1

SUBJECT: Constitutional Law II (Finals) committed and that the arresting officers had
Date: April 8, 2008 personal knowledge of facts indicating that Mengote
had committed it. All they had was hearsay
People v. Mengote information from the telephone caller, and about a
Facts: crime that had yet to be committed.
- the Western Police District received a telephone call - The truth is that they did not know then
from an informer that there were three suspicious- what offense, if at all, had been committed and
looking persons at the corner of Juan Luna and North neither were they aware of the participation therein
Bay Boulevard in Tondo, Manila, shortly before noon of the accused-appellant. It was only later, after
of August 8, 1987, a surveillance team of Danganan had appeared at the Police headquarters,
plainclothesmen was dispatched to the place. that they learned of the robbery in his house and of
- Patrolmen Rolando Mercado and Alberto Juan, said Mengote's supposed involvement therein.
that they saw two men "looking from side to side,"
one of whom was holding his abdomen. They
approached these persons and identified themselves Velasco v. CA
as policemen, whereupon the two tried to run away
but were unable to escape because the other FACTS:
lawmen had surrounded them. - Section 4, Rules of Court: the wirt of habeas corpus
- The suspects were then searched. One of them, who should not be allowed after the party sought to be
turned out to be the accused-appellant, was found released had been charged before any court
with a .38 caliber Smith and Wesson revolver with six - A warrant of arrest was issued against accused
live bullets in the chamber. His companion, later Larkins for violations of BP 22
identified as Nicanor Morellos, had a fan knife - A complaint affidavit was executed by Desiree Alinea
secreted in his front right pants pocket. The weapons accusing Larkins of the crime of rape
were taken from them. Mengote and Morellos were - On the basis of the said complaint, special
then turned over to police headquarters for investigators from the NBI arrested and detained the
investigation by the Intelligence Division. latter at the detention cell of the NBI at Taft Avenue,
- Information was filed with RTC charging accused in - Larkins posted his bail for the BP22 case.. The judge
violation of Violation of PD 1866 illegal possession of who issued the warrant of arrest pertaining to the
firearms. violations of BP22 ordered the recalling and setting
- Besides the police officers, one other witness aside of the said warrant and directed warden of the
presented by the prosecution was Rigoberto NBI to release Larkins from the confinement “unless
Danganan, who identified the subject weapon as otherwise detained for some other cause”
among the articles stolen from him during the - NBI did not release him because he should still be
robbery in his house in Malabon on June 13, 1987. He detained for the crime of rape for which he should be
pointed to Mengote as one of the robbers. held for inquest
Issue: - A complaint against Larkins for rape was executed
- W/N there was the warrantless arrest made was and filed in the RTC of Antipolo
legal? No. - Larkins filed a Motion for Bail wherein he alleged that
Ratio: the evidence against him is not strongfor he had no
Rules of Court Sec. 5. Arrest without warrant when lawful. A carnal knowledge of the complaint
peace officer or private person may, without a warrant, arrest - Larkins filed an Urgent Omnibus Motion for Dismissal
a person; of the Complaint and for immediate release
(a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has principally based on the alleged illegality of his
committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit warrantless arrest
an offense; - Trial Court denied both motions
(b) When an offense has in fact just been committed, and he - CA issued a resolution ordering NBI to produce
has personal knowledge of facts indicating that the person to Larkins before the court
be arrested has committed it; and - CA issued its decision resolving that Larkins be
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has immediately released on the ground that the
escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is complaint presented to the NBI by the complainant
serving final judgment or temporarily confined while his case Desiree on the basis of which Larkins was detained
is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one without a warrant of arrest did not meet the legal
confinement to another. requirements provided for in the Rules of Court.
- Clearly circumstances of the case doesn’t come Moreover, on the day Larkin’s detention commenced,
under Par. (c). no other criminal complaint had been filed or
- Par. (a) requires that the person be arrested (1) after pending in any court. It was only sometime after the
he has committed or while he is actually committing Urgent Motion for Bail was filed that the complaint of
or is at least attempting to commit an offense, (2) in rape was filed
the presence of the arresting officer.
o These requirements have not been ISSUE:
established in the case at bar. At the time of W/N the warrantless arrest was valid (consequently, W/N
the arrest in question, the accused- the petition for writ of HC will prosper)
appellant was merely "looking from side to
side" and "holding his abdomen." There was HELD:
apparently no offense that had just been No. However, supervening events rendered the detention
committed or was being actually committed valid and consequently, the petition for writ of HC will not
or at least being attempted by Mengote in prosper
their presence.
RATIO:
- Par. (b) is no less applicable because its no less
- CA granted the writ of HC because it foynd that the
stringent requirements have also not been satisfied.
warrantless arrest of LArkins foir the crime of rape
The prosecution has not shown that at the time of
did not meet the legal requirements provided for in
Mengote's arrest an offense had in fact just been

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 2
the rule on valid warrantless arrests trial court. Consequently, any irregularity attendant
- HOWEVER, even if the arrest was illegal, supervening to his arrest was cured when he voluntarily
events barred the release or discharge of Larkins submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the trial court
from custody. Amnong such events is (1) the by entering a plea of "not guilty" and by
issuance of a judicial process preventing the participating in the trial. What is more, his
discharge of the detained person (2) the filing of a submission that he was not apprehended during a
complaint or information for the offense for which skirmish but while plowing his field becomes puerile
the accused was deatined, as in the instant case. By when pitted against the positive testimony of Lt.
then, the restraint in liberty is already by virtue of Melquiades Feliciano who led Charlie Task Force BFK
the complaint and therefore the writ of HC is no (Bungi, Falcasantos and Kamlon) in apprehending
longer available as per Section 4 of RoC him and his companions. Credence is accorded to
- What is to be inquired into is the legality of his the testimony of Lt. Melquiades that appellant was
detention, as of, at the earliest, the filing for the captured during a military offensive, which
application of the writ of HC, for even if the detention testimony the trial court characterized as "positive,
at inception is illegal, it may, by reason of some clear and convincing.
supervening event, such as instances mentioned in
Section 4 of RoC, be no longer illegal at the time of
the filing of the application People v. Sequino
- It may also be said that by filing his motion for bail,
Larkins admitted that he was under the custody of This is a case involving the crime of robbery with homicide.
the court and voluntarily submitted his person to its Eugenio Godinez who is the overseer of Hacienda Jose Ancajas
jurisdiction. The trial court’s denial of the urgent in Cebu and Pedro Broniola, the hacienda’s bookkeeper, went
motion for bail was an unequivocal assertion of its to Medellin Rural Bank to withdraw money for payroll. The
authority to keep in custody the person of Larkins bank manager asked the bank driver, Serafin, to drive
- BUT even of the court diecides for the Godinez and Broniola back to the Hacienda using the bank’s
petitioner, it is disturbed by 2 incidents re: the motorcycle. On their way back to the Hacienda they were
warrantless arrest of Larkins: (1) Section 5, Rule 113 blocked by the accused armed with guns. Godinez recognized
of Roc requires that the person lawfully arrested be the armed men because Sequiño and Melvida used to work at
delivered to the nearest police station or jail and the Hacienda while Tumangan’s parents were Godinez’s
shall be proceeded against in accordance with neighbors. Serafin drove on but a gun was shot hitting
Section 7, Rule 112; and (2) Art 125 of RPC provides Broniola. Serfin ran away while Godinez was pinned down by
that he be delivered to the proper judicial authorities the motorcycle. The accused took the money and left the
within 36 hours, the crime with which Larkins was scene of the crime on foot. SPO Luna received a report that a
charged being punishable by an afflictive penalty. crime of robbery had just occurred and so they went to the
LArkins was arrested in MAkati but was brought to scene of the crime. Luna noticed that the “bushes were
the NBI detention cell at Taft Ave; though the compressed” and found WARNING THIS IS GROSS “ a piece of
complaint was executed on Nov. 23, the complaint paper utilized as toilet paper with a stool on it which was
was only filed on Dec. 2. These acts merit somewhat newly delivered”. the paper was a bio-data sheer
disapproval from the Court. with the name Melvida, Nenito (one of the accused). Melvida
was then arrested and was kept for investigation. He then
admitted his participation in the crime and old the police
People v. Samson where he kept his share of the loot (9000 pesos). he also
Facts: admitted that his companions were Sequiño and Tumangan.
RTC of Zamboanga found accused Samson alias
Commander Bungi, among others, guilty as Issue:
principals of kidnapping for ransom on the basis of The relevant issue in this case was whether or not a valid
the testimony of eyewitness and kidnap victim A2C warrant less arrest was effected (based on HOT PURSUIT)
Monteverde who testified that on 30 January 1990,
while riding a Fortune Bus on his way to the city to Held:
report for duty armed members of the MNLF stopped No
the bus somewhere in Sitio Texas, Barangay
Tictapul, Vitali, Zamboanga City, and dragged out 11 Luna’s basis for arresting Melvida as the bio-data
passengers. They were herded to the mountains of sheet with Melvida’s name on it found at the crime
Tungawan, Zamboanga del Sur, held hostage for scene. By no means can this indicate that Melvida
about one 1 month, during which they were ordered committed the offense charged. It does not even
among others to fetch water, cook, and carry the connote that Melvida was at the crime scene for the
clothes of their kidnappers whom they came to bio-data sheet could have been obtained by anyone
know. They were likewise ordered to write ransom and left at the crime scene long before or after the
letters to their relatives. On 6 March 1990, A2C crime was committed. Luna therefore had no
Monteverde was able to escape during an encounter personal knowledge of facts indicating Melvida’s
between his captors and the pursuing military. He guilt; at best he had an unreasonable suspicion.
immediately went to the 482nd PC Company in Ipil, Melvida’s arrest was thus illegal.
Zamboanga del Sur, to report his abduction. The
court held that the lone eyewitness account of
kidnap victim A2C Monteverde, candid and People v. Alvario
straightforward, is sufficient to convict appellant of
kidnapping for ransom. Facts:
Issue:
W/N there was an illegal arrest On January 29, 1993, Esterlina Quintero (Ester), a 29-year old
Held: girl, took her time off as a housekeeper at Pasong Tirad,
No, appellant is estopped from questioning any Makati, to look for another place of employment. Eventually,
defect in the manner of his arrest as he failed to she found a house in Bel-Air Subdivision where she was
move for the quashing of the information before the accepted by Armando Alvario as a cook and a laundress

