then it will be limited and can no longer respond to changing ways of the time.

[Ichiong vs. Hernandez, 101 Phil 1155]

It has been said the police power is so far - reaching in scope, that it has become almost impossible to limit its sweep. As it derives its existence from the very existence of the State itself, it does not need to be expressed or defined in its scope; it is said to be co-extensive with self-protection and survival, and as such it is the most positive and active of all governmental processes, the most essential, insistent and illimitable. Especially is it so under a modern democratic framework where the demands of society and of nations have multiplied to almost unimaginable proportions; the field and scope of police power has become almost boundless, just as the fields of public interest and public welfare have become almost all-embracing and have transcended human foresight. Otherwise stated, as we cannot foresee the needs and demands of public interest and welfare in this constantly changing and progressive world, so we cannot delimit beforehand the extent or scope of

3|P a ge

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes police power by which and through which the State seeks to attain or achieve interest or welfare. So it is that Constitutions do not define the scope or extent of the police power of the State.

[Lawrence vs. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)]

Police power can only regulate those that concern public welfare. The moment it touches matters of private concern, it is already the outside the domain of police power.

[MMDA vs. Bel-Air, 328 SCRA 836]

4|P a ge

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes 11-15-11 Police power can only be exercised by Congress because they know the conditions of their respective lands and are the representatives of the will of the people who will then be able to create and promulgate rules that will cure certain situations. [Binay vs. Domingo, 201 SCRA 508] The police power is a governmental function, an inherent attribute of sovereignty, which was born with civilized government. It is founded largely on the maxims, "Sic utere tuo et ahenum non laedas and "Salus populi est suprema lex. Its fundamental purpose is securing the general welfare, comfort and convenience of the people. Police power is inherent in the state but not in municipal corporations (Balacuit v. CFI of Agusan del Norte, 163 SCRA 182). Before a municipal corporation may exercise such power, there must be a valid delegation of such power by the legislature which is the repository of the inherent powers of the State. A valid delegation of police power may arise from express delegation, or be inferred from the mere fact of the creation of the municipal corporation; and as a general rule, municipal corporations may exercise police powers within the fair intent and purpose of their creation which are reasonably proper to give effect to the powers expressly granted, and statutes conferring powers on public corporations have been construed as empowering them to do the things essential to the enjoyment of life and desirable for the safety of the people. (62 C.J.S., p. 277). The so-called inferred police powers of such corporations are as much delegated powers as are those conferred in express terms, the inference of their delegation growing out of the fact of the creation of the municipal corporation and the additional fact that the corporation can only fully accomplish the objects of its creation by exercising such powers. (Crawfordsville vs. Braden, 28 N.E. 849). Furthermore, municipal corporations, as governmental agencies, must have such measures of the power as are necessary to enable them to perform their governmental functions. The power is a continuing one, founded on public necessity. (62 C.J.S. p. 273) Thus, not only does the State effectuate its purposes through the exercise of the police power but the municipality does also. (U.S. v. Salaveria, 39 Phil. 102). Municipal governments exercise this power under the general welfare clause: pursuant thereto they are clothed with authority to "enact such ordinances and issue such regulations as may be necessary to carry out and discharge the responsibilities conferred upon it by law, and such as shall be necessary and proper to provide for the health, safety, comfort and convenience, maintain peace and order, improve public morals, promote the prosperity and general welfare of the municipality and the inhabitants thereof, and insure the protection of property therein." (Sections 91, 149, 177 and 208, BP 337). And under Section 7 of BP 337, "every local government unit shall exercise the powers expressly granted, those necessarily implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary and proper for governance such as to promote health and safety, enhance prosperity, improve morals, and maintain peace and order in the local government unit, and preserve the comfort and 5|P a ge