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 3
(Alvario was just a caretaker of the house). Based on Ester’s Petitioner's "arrest" took place six (6) days after the
testimony, Alvario would barge into her room in the maids’ shooting of Maguan. The "arresting" officers
quarter, point a gun at her and rape her. Also, she testified obviously were not present, within the meaning of
that Alvario did not allow her to go out of the house and to Section 5(a), at the time petitioner had allegedly
use the telephone. However, on January 28, she phoned her shot Maguan. Neither could the "arrest" effected six
sister and asked her from her. Subsequently, her sister and 4 (6) days after the shooting be reasonably regarded
Makati police came to the house in Bel-Air. When Alvario and as effected "when (the shooting had) in fact just
Ester opened the door, she pointed at Alvario and say that he been committed" within the meaning of Section 5(b).
raped her. Then and there, Alvario was arrested. Moreover, none of the "arresting" officers had any
"personal knowledge" of facts indicating that
Issue: petitioner was the gunman who had shot Maguan.
The information upon which the police acted had
W/N the arrest of Alvario is valid. been derived from statements made by alleged
eyewitnesses to the shooting one stated that
Ruling. petitioner was the gunman; another was able to take
down the alleged gunman's car's plate number which
No. the arrest of Alvario violated his constitutional turned out to be registered in petitioner's wife's
right against warrantless arrests. As required by name. That information did not, however, constitute
Rules on Criminal Procedure, a person can be "personal knowledge."
arrested even without a warrant when an offense It is thus clear to the Court that there was no lawful
has in fact been committed and the police man warrantless arrest of petitioner within the meaning of
making the arrest has personal knowledge of facts Section 5 of Rule 113. It is clear too that Section 7 of
indicating that the person to be arrested has Rule 112 is not applicable. . . . When the police filed
committed it. In this case, the personal knowledge of a complaint for frustrated homicide with the
the arresting officers was culled from the Prosecutor, the latter should have immediately
information supplied by the victim herself who scheduled a preliminary investigation to determine
pointed to Alvario as the man who raped her at the whether there was probable cause for charging
time of his arrest. petitioner in court for the killing of Eldon Maguna.
Instead, as noted earlier, the Prosecutor proceeded
under the erroneous supposition that Section 7 of
FRANCISCO JUAN LARRANAGA (represented in this suit by his Rule 112 was applicable and required petitioner to
mother MARGARITA G.LARRANAGA) v. CA waive the provisions of Article 125 of the Revised
(October 27, 1997) Penal Code as a condition for carrying out a
Ponente: Puno preliminary investigation. This was substantive error,
for petitioner was entitled to a preliminary
Facts: On September 15, 1997, some PNP authorities went to investigation and that right should have been
the Center for Culinary Arts located at 287 Katipunan Avenue, accorded him without any conditions. Moreover,
Loyola Heights, Quezon City to arrest Francisco Juan since petitioner had not been arrested, with or
Larranaga. Larranaga, thru his lawyer, Atty. Raymundo without a warrant, he was also entitled to be
Armovit remonstrated against the warrantless arrest. The released forthwith subject only to his appearing at
police did not carry out the arrest on the assurance that the preliminary investigation.
Larranaga would be brought to Cebu City by his lawyer on
September 17, 1997 for preliminary investigation.
MANALILI VS COURT OF APPEALS
On October 1, 1997, petitioner Margarita G. Larranaga filed a
petition seeking to annul the information for kidnapping and FACTS: At around 2:10 pm, the Anti-Narcotics Unit of the
serious illegal detention against her minor son, Francisco Juan Kalookan City Police were conducting surveillance, in front of
Larranaga alias Paco, filed in the RTC of Cebu City as well as the Kalookan Cemetery. Policemen Espiritu and Lumabas were
the warrant of arrest issued as a consequence thereof. riding in a Tamaraw car, driven by Enriquez. Surveillance was
Petitioner as an alternative remedy prays for the annulment of being made because of information that drug addicts were
the order of the Office of the City Prosecutor of Cebu denying roaming that area.
Larranaga's motion for a regular preliminary investigation.
After reaching the cemetery, they stumbled across a
Issue: W/N the petitioner was lawfully arrested and thus man who appeared to be high on drugs: his eyes were red and
lawfully denied a preliminary investigation? NO. he was walking in a swaying manner. After seeing the police,
Ratio: Petitioner is entitled not to a mere inquest investigation this man tried to avoid them. The policemen asked what he
but to a regular preliminary investigation. Section 7 of Rule was holding in his hands. After resisting for awhile, he
112 cannot be invoked to justify petitioner's inquest eventually showed his wallet. Crushed marijuana residue was
investigation. Said section clearly provides that "when a found inside. After being brought to the station, this man was
person is lawfully arrested without a warrant for an offense identified as Alain Manalili.
cognizable by the RTC, the complaint or information may be
filed by the offended party, peace officer or fiscal without a ISSUE: W/N the warrantless search was reasonable and
preliminary investigation having been first conducted, on the evidence obtained be admissible in court?
basis of the affidavit of the offended party or arresting officer
or person." RATIO: YES. Search was considered to be a “stop and frisk”,
The records do not show that petitioner was "lawfully which is one of the exceptions to the general rule against a
arrested." For one the petitioner was not arrested on search without a warrant. Stop and frisk is defined as the right
September 15, 1997, as his counsel persuaded the arresting of a police officer to stop a citizen on the street, interrogate
officers that he would instead be presented in the preliminary him, and pat him for weapons. In the interest of crime
investigation to be conducted in Cebu City on September 17, prevention, a police officer may approach a person, in
1997. For another, the arresting officers had no legal authority appropriate circumstances and manner, for purposes of
to make a warrantless arrest of the petitioner for a crime investigating possible criminal behavios even though there is
committed some two (2) months before. As held in Go v. CA: insufficient probable cause to make an actual arrest.

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 4
forcibly opening his desk drawers and retrieving
In the case at hand, the policemen had documents/correspondences between Doc Martin and his
sufficient reason to stop petitioner to investigate if paramours (if he asks, there are about 157 yata). She used
he was actually high on drugs because he had red these documents as evidence for their legal separation case
eyes, he was wobbling like a drunk, and they had and disqualification from medical practice against her
information that the location was a popular hangout husband.
for drug addicts. Trial court and CA ordered Zulueta to return the documents of
Martin and told them that the those documents are not
ART 3, Section 3 admissible as evidence.
1. The privacy of communication and correspondence
shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the Issue:
court, or when public safety or order requires W/N the documents Zulueta took from her husband is
otherwise, as prescribed by law. admissible in court. NO
2. Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the W/N the documents should be returned to her husband. YES
preceding section shall be inadmissible for any
purpose in any proceeding. Ratio:
The initimacies between husband and wife do not
justify any one of them in breaking the drawers of
the cabinet to look for telltale evidence. Even if they
EXCLUSIONARY RULE are married, it does not mean that he no longer has
the right of privacy as an individual. Since the right
SALCEDO-ORTANEZ V. COURT OF APPEALS of privacy was violated, the documents gathered by
Zulueta is inadmissible because they were illegally
Facts: obtained.

Rafael Ortanez filed a complaint fo annulment of marriage

against petitioner Teresita Salcedo-Ortanez on grounds of lack People v. Marti
of marriage license and / or psychological incapacity of the
petitioner. Among the exhibits offered by Rafael were 3 Facts:
cassette tapes of alleged telephone conversations between Marti and his common-law wife, Shirley Reyes, went to the
petitioner and unidentified persons. The tape recordings were booth of the “Manila Packing and Export Forwarders” in the
made and obtained when Rafael allowed his friends from the Pistang Pilipino Complex, Ermita, Manila, carrying with them 4
military to wire tap his home telephone. gift-wrapped packages. Anita Reyes (no relation to Shirley)
attended to them.
Issue: W/N the tapes were admissible as evidence?
Marti informed Anita that he was sending the packages to a
Ruling: friend in Zurich, Switzerland. Anita then asked if she could
examine and inspect the packages. Marti refused, assuring
No. Rep Act No. 4200 entitled “An Act to Prohibit and her that the packages simply contained books, cigars, and
Penalize Wire Tapping and Other Related Violationz of the gloves. The 4 packages were placed inside a brown
Privacy of Communication, and for other purposes” expressly corrugated box.
makes such tape recordings inadmissible in evidence. The
relevant provisions are as follows: Before delivery of the box, Job Reyes (husband of Anita),
following the standard operating procedure, opened the box
Section 1: it shall be unlawful for any person, not for final inspection. When he opened the box, he notices a
being authorized by all the parties to any private peculiar odor emitted from it. His curiosity aroused, he
communication or spoken word, to tap and wire or squeezed one of the bundles allegedly containing gloves and
cable, or by using any other device or arrangement, felt dried leaves inside. Opening one of the bundles, he pulled
to secretly overhear, intercept, or record such out a cellophane wrapper protruding from the opening of one
communication or spoken word by using a device of the gloves. He made an opening on one of the cellophane
commonly known as a tape recorder, or however wrappers and took several grams of the contents.
otherwise described.
After examination of the sample by the NBI, dried marijuana
Section 4: Any communication or spoken word, or the leaves were found to have been contained inside the
existence of contents, substance, purport or meaning cellophane wrappers.
of the same or any part thereof, or any information
therein contained, obtained or secured by any person Marti was charged with violation of RA 6425 (Dangerous
in violating of the preceding sections of this Act shall Drugs Act).
NOT be admissible in evidence in any judicial,
quasi0judicial, legislative or administrative hearing or Issue:
investigation 1. W/N his constitutional right against unreasonable search
and seizure was violated? NO.
Absent a clear showing that both parties to the 2. W/N the same should be inadmissible in evidence? NO.
telephone conversation allowed the recording of the same,
the INADMISSIBILITY of the subject tapes is mandatory. Held:
1. The case at bar assumes a peculiar character since the
evidence sought to be excluded was primarily discovered and
obtained by a private person, acting in a private capacity and
Zuleta v. CA without the intervention and participation of State authorities.
In the absence of governmental interference, the liberties
Facts: guaranteed by the Constitution cannot be invoked against the
Cecilia Zulueta is the wife of Dr Martin. Suspecting him of State.
infidelity, she stole some documents from his office by The constitutional proscription against unlawful searches and

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 5
seizures therefore applies as a restraint directly only against Eusebio, a private individual. Besides, other evidence proved
the government and it agencies tasked with the enforcement his guilt. Test showed nitrate in his hands and the testimony
of the law. Thus, it could only be invoked against the State to of his daughter was accorded great weight.
whom the restraint against arbitrary and unreasonable
exercise of power is imposed. He was charged of the crime parricide with the special
aggravating circumstance of the use of an unlicensed firearm.
2. Said inspection was reasonable and a standard operation
procedure on the part of Mr. Reyes as a precautionary
measure before delivery of packages to the Bureau of Waterous Drug Corp. V NLRC
Customs or the Bureau of Posts.
Where the contraband articles are identified without a PONENTE: Davide
trespass on the part of the arresting officer, there is not the
search that is prohibited by the constitution. Facts:
- Antonia Melodia Catolico was hired as a pharmacist
Doctrine: by Waterous Drug Corp.
The protection against unreasonable searches and - Catolico sold to YSP Inc. 10 bottles of Voren Tablets
seizures cannot be extended to acts committed by at P384 per unit. However, the normal selling price is
private individuals so as to bring it within the ambit P320 per unit. Catolico overcharged by P64 per unit
of alleged unlawful intrusion by the government. for a total of P640
- YSP sent a check payable to Catolico as a “refund”
Ramirez for the jacked-up price. It was sent in an envelope
addressed to her
People v. Medoza - Saldana, the clerk of Waterous Drug Corp. opened
the envelope and saw that there was a check for
Facts: P640 for Catolico.
On November 11, 1988, OCTAVIO MENDOZA, his wife CECILIA - Waterous Drug Corp. ordered the termination of
and their 10 yr. Old daughter CHARMAINE went to the Catolico for acts of dishonesty.
birthday party of a relative of Octavio In Mcdo, Harrison Plaza.
During the party, Octavio left without telling his wife and kid, Issue:
and went to KFC and drank beer. (KFC has beer??? Mura - W/N the check is admissible as evidence
kaya?J) Since Cecilia and Charamaine couldn’t find him in the
party, they went home at #2 TRAMO ST. CAMELLA HOMES, Held:
PHASE III, PAMPLONA, LAS PINAS. They arrived home at 7pm - Yes
and left again to go to Cecilia’s parents in Bacoor to bring
perfume. Octavio still was not home. They got home around Ratio:
9pm and saw Octavio’s car parked in the garage of their - Marti ruling: the Bill of Rights does not protect
neighbor. All the lights were opened but the front door was citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures
locked. After a while, Octavio opened the back door and let perpetrated by private individuals
them in. He was drunk and told Charmaine to get cold water - Despite this, the SC ruled that there was
and douse him. She followed and was instructed to go to her insufficient evidence of cause for the dismissal of
room. She went and got ready for bed. She heard her parents Catolico
arguing about them leaving the party without Octavio.
Afterwards, she heard THREE GUNSHOTS, ran to their room
and saw her mom on the floor bleeding. She also saw her dad Ople
hide a gun under the bed. Octavio called his brother-in-law
Sgt. Antonio Gabac. When Gabac arrived, they all brought him KMU v. Dir. Gen. NEDA
to Prepetual Help Hospital where Cecila was decalred d.o.a.
The policemen investigated Gabac and found a gun in his Facts:
waist. A .38 caliber revolver. He told them that Octavio
handed it over to him as soon as he arrived at the crime - Pres Arroyo issued EO 420 requiring government
scene. Cecilia’s father, Alipio Eusebio learned of his agencies and GOCCs to streamline and harmonize
daughter’s death and that valuable were being taken away their ID systems and authorizing for such purpose the
from her house. He and his sons decided to go there and Dir Gen of NEDA to implement the same
remove the rest of the property, including a memorandum - The purpose of said order is to reduce cost and
receipt signed by Octavio and a mission order authorizing him provide greater convenience to those transacting
to carry such weapon. At court, Charmaine testified that she with the government
saw her father hide the gun under the bed. On her second Issue:
testimony, she said she saw no such act. Octavio also denied - W/N E.O. 420 is unconstitutional because it infringes
that he killed his wife and that he owned that gun. He said on the citizen’s right to privacy? No.
that the memorandum receipt and mission order were illegally Ratio:
procured by Eusebio in violation of his right against - The right to privacy does not bar the adoption of
unreasonable search and seizure. reasonable ID systems by government entities. Some
one hundred other countries have compulsory
Issue (for Section 2): Was Octavio’s constitutional right national ID systems. Even with EO 420, the
against unreasonable search and seizure violated when Philippines will still fall under the countries that do
Eusebio took the memorandum receipt and mission order and not have compulsory national ID systems but allow
brought it to court? only sectoral cards for social security, health
services, and other specific purposes.
Held: NO. The constitutional protection against unreasonable - Without a reliable ID system, government entities
searches and seizures refers to immunity of one’s person from like GSIS, SSS, Philhealth, and LTO cannot perform
intereference from THE GOVERNMENT and it cannot be effectively and efficiently their mandated functions
extended to acrs committed by PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS. In this under existing laws.
case, the articles were discovered by Cecilia’s father, Alipio - Petitioners have not shown how EO 420 will violate