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes convenience of the inhabitants therein." Police power is the power to prescribe regulations to promote the health, morals, peace, education, good order or safety and general welfare of the people. It is the most essential, insistent, and illimitable of powers. In a sense it is the greatest and most powerful attribute of the government. It is elastic and must be responsive to various social conditions. (Sangalang, et al. vs. IAC, 176 SCRA 719). On it depends the security of social order, the life and health of the citizen, the comfort of an existence in a thickly populated community, the enjoyment of private and social life, and the beneficial use of property, and it has been said to be the very foundation on which our social system rests. (16 C.J.S., P. 896) However, it is not confined within narrow circumstances of precedents resting on past conditions; it must follow the legal progress of a democratic way of life. (Sangalang, et al. vs. IAC, supra). Why would do the courts be hesitant in scrutinizing the local government units exercising police power compared to when the Congress is exercising police power? Courts have wider degree of judicial review when police power is exercised by a delegated authority as when it is exercised by Congress. If police power is exercised by a delegated authority, it is a legal question because you are questioning whether the delegated authority have complied with the conditions given, compared to when it is exercised by Congress within which it is a political question. Private corporations cannot exercise police power, only municipal corporations. [DECS vs. San Diego, 180 SCRA 525] There is no need to redefine here the police power of the State. Suffice it to repeat that the power is validly exercised if (a) the interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular class, require the interference of the State, and (b) the means employed are reasonably necessary to the attainment of the object sought to be accomplished and not unduly oppressive upon individuals. In other words, the proper exercise of the police power requires the concurrence of a lawful subject and a lawful method. [Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association vs. City Mayor, L-24693, July 31, 1967] There is no need to redefine here the police power of the State. Suffice it to repeat that the power is validly exercised if (a) the interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular class, require the interference of the State, and (b) the means employed are reasonably necessary to the attainment of the object sought to be accomplished and not unduly oppressive upon individuals.

6|P a ge

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes In other words, the proper exercise of the police power requires the concurrence of a lawful subject and a lawful method. [White Light Corp. vs. City of Manila, G.R. No. 122846, January 20, 2009] That the Ordinance prevents the lawful uses of a wash rate depriving patrons of a product and the petitioners of lucrative business ties in with another constitutional requisite for the legitimacy of the Ordinance as a police power measure. It must appear that the interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular class, require an interference with private rights and the means must be reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly oppressive of private rights. It must also be evident that no other alternative for the accomplishment of the purpose less intrusive of private rights can work. More importantly, a reasonable relation must exist between the purposes of the measure and the means employed for its accomplishment, for even under the guise of protecting the public interest, personal rights and those pertaining to private property will not be permitted to be arbitrarily invaded. Lawful Subject - Public morals + Lawful Means - no arbitrariness - reasonable connection - least intrusive into private

rights - Public safety - Public health [Del Rosario vs. Bengzon, 180 SCRA 525] The prohibition against the use by doctors of "no substitution" and/or words of similar import in their prescription, is a valid regulation to prevent the circumvention of the law. It secures to the patient the right to choose between the brand name and its generic equivalent since his doctor is allowed to write both the generic and the brand name in his prescription form. If a doctor is allowed to prescribe a brand-name drug with "no substitution," the patient's option to buy a lower-priced, but equally effective, generic equivalent would thereby be curtailed. The law aims to benefit the impoverished (and often sickly) majority of the population in a still developing country like ours, not the affluent and generally healthy minority. [Javier vs. Earnshaw, 64 Phil 626] The storing, handling, and use of inflammable and explosive substances, being attended with danger, may be regulated under the police power. What do you do if you want to invalidate a regulation? 7|P a ge

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes

1. Check if the branch or agency has a properly delegated power to exercise police power 2. Lawful subject or purpose 3. Lawful means or method
What makes a purpose lawful is when it touches public concern. You must distinguish whether the police power is exercised by a delegate authority or an inherent prerogative.

Eminent domain will be exercised if the private owner refuses to give his private property.

Regalian Doctrine everything is owned by the State. The State simply allowed us to own lands.

8|P a ge

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes 11-18-11

[Moday vs. Court of Appeals, 268 SCRA 586] Eminent domain, the power which the Municipality of Bunawan exercised in the instant case, is a fundamental State power that is inseparable from sovereignty.14 It is government's right to appropriate, in the nature of a compulsory sale to the State, private property for public use or purpose.15 Inherently possessed by the national legislature, the power of eminent domain may be validly delegated to local governments, other public entities and public utilities.16 For the taking of private property by the government to be valid, the taking must be for public use and there must be just compensation.17 Is eminent domain constitutionally granted? Section 9, Article 3 is not a confirmation but a limitation of Eminent Domain.

[Visayan Refining Co. vs. Camus and Paredes, 40 Phil 550] The power of eminent domain does not depend for its existence on a specific grant in the constitution. It is inherent in sovereignty and exists in a sovereign state without any recognition of it in the constitution. The provisions found in most of the state constitutions relating to the taking of property for the public use do not by implication grant the power to the government of the state, but limit a power which would otherwise be without limit." (10, R. C. L., pp. 11, 12.) Who may exercise it? [City of Manila vs. Chinese Community of Manila, 40 Phil 349]

Upon the question whether expropriation is a legislative function exclusively, and that the courts cannot intervene except for the purpose of determining the value of the land in question, there is much legal literature. Much has been written upon both sides of that question. A careful examination of the discussions pro and con will disclose the fact that the decisions depend largely upon particular constitutional or statutory provisions. It cannot be denied, if the legislature under proper authority should grant the expropriation of a certain or particular parcel of land for some specified public purpose, that the courts would be without jurisdiction to inquire into the purpose of that legislation. If, upon the other hand, however, the Legislature should grant general authority to a municipal corporation to expropriate private land for public purposes, we think the courts have ample authority in this jurisdiction, under the provisions above quoted, to make inquiry and to hear proof, upon an issue properly presented, concerning whether or not the lands were private and whether the purpose was, in fact, public. . In other words, have not the courts in this jurisdiction the right, inasmuch as the questions relating to expropriation must be referred to them (sec. 241, Act No. 190) for final decision, to ask whether or not the law has been complied with? Suppose, in a particular case, it should be denied that the property is not private property but public, may not the courts hear proof upon that question? Or, suppose the defense is, that the purpose of the expropriation is not public but private, or that there exists no public purpose at all, may not the courts make inquiry and hear proof upon that question?

9|P a ge

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes

When the courts come to determine the question, they must not only find (a) that a law or authority exists for the exercise of the right of eminent domain, but (b) also that the right or authority is being exercised in accordance with the law. The very foundation of the right to exercise eminent domain is a genuine necessity, and that necessity must be of a public character. The ascertainment of the necessity must precede or accompany, and not follow, the taking of the land. Courts can come in upon the showing only of grave abuse of discretion. If it is exercised by delegate, look at its power whether it is general or specific. Genuine necessity is a political question if exercised by Congress but a legal question if exercised by a delegate authority with general power. Delegated authority: A. Authority B. Requirements/Limitations

[Heirs of Alberto Suguitan vs. City of Mandaluyong, 328 SCRA 137] The power of eminent domain is essentially legislative in nature. It is firmly settled, however, that such power may be validly delegated to local government units, other public entities and public utilities, although the scope of this delegated legislative power is necessarily narrower than that of the delegating authority and may only be exercised in strict compliance with the terms of the delegating law. 22 The basis for the exercise of the power of eminent domain by local government units is Section 19 of RA 7160 (Local Government Code) which provides that: A local government unit may, through its chief executive and acting pursuant to an ordinance, exercise the power of eminent domain for public use, purpose, or welfare for the benefits of the poor and the landless, upon payment of just compensation, pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution and pertinent laws; Provided, however, That the power of eminent domain may not be exercised unless a valid and definite offer has been previously made to the owner, and such offer was not accepted; Provided, further, That the local government unit may immediately take possession of the property upon the filing of the expropriation proceedings and upon making a deposit with the proper court of at least fifteen percent (15%) of the fair market value of the property based on the current tax declaration of the property to be expropriated; Provided, finally, That the amount to be paid for the expropriated property shall be determined by the proper court, based on the fair market value at the time of the taking of the property. Despite the existence of this legislative grant in favor of local governments, it is still the duty of the courts to determine whether the power of eminent domain is being exercised in accordance with the delegating law. 23 In fact, the courts have adopted a more censorious attitude in resolving questions involving the proper exercise of