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 6
their right to privacy. Petitioners cannot show such possession of firearms.
violation by a mere facial examination of EO 420
because EO 420 narrowly draws the data collection,
recording and exhibition while prescribing Art III, Sec 4: No law shall be passed abridging the freedom
comprehensive safeguards. of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the
- EO 420 applies only to government entities that people to peacefully assemble and petition the government
already maintain ID systems and issue ID cards for redress of grievances
pursuant to their regular functions under existing
laws. EO 420 does not grant such government
entities any power that they do not already possess
under existing laws. PRIOR RESTRAINT
WAIVER UNDER SECTiON 2 and 3
Near v. State of Minnesota
Damaso
The State of Minnesota enjoined the publication of the
newspaper The Saturday Press for being malicious,
scandalous and defamatory which was in violation of Chapter
Spouses Veroy v. Layague 285 of the Sessions Laws of Minnesota. The 9 articles in
(Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunitions in question were about a Jewish Gangster who was in control of
Furtherance of Rebellion) gambling, bootlegging and racketeering and the officers and
Facts: agencies were not energetically performing their duties. Most
Petitioner spouses owned and formerly resided at No. 13 of the charges were directed against the Chief of Police and
Isidro St., Skyline Village. Catalunan Grande, Davao City. They the mayor was also accused of inefficiency and dereliction.
transferred to 130 K-8th St., East Kamias, Quezon City, on One of the original defendants in this case, Cullard, was
account of Leopoldo’s promotion as SSS Assistant assassinated after the first issue of the periodical was
Administrator. The care and upkeep of their residence in published and the articles made serious accusations against
Davao City was left to 2 houseboys, Jimmy Favia and Eric the public officers in connection with the prevalence of crimes
Burgos, who had their assigned quarters at a portion of the and the failure to expose and punish them. The ruling of the
premises.On April 12, 1990, Capt. Reynaldo Obrero of the direct court found the publication guilty of the violation and
Talomo Patrol Station, PC/INP, acting upon a directive issued enjoin the defendants from producing, editing, circulating,
by Metrodiscom Commander Col. Franco Calida, raided the having in their possession, selling or giving away any
house of herein petitioners in Davao City on information that publication whatsoever which is malicious, scandalous or
the said residence was being used as a safehouse of rebel defamatory. Near, who is the sole owner of The Saturday
soldiers. They were able to enter the yard with the help of the Press says that the statute was in violation of the Fourteenth
caretakers but did not enter the house since the owner was Amendment. The State of Minnesota's defense was that it was
not present and they did not have a search warrant. Petitioner a valid exercise of the police power of the state because such
Ma. Luisa was contacted by telephone in her Quezon City publication injures reputation and invite public reprobation
residence by Capt. Obrero to ask permission to search the and constitute scandal.
house in Davao City as it was reportedly being used as a
hideout and recruitment center of rebel soldiers. She agreed ISSUE:
on the condition that the search be conducted in the presence whether or not such statute authorizing such proceedings in
of Major Ernesto Macasaet, an officer of the PC/INP, Davao restraint of publication is consistent with the conception of
City and a long time family friend of the Veroys. liberty of the press from the guaranty to prevent prior restaint
upon publication?
Another search was conducted the following day. A locksmith
had to be employed to open the padlock of the door leading to HELD:
the children's room where Capt. Obrero and Major Macasaet no it is not.
recovered a .45 cal. handgun with a magazine and sacks
containing printed materials of RAM-SFP. A search of the Ruling:
children's recreation and study area revealed a big travelling
bag containing lothing for men whereas a plastic bag Every freeman has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments
containing assorted medicines and religious pamphlets was he pleases before the public; to forbid this is to destroy the
found in the master's bedroom. freedom of the press. There should be no prior restraint from
Issue: the executive or the legislature to ensure the freedom of the
W/N the search and seizure done in the Davao City house of press. People who were or will be injured by certain
the Veroys were legal publications have libel as a source of remedy. In this case the
Held: ruling of direct court provided for what was clearly a prior
No, the case does not fall within the exeptions to warrantess restraint to the publication, "enjoin the defendants from
search. The reason for searching the house of herein producing, editing, circulating, having in their possession,
petitioners is that it was reportedly being used as a hideout selling or giving away any publication whatsoever which is
and recruitment center for rebel soldiers. While Capt. Obrero malicious, scandalous or defamatory." If they violate such
was able to enter the compound, he did not enter the house restraint they would be held in contempt of court. The
because he did not have a search warrant and the owners vigilance of the press is important to protect the people from
were not present. This shows that he himself recognized the unfaithful officials and from the impairment of the
need for a search warrant, hence, he did not persist in fundamental security of life and property by criminal alliances
entering the house but rather contacted the Veroys to seek and official neglect. The truth or falsehood of the articles
permission to enter the same. Permission was indeed granted published may be dealt with in a case of libel. The freedom of
by Ma. Luisa Veroy to enter the house but only to ascertain the press is guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment and
the presence of rebel soldiers. Under the circumstances it is the statute of the State of Minnesota is found to be
undeniable that the police officers had ample time to procure unconstitutional for putting prior restraint on publication.
a search warrant but did not. The articles seized, having been
confiscated illegally, are protected by the exclusionary
principle and cannot be used as evidence against the
Freedman v. Maryland
petitioners in the criminal action against them for illegal

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 7
justification for the enforcement of such a [prior] restraint?
Facts: NO.
Appellant sought to challenge the constitutionality of the Held:
Maryland motion picture censorship statute and exhibited the Any system of prior restraints of expression comes to this
film, “Revenge at Daybreak” at his Baltimore theatre without Court bearing a heavy presumption against its constitutional
first submitting the picture to the State Board of Censors. The validity. The Government “thus carries a heavy burden of
State conceded that the picture did not violate statutory showing justification for the imposition of such a restraint.”
standards and he would have gotten a license if he properly
submitted for one. Since he didn’t, he was convicted for From Wikipedia:
violation of Section 2 of the act. The First Amendment states that no federal law can be made
Appellant argues that Section 2 of the act presents a danger abridging the freedom of the press, but a few landmark cases
of unduly suppressing protected expression. He focuses in the 20th century had established precedents creating
particularly on the procedure for an initial decision by the exceptions to that rule. The exception was the grave and
censorship board, which, without any judicial participation, probable danger rule. In Dennis v. United States, the wording
effectively bars any disapproved film, unless and until the was changed to the grave and irreparable danger standard.
exhibitor undertakes a time-consuming appeal to the The idea is that if a certain message will likely cause a “grave
Maryland courts and succeeds in having the Board’s decision and irreparable” danger to the American public when
reversed. expressed, then the message’s prior restraint could be
There is no statutory provision for judicial participation in the considered an acceptable infringement of civil liberties.
procedure which bars a film, nor even assurance of prompt
judicial review. Risk of delay is built into the Maryland
procedure because no time limit is imposed for completion of Iglesia ni Cristo v. CA
Board action.
Facts:
Issue: Certain episodes of the program “Ang Iglesia ni Cristo” were
Whether or not the Maryland statute violates freedom of considered by the Board of Review for Moving Pictures and
expression. Television were considered as X-rated and not for public
viewing. The Board considered them as X-rated because they
Held: Yes. allegedly attacked beliefs of other religions. INC filed a case
against the Board in the LC. The LC ruled that the Board
Rationale: committed grave abuse of discretion when it disallowed the
A noncriminal process which requires the prior submission of a airing of the episodes. However, when the case reached the
film to a censor avoids constitutional infirmity only if it takes CA, the CA reversed the decision of the LC. Hence the appeal
place under procedural safeguards designed to obviate the to the SC.
dangers of a censorship system.
1. The burden of providing that the film is unprotected Issue: W/N freedom of speech / religion was violated.
expression must rest on the censor.
2. While the State may require advance submission of all Ruling.Yes.
films, in order to proceed effectively to bar all showings of
unprotected films, the requirement cannot be administered in Ratio:
a manner which would lend an effect of finality to the censor’s
determination whether a film constitutes protected Religious profession and worship has a two-fold aspect namely
expression. freedom to believe and freedom to act on one’s beliefs. The
The exhibit must be assured, by statute or first is absolute , while the second is subject to regulation
authoritative judicial construction that the censor will, within a where the belief is translated into external acts that affect the
specified brief period, either issue a license or go to court to public welfare. The exercise of religious freedom can be
restrain showing the film. regulated by the State when it will bring about the clear and
The Maryland scheme fails to provide adequate present danger of some substantive evil which the State is
safeguards against undue inhibition of protected expression, duty bound to prevent. Deeply enshrined in the Constitution is
and this renders the Section 2 requirement of prior submission its hostility against all prior restraints on speech, including
of films to the Board an invalid previous restraint. religious speech. Hence, any act that restrains speech is
1. Once the censor disapproves the film, the exhibitor must presumed to be invalid and it is up to the Board to overthrow
assume the burden of instituting judicial proceedings and of the presumption. Furthermore, the so-called “attacks” are
persuading the courts that the film is protected expression. mere criticisms of some of the deeply held dogmas and tenets
2. Once the Board has acted against a film, exhibition is of other religions. The ruling made by the CA clearly
prohibited pending judicial review, however protracted. Under suppresses petitioner’s freedom of speech and interferes with
the statute, appellant could have been convicted if he had its right to free exercise of religion. The Board may disagree
shown the film after unsuccessfully seeking a license, even with the criticisms against other religions but that gives it no
though no court had ever ruled on the obscenity of the film. excuse to interdict such criticisms, however, unclean they
3. It is abundantly clear that the Maryland statute provides no may be. The respondent board cannot prohibit the speech of
assurance of prompt judicial determination. petitioner simply because it attacks other religions, even if
said religion happens to be the most numerous church in our
country. The bedrock of freedom of religion is freedom of
New York Times Co. v. United States thought and it is best served by encouraging the marketplace
of dueling ideas. When the luxury of time permits, the
Facts: marketplace of ideas demands that speech should be met by
The United States seeks to enjoin the New York Times and the more speech for it is the spark of opposite speech, the heat of
Washington Post from publishing the contents of a classified colliding ideas that can fan the embers of truth. Is the clear
study entitled, “History of U.S. Decision-Making Process on and present danger rule applicable to the case? The clear and
Viet Nam Policy. present danger rule dictates that “it is only where it is
unavoidably necessary to prevent an immediate and grave
Issue: danger to the security and welfare of the community that
W/N the government has met the “heavy burden of showing infringement of religious freedom may be justified, and only to