10 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes

this delegated power by local bodies, as compared to instances when it is directly exercised by the national legislature. 24 The courts have the obligation to determine whether the following requisites have been complied with by the local government unit concerned: 1. An ordinance is enacted by the local legislative council authorizing the local chief executive, in behalf of the local government unit, to exercise the power of eminent domain or pursue expropriation proceedings over a particular private property. 2. The power of eminent domain is exercised for public use, purpose or welfare, or for the benefit of the poor and the landless. 3. There is payment of just compensation, as required under Section 9, Article III of the Constitution, and other pertinent laws. 4. A valid and definite offer has been previously made to the owner of the property sought to be expropriated, but said offer was not accepted. 25 We are not convinced by petitioner's insistence that the terms "resolution" and "ordinance" are synonymous. A municipal ordinance is different from a resolution. An ordinance is a law, but a resolution is merely a declaration of the sentiment or opinion of a lawmaking body on a specific matter. An ordinance possesses a general and permanent character, but a resolution is temporary in nature. Additionally, the two are enacted differently a third reading is necessary for an ordinance, but not for a resolution, unless decided otherwise by a majority of all the Sanggunian members.

11 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes 11-22-11

EMINENT DOMAIN can be exercised by Congress by inherent power and by delegates. If delegates, it is not inherent authority. (inferior domain, not eminent; limited in nature and express limitation in law)

Art. 7279 Requirement for LGU to expropriate:

The governing law that deals with the subject of expropriation for purposed of urban land reform and housing in Republic Act No. 7279 (Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992) and Sections 9 and 10 of which specifically provide as follows:

Sec. 9. Priorities in the acquisition of Land following order:

Lands for socialized housing shall be acquired in the

(a) Those owned by the Government or any of its sub-divisions, instrumentalities, or agencies, including government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries; (b) Alienable lands of the public domain; (c) Unregistered or abandoned and idle lands; (d) Those within the declared Areas of Priority Development, Zonal Improvement sites, and Slum Improvement and Resettlement Program sites which have not yet been acquired; (e) Bagong Lipunan Improvement sites and Services or BLISS sites which have not yet been acquired; and (f) Privately-owned lands. Where on-site development is found more practicable and advantageous to the beneficiaries, the priorities mentioned in this section shall not apply. The local government units shall give budgetary priority to on-site development of government lands.

(REPUBLIC OF THE PHILS VS VDA DE CASTELLVI)

TAKING:

12 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes

1. 2. 3. 4. entry permanent color of authority full intention to exercise power of ED deprivation - deprived of total ownership of property - deprived of some beneficial use

The utilization of the property for public use must be in such a way as to oust the owner and deprive him of all beneficial enjoyment of the property. In the instant case, the entry of the Republic into the property and its utilization of the same for public use did not oust Castellvi and deprive her of all beneficial enjoyment of the property.

(NAPOCOR VS CA) Warrant or color of authority intent to expropriate or exercise full power of eminent domain

In this case, the petitioner s entrance in 1978 was without intent to expropriate or was not made under warrant or color of legal authority, for it believed the property was public land covered by Proclamation No. 1354.

Only in 1992, after the private respondent sued to recover possession and petitioner filed its Complaint to expropriate, did petitioner manifest its intention to exercise the power of eminent domain.

** Upon taking, it must be for public purpose which means: used by public? It is for public benefit: property if you are able to show that there is public benefit that it can be of public use.

(Sumulong vs Guerrero) Even if not directly, you can derive indirect public benefit. Even if it doesn t benefit a lot, it is for culture, history.

Expropriation must be for specific purpose.

(MCIAA VS LOZADA)

13 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes

More particularly, with respect to the element of public use, the expropriator should commit to use the property pursuant to the purpose stated in the petition for expropriation filed, failing which, it should file another petition for the new purpose. If not, it is then incumbent upon the expropriator to return the said property to its private owner, if the latter desires to reacquire the same. Otherwise, the judgment of expropriation suffers an intrinsic flaw, as it would lack one indispensable element for the proper exercise of the power of eminent domain, namely, the particular public purpose for which the property will be devoted. Accordingly, the private property owner would be denied due process of law, and the judgment would violate the property owners right to justice, fairness, and equity.

Government can change purpose as long as it goes to court for the change or else property will be returned.

If government gets property through eminent domain you have no choice but to give it up in return for just compensation.

JUST COMPENSATION -

a judicial function

Court sees what is full and fair compensation Determined by the court Is the fair market value of the property Jc = fmv + (consequential damage consequential benefit)

price that you will pay from the seller not compelled to sell and from a buyer who is not keen in buying

RECKONING OF FAIR MARKET VALUE: 1. 2. taking filing of complaint

(EPZA VS DULAY)

P.D. No. 76: xxx xxx xxx

14 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes

For purposes of just compensation in cases of private property acquired by the government for public use, the basis shall be the current and fair market value declared by the owner or adminiqtrator, or such market value as determined by the Assessor, whichever is lower.

(MUN. OF BINAN VS GARCIA)

There are two (2) stages in every action of expropriation. 1. The first is concerned with the determination of the authority of the plaintiff to exercise the power of eminent domain and the propriety of its exercise in the context of the facts involved in the suit. 19 It ends with an order, if not of dismissal of the action, "of condemnation declaring that the plaintiff has a lawful right to take the property sought to be condemned, for the public use or purpose described in the complaint, upon the payment of just compensation to be determined as of the date of the filing of the complaint." 20 An order of dismissal, if this be ordained, would be a final one, of course, since it finally disposes of the action and leaves nothing more to be done by the Court on the Merits. 21 So, too, would an order of condemnation be a final one, for thereafter, as the Rules expressly state, in the proceedings before the Trial Court, "no objection to the exercise of the right of condemnation (or the propriety thereof) shall be flied or heard. 22

The second phase of the eminent domain action is concerned with the determination by the Court of "the just compensation for the property sought to be taken." This is done by the Court with the assistance of not more than three (3) commissioners. 23 The order fixing the just compensation on the basis of the evidence before, and findings of, the commissioners would be final, too. It would finally dispose of the second stage of the suit, and leave nothing more to be done by the Court regarding the issue. Obviously, one or another of the parties may believe the order to be erroneous in its appreciation of the evidence or findings of fact or otherwise. Obviously, too, such a dissatisfied party may seek reversal of the order by taking an appeal therefrom.

(MCIAA VS RODRIGUEZ)

It is as of the time of such a taking, to repeat, that the just compensation for the property is to be established. As stated in Republic v. Philippine National Bank,

". . . (W)hen plaintiff takes possession before the institution of the condemnation proceedings, the value should be fixed as of the time of the taking of said possession, not of filing of the complaint and the latter should be the basis for the determination of the value, when the taking of the property involved coincides with or is subsequent to, the commencement of the proceedings. Indeed, otherwise, the provision of

15 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes

Rule 69, Section 3, directing that compensation 'be determined as of the date of the filing of the complaint' would never be operative. As intimated in Republic v. Lara (supra), said provision contemplates 'normal circumstances,' under which 'the complaint coincides or even precedes the taking of the property by the plaintiff.'"

Just compensation compensates owner for what HE LOST.

RULE 67: Procedure for just compensation

WHEN CAN EXPROPRIATOR ENTER THE PROPERTY? RULE 67 SEC. 2 Upon filing of complaint of expropriation, plaintiff shall have the right to take or enter upon the possession of the real property involved if the deposits with the authorized government depositary an amount equivalent to

LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE IF LGU = makes a deposit with the proper court of at least 15 percent of FMV of the property based on the current tax declaration of the property to be expropriated. For other expropriators:

When do you get just compensation?

16 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes 11-25-11 Difference between Police Power and Eminent Domain

[Office of the Solicitor General vs. Ayala Land, GR No 177056]

When there is a taking or confiscation of private property for public use, the State is no longer exercising police power, but another of its inherent powers, namely, eminent domain. Eminent domain enables the State to forcibly acquire private lands intended for public use upon payment of just compensation to owner.

It is only police power if you take a property for the purpose of destroying it.

Taxation power by which the Sovereign raises revenue to pay necessary expenses of the government.