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 8
the smallest extent necessary to avoid the danger. There was except the security guard of the building; and fifth,
no evidence given to prove the harm the episodes might bring policemen stationed themselves at the vicinity of the Daily
about. Prior restraint on speech, including religious speech, Tribune offices. Thereafter, a wave of warning came from
cannot be justified by hypothetical fears but only by the government officials. Presidential Chief of Staff Michael
showing of a substantive and imminent evil which has taken Defensor was quoted as saying that such raid was “meant to
the life of a reality already on ground. There are four show a ‘strong presence,’ to tell media outlets not to
instances where the clear and present danger test applies connive or do anything that would help the rebels in
namely: (1) speeches that advocates dangerous ideas, (2) bringing down this government.” Director General
speeches that provoke a hostile audience reaction, (3) Lomibao further stated that “if they do not follow the
speeches out of contempt and (4) release of information that standards –and the standards are if they would
endangers a fair trial. contribute to instability in the government, or if they
do not subscribe to what is in General Order No. 5 and
Proc. No. 1017 – we will recommend a ‘takeover.’”
DAVID V. MACAPAGAL ARROYO National Telecommunications Commissioner Ronald Solis
(May 3, 2006) urged television and radio networks to “cooperate” with the
Ponente: Sandoval-Guttierez government for the duration of the state of national
emergency. He warned that his agency will not
Facts: These seven (7) consolidated petitions allege that in hesitate to recommend the closure of any broadcast
issuing Presidential Proclamation No. 1017 (PP 1017) and outfit that violates rules set out for media coverage
General Order No. 5 (G.O. No. 5), President Macapagal-Arroyo during times when the national security is threatened.
committed grave abuse of discretion. Petitioners contend that
respondent officials of the Government, in their professed On March 3, 2006, President Arroyo issued PP 1021 declaring
efforts to defend and preserve democratic institutions, are that the state of national emergency has ceased to exist.
actually trampling upon the very freedom guaranteed and
protected by the Constitution. Hence, such issuances are void Issue: a) W/N PP1017 violates the constitutional guarantees
for being unconstitutional. of freedom of the press, of speech and of assembly? YES
b) W/N the search/raid of The Daily Tribune was
On February 24, 2006, as the nation celebrated the 20th constitutional? NO
Anniversary of the Edsa People Power I, President Arroyo
issued PP 1017 declaring a state of national emergency. On Ratio:
the same day, the President issued G. O. No. 5 implementing a) Not only was their right against warrantless arrest violated,
PP 1017. In their presentation of the factual bases of PP 1017 but also their right to peaceably assemble. Section 4 of Article
and G.O. No. 5, respondents stated that the proximate cause III guarantees:
behind the executive issuances was the conspiracy among “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of
some military officers, leftist insurgents of the New People’s expression, or of the press, or the right of the people
Army (NPA), and some members of the political opposition in peaceably to assemble and petition the government for
a plot to unseat or assassinate President Arroyo. They redress of grievances.”
considered the aim to oust or assassinate the President and “Assembly” means a right on the part of the citizens to meet
take-over the reigns of government as a clear and present peaceably for consultation in respect to public affairs. It is a
danger. necessary consequence of our republican institution and
The Office of the President announced the cancellation of all complements the right of speech. As in the case of freedom
programs and activities related to the 20th anniversary of expression, this right is not to be limited, much less denied,
celebration of People Power 1 and revoked the permits to hold except on a showing of a clear and present danger of a
rallies issued earlier by the local governments. Justice substantive evil that Congress has a right to prevent. In other
Secretary Raul Gonzales stated that political rallies, which to words, like other rights embraced in the freedom of
the President’s mind were organized for purposes of expression, the right to assemble is not subject to previous
destabilization, are cancelled. Presidential Chief of Staff restraint or censorship. It may not be conditioned upon the
Michael Defensor announced that “warrantless arrests and prior issuance of a permit or authorization from the
take-over of facilities, including media, can already be government authorities except, of course, if the assembly is
implemented.” intended to be held in a public place, a permit for the use of
such place, and not for the assembly itself, may be validly
Notwithstanding the ban, some groups of protesters still required.
pursued the march to EDSA Shrine the following day. The
police violently dispersed the crowds & conducted arrests The ringing truth here is that petitioner David, et al. were
invoking PP1017. During the dispersal of the rallyists along arrested while they were exercising their right to peaceful
EDSA, police arrested (without warrant) petitioner Randolf S. assembly. They were not committing any crime, neither was
David, a professor at the University of the Philippines and there a showing of a clear and present danger that warranted
newspaper columnist. In G.R. No. 171409, petitioners Cacho- the limitation of that right. As can be gleaned from
Olivares and Tribune Publishing Co., Inc. claimed that on circumstances, the charges of inciting to sedition and
February 25, 2006, the CIDG operatives “raided and violation of BP 880 were mere afterthought. Even the
ransacked without warrant” their office. Three policemen Solicitor General, during the oral argument, failed to justify
were assigned to guard their office as a possible “source of the arresting officers’ conduct.
destabilization.” Again, the basis was PP 1017. In De Jonge v. Oregon, it was held that peaceable assembly
cannot be made a crime, thus:
G.R. No. 171409, (Cacho-Olivares, et al.) presents another
facet of freedom of speech i.e., the freedom of the press. Peaceable assembly for lawful discussion cannot be made a
Petitioners’ narration of facts, which the Solicitor General crime. The holding of meetings for peaceable political action
failed to refute, established the following: first, the Daily cannot be proscribed. Those who assist in the conduct of such
Tribune’s offices were searched without warrant; second, the meetings cannot be branded as criminals on that score. The
police operatives seized several materials for publication; question, if the rights of free speech and peaceful assembly
third, the search was conducted at about 1:00 o’ clock in the are not to be preserved, is not as to the auspices under which
morning of February 25, 2006; fourth, the search was the meeting was held but as to its purpose; not as to the
conducted in the absence of any official of the Daily Tribune relations of the speakers, but whether their utterances