How is it exercised? When exercised what are the limitations and the exceptions? Nature of the power.

17 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes 11-28-11

Taxation - life blood theory of taxation; lifeblood of the government. It is what you pay for civilized society. Without it, government is paralyzed. - Power of LGU to tax is not inherent from the Congress, it is sourced from the constitution. Congress role is only to limit like impose mandatory - Enforced proportional contribution upon persons or properties for the support of government. - It is not a debt. - Shall be uniform and equitable. (Article VI. Section 28)

Article X. Section 5. Each LGU shall have the power to create its own sources of revenues and to levy taxes, fees, and charges subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide, consistent with the basic policy of local autonomy. Such taxes, fees, and charges shall accrue exclusively to the Local Government.

Limitation: - Creation of national entity (instrumentalities of the government) with exemption of taxes (pagcor) - Actual, direct and exclusive use for Religious, charitable, educational purposes. - Education (Article XIV. Par 3) Exemption from taxes and duties of all revenues and assets of non-stock, non-profit used ADE for educational purposes.

If power to tax is used as pure revenue, it is not power to destroy. But it can be used as implementation to police power thus may be used as power to destroy. [Basco vs PAGCOR] [Lung Center vs. Quezon City]

18 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes 11-29-11 Article III. Bill of Rights

Rights - There are some rights that are inherent and some are not inherent but stated in constitution - Universal declaration of human rights: Civil rights, political rights, economic rights. - Some rights are not inherent like the right to appeal.

[People vs. Domasian]

Bill of Rights can only be invoked against the state but not against the individual. Only to the state because it has an awesome power against the people, thus, BOR gives limitations. Note for ransom was taken by Agra himself and not by the NBI. Thus, Bill of Rights cannot be invoked.

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.

y y y y

Deprived of life you are alive but not living a quality life (philosophical point of view) Deprived of liberty incarceration Deprived of property Person stated here covers national and juridical (have artificial life; law gave life to it, e.g. corporations, partnership, etc.); application of due process in juridical is not the same with natural persons as its existence is limited to the law.

[Sec. of National defense vs. Manalo]

When there is deprivation of life, liberty and property

[U.S. vs. Ling Su Fan] Due Process: (Before you are deprived, ff. procedures are followed) 1. Authority to pass law If there is authority to pass legislation 2. Reasonable 1) Substance/purpose; 2) Lawful means 3. Procedure Substantive

19 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes Due process of Law: In general

Two aspects: 1. Substantive a. Includes notice b. Void for vagueness test to men of common intelligence; applies to freedom of speech case. 2. Procedural a. In court proceedings I. Jurisdiction (fixed by congress) - Subject matter fixed by law, check the law
and check what jurisdiction to know where is the proper court to file.

II.

-Person Notice and Hearing

- You must be given opportunity to be heard. It is a requirement for due process. 1. Proof beyond reasonable doubt 2. Preponderance of evidence

III.

Cold Neutrality of an Impartial Judge

- Court has repeatedly and consistently demanded the cold neutrality of an impartial judge as the indespensible imperative of due process. - Must appear neutral in truth and in appearance. [GR 118882] b. In administrative case c. In student discipline It is recognized by the constitution that school must have a disciplinary action SC states a school without discipline is like a mill without a water Requirements: 1. Publication 2. Reasonableness of the rules 3. Just, authorized and recognized causes 4. Appropriate Procedure 5. Appropriate penalty Sec.78 Authority to promulgate disciplinary rules. Preventive Suspension doesn t require prior notice and hearing as it is not a penalty. No need to hear your side, can be immediately impose.
20 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes

12-06-11

1) suspension, 2) exclusion (remove/dropped in school), 3)expulsion (cannot be enrolled school within Philippines) Penalty should be congruent with the committed act