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 9
transcend the bounds of the freedom of speech which the be so rash as to disobey.
Constitution protects. If the persons assembling have
committed crimes elsewhere, if they have formed or are Undoubtedly, the The Daily Tribune was subjected to these
engaged in a conspiracy against the public peace and order, arbitrary intrusions because of its anti-government
they may be prosecuted for their conspiracy or other sentiments. This Court cannot tolerate the blatant disregard
violations of valid laws. But it is a different matter when of a constitutional right even if it involves the most defiant of
the State, instead of prosecuting them for such our citizens. Freedom to comment on public affairs is
offenses, seizes upon mere participation in a essential to the vitality of a representative democracy. It is
peaceable assembly and a lawful public discussion as the duty of the courts to be watchful for the constitutional
the basis for a criminal charge. rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachments
thereon.
On the basis of the above principles, the Court likewise
considers the dispersal and arrest of the members of KMU et
al. (G.R. No. 171483) unwarranted. Apparently, their dispersal SUBSEQUENT PUNISHMENT
was done merely on the basis of Malacañang’s directive
canceling all permits previously issued by local government People v. Perez
units. This is arbitrary. The wholesale cancellation of all
permits to rally is a blatant disregard of the principle that Facts:
“freedom of assembly is not to be limited, much less Perez shouted in a meeting a number of times: “The Filipinos,
denied, except on a showing of a clear and present like myself must use bolos for cutting off Wood’s (Gov.
danger of a substantive evil that the State has a right General) head for having recommended a bad thing for the
to prevent.” Tolerance is the rule and limitation is the Filipinos, for he has killed our independence.”
exception. Only upon a showing that an assembly presents a
clear and present danger that the State may deny the Act 292: Treason and Sedition Law.
citizens’ right to exercise it. Indeed, respondents failed to
show or convince the Court that the rallyists committed acts
amounting to lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. With the Issue:
blanket revocation of permits, the distinction between W/N Act 292 violates the freedom of speech and the right of
protected and unprotected assemblies was eliminated. assembly. NO
Moreover, under BP 880, the authority to regulate assemblies W/N there was a violation of Act 292. YES
and rallies is lodged with the local government units. They
have the power to issue permits and to revoke such permits Ratio: The provisions of Act 292 must not be interpreted so as
after due notice and hearing on the determination of the to abridge the freedom of speech and the right of the people
presence of clear and present danger. Here, petitioners were to assembly. Criticism is permitted to penetrate even to the
not even notified and heard on the revocation of their permits. foundations of Government. Criticism, no matter how severe,
The first time they learned of it was at the time of the on the Executive, Legislature or Judiciary. In within the range
dispersal. Such absence of notice is a fatal defect. When a of liberty of speech unless the intention and effect be
person’s right is restricted by government action, it behooves seditious.
a democratic government to see to it that the restriction is
fair, reasonable, and according to procedure.
b) The search is illegal for failing to comply with Rule 126 of
The Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure w/c lays down the DENNIS V. US
steps in the conduct of search and seizure. Not only that, the
search violated petitioners’ freedom of the press. The Facts: Petitioners were indicted in July 1948 for violation of the
best gauge of a free and democratic society rests in conspiracy provisions of the Smith Act. The indictment
the degree of freedom enjoyed by its media. In the charged the petitioners with willfully and knowingly conspiring
Burgos v. Chief of Staff this Court held that -- to organize as the Communist Party of the USA and were
As heretofore stated, the premises searched were the found guilty of the offense charged.
business and printing offices of the "Metropolitan Mail" and
the "We Forum” newspapers. As a consequence of the search Issue: Whether the Smith act may be constitutionally applied.
and seizure, these premises were padlocked and sealed, with
the further result that the printing and publication of said Held: Yes
newspapers were discontinued. The statue may be applied where there is a clear and present
danger of the substantive evil which the legislature has the
Such closure is in the nature of previous restraint or right to prevent. Bearing as it does, the marks of a question of
censorship abhorrent to the freedom of the press guaranteed law, the issue is properly one for the judge to decide.
under the fundamental law, and constitutes a virtual denial of
petitioners' freedom to express themselves in print. This state There mere fact that from the period of 1945-1948 petitioners
of being is patently anathematic to a democratic framework activities did not result in an attempt to overthrow the govt by
where a free, alert and even militant press is essential for the force and violence is of course no answer to the fact that
political enlightenment and growth of the citizenry. there was a group that was ready to make the attempt

While admittedly, the Daily Tribune was not padlocked and The formation by petitioners of such a highly organized
sealed like the “Metropolitan Mail” and “We Forum” conspiracy, with rigidly disciplined members subject to call
newspapers in the above case, yet it cannot be denied that when the leaders, these petitioners, felt that the time had
the CIDG operatives exceeded their enforcement duties. The come for action, coupled with the inflammable nature of world
search and seizure of materials for publication, the stationing conditions, similar uprisings in other countries, and the touch
of policemen in the vicinity of the The Daily Tribune offices, and go nature of our relations with countries with whom
and the arrogant warning of government officials to media, petitioners were in the very lease ideologically attuned,
are plain censorship. It is that officious functionary of the convince us that their convictions were justified on the score.
repressive government who tells the citizen that he may
speak only if allowed to do so, and no more and no less than And this analysis disposes of the contention that a conspiracy
what he is permitted to say on pain of punishment should he to advocate, as distinguished from the advocacy itself, can’t
be constitutionally restrained because it compromises only

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 10
the preparation. It is the existence of the conspiracy, which evil affecting the electoral process, not merely in danger of
creates the danger. If the ingredients of the reaction are happening, but actually in existence, and likely to continue
present, we can’t blind the govt to wait until the catalyst is unless curbed or remedied. To assert otherwise would be to
added. close one's eyes to the realities of the situation. Nor can we
ignore the express legislative purpose apparent in the proviso
"that simple expressions of opinion and thoughts concerning
Gonzales v. Comelec the election shall not be considered as part of an election
campaign," and in the other proviso "that nothing herein
Facts: stated shall be understood to prevent any person from
Act No. 4880 as an exercise of the police power of the state, expressing his views on current political problems or issues, or
designed to insure a free, orderly and honest election by from mentioning the names of the candidates for public office
regulating "conduct which Congress has determined harmful if whom he supports." Such limitations qualify the entire
unstrained and carried for a long period before elections it provision restricting the period of an election campaign or
necessarily entails huge expenditures of funds on the part of partisan political activity.
the candidates, precipitates violence and even deaths, results
in the corruption of the electorate, and inflicts direful The right of association is affected. Political parties have less
consequences upon public interest as the vital affairs of the freedom as to the time during which they may nominate
country are sacrificed to purely partisan pursuits." candidates; the curtailment is not such, however, as to render
meaningless such a basic right. Their scope of legitimate
It states that: activities, save this one, is not unduly narrowed. Neither is
SEC. 50-A. Prohibition of too early nomination of Candidates. - there infringement of their freedom to assemble. They can do
It shall be unlawful for any political party, Political Committee so, but not for such a purpose. We sustain in validity.
or Political group to nominate candidates for any elective
public office voted for at large earlier than one hundred and We give due recognition to the legislative concern to cleanse,
fifty days immediately preceding an election, and for any and, if possible, render spotless, the electoral process. There
other elective public office earlier than ninety days is full acceptance by the Court of the power of Congress,
immediately preceding an election. under narrowly drawn legislation to impose the necessary
restrictions to what otherwise would be liberties traditionally
SEC. 50-B. Limitation upon the period of Election Campaign or accorded the widest scope and the utmost deference,
Partisan Political Activity. - It is unlawful for any person freedom of speech and of the press, of assembly, and of
whether or not a voter or candidate, or for any group or association. We cannot, however, be recreant to the trust
association of persons, whether or not a political party or reposed on us; we are called upon to safeguard individual
political committee, to engage in an election campaign or rights
partisan political activity except during the period of one
hundred twenty days immediately preceding an election There is clear and present danger: the statute is to be
involving a public office voted for at large and ninety days assayed by considering the degree of probability and
immediately preceding an election for any other elective imminence with which "prolonged election campaigns" would
public office. increase the incidence of "violence and deaths," "dominion of
the rich in the political arena" and "corruption of the
electorate."
"Activities deemed to me “election campaign" or "partisan
political activity" Doctrine:
a) Forming organizations, associations, clubs, committees or Clear and present danger test: means that the evil
other groups of persons for the purpose of soliciting votes consequence of the comment or utterance must be extremely
and/or undertaking any campaign or propaganda for or serious and the degree of imminence extremely high' before
against a party or candidate; (b) holding political conventions, the utterance can be punished. The danger to be guarded
caucuses, conferences, meetings, rallies, parades, or other against is the 'substantive evil' sought to be prevented." It has
similar assemblies, for the purpose of soliciting votes and/or the advantage of establishing according to the above decision
undertaking any campaign or propaganda for or against a "a definite rule in constitutional law. It provides the criterion
candidate or party;(c) making speeches, announcements or as to what words may be public established."
commentaries or holding interviews for or against the election
or any party or candidate for public office; (d) publishing or Dangerous tendency rule: If the words uttered create a
distributing campaign literature or materials; (e) directly or dangerous tendency which the state has a right to prevent,
indirectly soliciting votes and/or undertaking any campaign or then such words are punishable. It is not necessary that some
propaganda for or against any party; (f) giving, soliciting, or definite or immediate acts of force, violence, or unlawfulness
receiving contributions for election campaign purposes, either be advocated. It is sufficient that such acts be advocated in
directly or indirectly." general terms. Nor is it necessary that the language used be
reasonably calculated to incite persons to acts of force,
Issue: violence, or unlawfulness. It is sufficient if the natural
W/N Act 4880 violates the freedom of speech. NO tendency and probable effect of the utterance be to bring
W/N it violates the right to assemble. NO about the substantive evil which the legislative body seeks to
prevent.
Held: Act 4880 is VALID
Balanced Interest Test (from Castro dissent): a wide range of
Ratio: factors are necessarily relevant in ascertaining the point or
Freedom of expression is not an absolute. It would be too line of equilibrium. Among these are (a) the social values and
much to insist that at all times and under all circumstances it importance of the specific aspect of the particular freedom
should remain unfettered and unrestrained. There are other restricted by the legislation; (b) the specific thrust of the
societal values that press for recognition. restriction, i.e., whether the restriction is direct or indirect,
whether or not the persons affected are few; (c) the value and
In considering whether it is violative of any of the above importance of the public interest sought to be secured by the
rights, we cannot ignore of course the legislative declaration legislation the reference here is to the nature and gravity of
that its enactment was in response to a serious substantive the evil which Congress seeks to prevent;(d) whether the

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 11
specific restriction decreed by Congress is reasonably newspaper and print media.
appropriate and necessary for the protection of such public Similar considerations apply in the area of national security.
interest; and (e) whether the necessary safeguarding of the The broadcast media have also established a uniquely
public interest involved may be achieved by some other pervasive presence in the lives of all Filipinos, Newspapers
measure less restrictive of the protected freedom. and current books are found only in metropolitan areas and in
the poblaciones of municipalities accessible to fast and
regular transportation. Even here, there are low income
Eastern Broadcasting Corp v. Dans masses who find the cost of books, newspapers, and
magazines beyond their humble means. Basic needs like food
Facts: This petition was filed to compel the respondents to and shelter perforce enjoy high priorities.
allow the reopening of Radio Station DYRE which had been On the other hand, the transistor radio is found everywhere.
summarily closed on grounds of national security. The television set is also becoming universal. Their message
The petitioner contended that it was denied due process when may be simultaneously received by a national or regional
it was closed on the mere allegation that the radio station was audience of listeners including the indifferent or unwilling who
used to incite people to sedition. it alleged that no hearing happen to be within reach of a blaring radio or television set.
was held and not a bit of proof was submitted to establish a The materials broadcast over the airwaves reach every person
factual basis for the closure. The petitioner was not informed of every age, persons of varying susceptibilities to persuasion,
beforehand why administrative action which closed the radio persons of different I.Q.s and mental capabilities, persons
station was taken against it. No action was taken by the whose reactions to inflammatory or offensive speech would be
respondents to entertain a motion seeking the reconsideration difficult to monitor or predict. The impact of the vibrant
of the closure action. The petitioner also raised the issue of speech is forceful and immediate. Unlike readers of the
freedom of speech. It appears from the records that the printed work, the radio audience has lesser opportunity to
respondents' general charge of "inciting people to commit cogitate analyze, and reject the utterance.
acts of sedition" arose from the petitioner's shift towards what (5) The clear and present danger test, therefore, must take
it stated was the coverage of public events and the airing of the particular circumstances of broadcast media into account.
programs geared towards public affairs. The supervision of radio stations-whether by government or
On March 25, 1985, before the Court could promulgate a through self-regulation by the industry itself calls for
decision squarely passing upon all the issues raised, the thoughtful, intelligent and sophisticated handling.
petitioner through its president, Mr. Rene G. Espina suddenly The government has a right to be protected against
filed a motion to withdraw or dismiss the petition. broadcasts which incite the listeners to violently overthrow it.
Radio and television may not be used to organize a rebellion
Issue: or to signal the start of widespread uprising. At the same
W/N there was a violation of due process? time, the people have a right to be informed. Radio and
W/N there was a violation of the freedom of speech? television would have little reason for existence if broadcasts
are limited to bland, obsequious, or pleasantly entertaining
Ruling: utterances. Since they are the most convenient and popular
The case having become moot and academic, the petitioner's means of disseminating varying views on public issues, they
motion to withdraw or dismiss the petition is hereby also deserve special protection.
GRANTED. (6) The freedom to comment on public affairs is essential to
the vitality of a representative democracy.
Ratio: (7) Broadcast stations deserve the special protection given to
Having been ruled moot and academic, the Court provides for all forms of media by the due process and freedom of
the following guidelines: expression clauses of the Constitution.
(1) The cardinal primary requirements in administrative
proceedings laid down by this Court in Ang Tibay v. Court of
Industrial Relations (69 Phil. 635) should be followed before a
broadcast station may be closed or its operations curtailed. AYER PRODUCTIONS VS. CAPULONG
(2) It is necessary to reiterate that while there is no controlling GR 82398 APRIL 29, 1988
and precise definition of due process, it furnishes an
unavoidable standard to which government action must FACTS:
conform in order that any deprivation of life, liberty, or In a letter dated December 16, 1987, Australian film maker
property, in each appropriate case, may be valid (Ermita- and
Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association v. City Mayor, petitioner Hal McElroy informed private respondent Juan
20 SCRA 849). Ponce Enrile
(3) All forms of media, whether print or broadcast, are entitled about the motion picture he intended to make, which was
to the broad protection of the freedom of speech and about the
expression clause. The test for limitations on freedom of EDSA Revolution. The respondent did not approve of the
expression continues to be the clear and present danger rule showing of
that words are used in such circumstances and are of such a the film and filed a complaint with application for Temporary
nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will Restraining Order (TRO) on February 23, 1988. On February
bring about the substantive evils that the lawmaker has a 24, 1988,
right to prevent the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati, Branch 134, issued a
(4) The clear and present danger test, however, does not lend TRO
itself to a simplistic and all embracing interpretation and set for hearing the application for preliminary injunction.
applicable to all utterances in all forums. In
Broadcasting has to be licensed. Airwave frequencies have to response, Hal McElroy filed a motion to dismiss with
be allocated among qualified users. A broadcast corporation opposition to the
cannot simply appropriate a certain frequency without regard petition for preliminary injunction. Petitioner Ayer Productions
for government regulation or for the rights of others. also
All forms of communication are entitled to the broad filed its own Motion to Dismiss, alleging lack of cause of action
protection of the freedom of expression clause. Necessarily, as the
however, the freedom of television and radio broadcasting is mini-series had not yet been completed. In an order dated
somewhat lesser in scope than the freedom accorded to March 16

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 12
1988, respondent court issued a writ of Preliminary Injunction Teofilo
against Guadiz of the RTC of Makati, Branch 147, TO DISMISS Civil
the petitioners. On March 22 1988, petitioner Ayer Case No.
Productions filed a 88-413 and to set aside and dissolve his TRO dated March 25
Petition for certiorari dated March 21 1988 with an urgent 1988
prayer for and any Preliminary Injunction that may have been issued by
Preliminary Injunction or Restraining Order. On March 23 him.
1988,
petitioner Hal McElroy also filed separate Petition for certiorari RATIONALE:
with 1. There was no "clear and present danger" or any violation of
Urgent prayer for a Restraining Order or Preliminary any
Injunction, dated right to privacy that private respondent could lawfully assert.
March 22, 1988. By a Resolution dated March 24, 1988, the 2. The subject relates to a highly critical stage in the history of
petitions this
were consolidated and Enrile was required to file a country and as such, must be regarded as having passed into
consolidated the public domain and as an appropriate subject for speech
answer. The Court also granted a TRO partially enjoining the and
implementation of the respondent Judge's Order of March 16 expression and coverage by any form of mass media.
1988 and 3. The extent of the intrusion upon the life of private
the Writ of Preliminary Injunction issued therein, and allowing respondent
the Juan Ponce Enrile that would be entailed by the production
petitioners to resume producing and filming those portions of and
the exhibition of "The Four Day Revolution" would be limited in
projected film that do not make any reference to private character.
respondent or 4. The right of privacy of a "public figure" is necessarily
his family or to any fictitious character based on the narrower
respondent. As a than that of an ordinary citizen. Private respondent has not
result, Enrile filed his Consolidated Answer on April 6, 1988, retired into the seclusion of simple private citizenship. He
invoking continues to be a "public figure.” He sits in a very public
his right of privacy. In a Manifestation dated March 30, 1988, place,
petitioner Hal McElroy informed the Court that a TRO dated the Senate of the Philippines.
March 25, 5. The line of equilibrium in the specific context of the instant
1988, was issued by Judge Teofilo Guadiz of the RTC of case
Makati, Branch between the constitutional freedom of speech and of
147, in Civil Case No. 88-413, entitled "Gregorio B. Honasan expressionand the right of privacy may be marked out in
vs. Ayer terms of a
Productions Pty. Ltd., McElroy Film Productions, Hal McElroy, requirement that the proposed motion picture must be fairly
Lope truthful and historical in its presentation of events.
Juban and PMP Motion for Pictures Production. Private Board as wel as the other government agencies consulted.
respondent filed General Fidel Ramos also signified his approval of the
a Counter-Manifestation on April 13, 1988. intended film production.