Coverage for Pre-mid: Start to Equal Protection of Laws Due Process of Law: In General (2 Aspects) Both must be complied 1) Substantive (If asked about the Substantive Due Process) - Check the authority to pass the law - Reasonableness - Procedure Requirements: to be notified and must not be vague 2) Procedural - In Court Proceedings - In Administrative Case - In Student Discipline
[Serrano vs. NLRC] Due process does not apply on private parties. Not all requirement and hearing are not from constitutions but rather on fair play, justice. (Art.III, Sec1-Against Gov t) Equal Protection of Laws all persons or things similarly treated both as to rights conferred and responsibilities imposed. [Philippine Judges Assoc vs. Prado]
The equal protection of the laws is embraced in the concept of due process, as every unfair discrimination offends the requirements of justice and fair play. It has nonetheless been embodied in a separate clause in Article III Sec. 1., of the Constitution to provide for a more, specific guaranty against any form of undue favoritism or hostility from the government. Arbitrariness in general may be challenged on the basis of the due process clause. But if the particular act assailed partakes of an unwarranted partiality or prejudice, the sharper weapon to cut it down is the equal protection clause. According to a long line of decisions, equal protection simply requires that all persons or things similarly situated 12 should be treated alike, both as to rights conferred and responsibilities imposed, Similar subjects, in other words, should not be treated differently, so as to give undue favor to some and unjustly discriminate against others. The equal protection clause does not require the universal application of the laws on all persons or things without distinction. This might in fact sometimes result in unequal protection, as where, for example, a law prohibiting mature books to all persons, regardless of age, would benefit the morals of the youth but violate the liberty of adults. What the clause requires is equality among equals as determined according to a valid classification. By classification is meant the grouping of persons or things similar to each other in certain particulars and different from all others in 13 these same particulars.

Right to be noticed and to be heard

21 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes

[Villegas vs. Ho] Unequal protection of laws as Mayor in this case requires to all alien to pay 50 pesos for permit regardless of the kind of job an alien is employed. [People v. Cayat]
It is an established principle of constitutional law that the guaranty of the equal protection of the laws is not equal protection of the laws is not violated by a legislation based on reasonable classification. And the classification, to be reasonable, (1) must rest on substantial distinctions; (2) must be germane to the purposes of the law; (3) must not be limited to existing conditions only; and (4) must apply equally to all members of the same class.

 Example is woman have special clause of to put a chair during work but does it also mean to decrease the passing average of women in the bar exam? (Germane to the purpose of the law) Physical attribute should not be allowed to interfere with her capability to practice law.

[Quinto vs. Comelec] Sad to state, this conclusion conveniently ignores the long-standing rule that to remedy an injustice, the Legislature need not address every manifestation of the evil at once; it may proceed "one step at a time."39 In addressing a societal concern, it must invariably draw lines and make choices, thereby creating some inequity as to those included or excluded.40 Nevertheless, as long as "the bounds of reasonable choice" are not exceeded, the courts must defer to the legislative judgment.41 We may not strike down a law merely because the legislative aim would have been more fully achieved by expanding the class.42 Stated differently, the fact that a legislative classification, by itself, is underinclusive will not render it unconstitutionally arbitrary or invidious.43 There is no constitutional requirement that regulation must reach each and every class to which it might be applied;44 that the Legislature must be held rigidly to the choice of regulating all or none.

22 | P a g e

Constitutional Law II Discussion Notes 12-12-11 Umbrella Right: RIGHT TO PRIVACY Is not expressly stated, penumbral right, comes in the shades of the constitution Right against unreasonable searches and seizures. (Art III Bill of Rights, Section 2) 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 persons or things to be seized.

Exceptions: 1) Reasonable Searches 2) Legal Warrantless Arrest

Arrest take you in a legal custody

Search to look forth General Rule:

What s Reasonable: Valid Warrant (Search or Arrest) Valid Warrant Search or Arrest:

1) 2) 3) 4)

Probable Cause Determined by Judge After examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized

Exceptions: Valid Warrantless search or arrest.

Probable Cause

Facts and circumstances that establish an offense has been committed. Facts that reasonable persons accept it that offense has been committed.

Gather Evidences then bring it to prosecutor or judge (finding probable cause / dismiss), then makes resolution filing information or charge. Bring it to the judge, and he will read the files then if he agrees, thus, issuance of search warrant / warrant of arrest. During trial, facts and circumstances court is looking for a proof beyond reasonable doubt. 23 | P a g e