ISSUES:
Whether or not the production and filming of the projected SPEECH AND THE ELECTORAL PROCESS
mini-
series would constitute an unlawful intrusion into the privacy PABLITO SANIDAD vs. COMELEC (1990)
of the
private respondent. Facts: Republic Act No. 6766 ORGANIC ACT FOR CAR was
enacted into law. A plebiscite for the ratification of said
RESOLUTION: Organic Act was scheduled. COMELEC promulgated Resolution
The court concluded that the production and filming by No. 2167, to govern the conduct of the plebiscite. Petitioner
petitioners of Pablito V. Sanidad, a newspaper columnist of the "OVERVIEW"
the projected motion picture "The Four Day Revolution" does for the BAGUIO MIDLAND COURIER, assailed the
not, in constitutionality of Section 19 of Comelec Resolution No.
the circumstances of the case, constitute an unlawful 2167, which provides: Section 19. Prohibition on columnists,
intrusion upon commentators or announcers. During the plebiscite campaign
private respondent's "right of privacy." period, on the day before and on the plebiscite day, no mass
a. The Petitions for Certiorari are granted due course, and the media columnist, commentator, announcer or personality
March shall use his column or radio or television time to campaign
16, 1988 order of trial court granting a Writ of Preliminary for or against the plebiscite issues.
Injunction is
set aside. The limited TRO granted by the Court on March 24, Issue: Is Sec 19 of Comelec Resolution No. 2167 void and
1988 is unconstitutional because it violates the constitutional
modified, enjoining unqualifiedly the implementation of guarantees of the freedom of expression and of the press?
respondent
Judge's order of March 16, 1988 and made PERMANENT Held: Yes
b) Treating the Manifestations of petitioners dated March 30,
1988 and Ratio: Unlike a regular news reporter or news correspondent
April 4, 1988 as separate Petitions for Certiorari with Prayer who merely reports the news, a columnist, obviously and
for necessarily contains and reflects his opinions, views and
Preliminary Injunction or Restraining Order, the Court, in the beliefs on any issue or subject about which he writes.
exercise COMELEC Resolution No. 2167 constitutes a prior restraint on
of its plenary and supervisory jurisdiction, required Judge his constitutionally-guaranteed freedom of the press.

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 13
Art. IX-C of the 1987 Constitution granted to the Comelec was W/N section 11b violates the freedom of speech. NO
the power to supervise and regulate the use and enjoyment of
franchises, permits or other grants to the end that equal Rationale:
opportunity, time and space for candidates are ensured. Section 11 (b) does, of course, limit the right of free speech
Media practitioners exercising their freedom of expression and of access to mass media of the candidates themselves.
during plebiscite periods are neither the franchise holders nor The limitation, however, bears a clear and reasonable
the candidates. In fact, there are no candidates involved in a connection with the constitutional objective set out in Article
plebiscite. Therefore, Section 19 of Comelec Resolution No. IX(C) (4) and Article II (26) of the Constitution. For it is
2167 has no statutory basis. precisely in the unlimited purchase of print space and radio
and television time that the resources of the financially
affluent candidates are likely to make a crucial difference.
Here lies the core problem of equalization of the situations of
National Press Club v. COMELEC the candidates with deep pockets and the candidates with
shallow or empty pockets that Article IX(C) (4) of the
Facts: Constitution and Section 11 (b) seek to address. That the
The statutory text that petitioners ask us to strike down as statutory mechanism which Section 11 (b) brings into
unconstitutional is that of Section 11 (b) of Republic Act No. operation is designed and may be expected to bring about or
6646, known as the Electoral Reforms Law of 1987: promote equal opportunity, and equal time and space, for
political candidates to inform all and sundry about
Sec. 11 Prohibited Forms of Election Propaganda. � In themselves, cannot be gainsaid.
addition to the forms of election propaganda prohibited under
Section 85 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 881, it shall be unlawful; The limiting impact of Section 11 (b) upon the right to free
b) for any newspapers, radio broadcasting or television speech of the candidates themselves may be seen to be not
station, other mass media, or any person making use of the unduly repressive or unreasonable. For, once again, there is
mass media to sell or to give free of charge print space or air nothing in Section 11 (b) to prevent media reporting of and
time for campaign or other political purposes except to the commentary on pronouncements, activities, written
Commission as provided under Sections 90 and 92 of Batas statements of the candidates themselves. All other fora
Pambansa Blg. 881. Any mass media columnist, commentator, remain accessible to candidates, even for political
announcer or personality who is a candidate for any elective advertisements. The requisites of fairness and equal
public office shall take a leave of absence from his work as opportunity are, after all, designed to benefit the candidates
such during the campaign period. (Emphasis supplied) themselves.

Section 11 (b) of Republic Act No. 6646 should be taken

together with Sections 90 and 92 of B.P. Blg. 881, known as
the Omnibus Election Code of the Philippines, which provide Adiong v. Comelec
respectively as follows: Speech and Electoral Process

Sec. 90. Comelec space. The Commission shall procure space Facts: 13 January 1992 Comelec promulgated Resolution No.
in at least one newspaper of general circulation in every 2347.
province or city: Provided, however, That in the absence of
said newspaper, publication shall be done in any other Section 15(a) defines what is lawful election propaganda.
magazine or periodical in said province or city, which shall be “Pamphlets, leaflets, cards, decals, stickers, handwritten or
known as "Comelec Space" wherein candidates can announce printed letters, or other written or printed materials not more
their candidacy. Said space shall be allocated, free of charge, than eight and one-half (8-1/2) inches in width and fourteen
equally and impartially by the Commission among all (14) inches in length. Provided, That decals and stickers may
candidates within the area in which the newspaper is be posted only in any of the authorized posting areas
circulated. provided in paragraph (f) of Section 21 hereof.”

Sec. 92. Comelec time. The Commission shall procure radio Section 21 then defines what is unlawful election propaganda
and television time to be known as "Comelec Time" which “To draw, paint, inscribe, post, display or publicly exhibit any
shall be allocated equally and impartially among the election propaganda in any place, whether public or private,
candidates within the area of coverage of all radio and mobile or stationary, except in the COMELEC common posted
television stations. For this purpose, the franchise of all radio areas and/or billboards, at the campaign headquarters of the
broadcasting and television stations are hereby amended so candidate or political party, organization or coalition, or at the
as to provide radio or television time, free of charge, during candidate's own residential house or one of his residential
the period of the campaign. (Emphasis supplied) houses, if he has more than one: Provided, that such posters
The objective which animates Section 11 (b) is the equalizing, or election propaganda shall not exceed two (2) feet by three
as far as practicable, the situations of rich and poor (3) feet in size. (Emphasis supplied)”
candidates by preventing the former from enjoying the undue
advantage offered by huge campaign "war chests." Section 11 Blo Umpar Adiong was then a senatorial candidate and
(b) prohibits the sale or donation of print space and air time alleged that the two sections mentioned violate the Omnibus
"for campaign or other political purposes" except to the Election Code and RA 6646 insofar as unduly curtailing the
Commission on Elections ("Comelec"). Upon the other hand, rights of a private citizen to attach stickers to his vehicle.
Sections 90 and 92 of the Omnibus Election Code require the
Comelec to procure "Comelec space" in newspapers of Issue: Whether or not COMELEC has the power to prohibit the
general circulation in every province or city and "Comelec posting of stickers and decals on “mobile” places, public or
time" on radio and television stations. Further, the Comelec is private and limit their posting on designated areas.
statutorily commanded to allocate "Comelec space" and
"Comelec time" on a free of charge, equal and impartial basis Held: Petition granted Resolution No. 2347 Section 15(a)
among all candidates within the area served by the Section 21(f) declared void.
newspaper or radio and television station involved.
Ratio: Several reasons.
Issue: 1. Prohibition unduly infringes upon private citizens

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 14
right to free speech Sec 4 Art III, no public interest substantial
enough to warrant regulating free speech
2. Questioned sections of resolution void for ABS-CBN v. COMELEC
overbreadth
3. Intention to give rich and poor candidate equal FACTS:
footing during elections (this is found in the Consti) is not A reliable source informed the COMELEC that ABS-CBN has
impaired when one posts decals and stickers. Financial prepared a project to conduct a radio-TV coverage of the
considerations are inferior to the right to know and freedom of elections and to make an exit survey of the vote during the
speech. elections for national officials particularly for the President
and Vice-President, results of which shall be broadcasted
immediately. COMELEC, believing that such project might
Osmena v. COMELEC conflict with the official COMELEC count and the unofficial
quick-count of the NAMFREL, issued the assailed Resolution.
Facts: The Resolution approved the issuance of a restraining order to
Petitioners are candidates for public office: Osmena for stop ABS-CBN or any other groups, its agents or
President of the Philippines and Garcia for reelection as representatives from conducting such exit-survey.
governor of Cebu
The case is a Petition for Certiorari assailing the Resolution.
They are assailing RA 6646 or the Electoral Reforms Law of This court issued a TRO prayed by the petitioner. The exit
1987 which prohibits the mass media from selling or giving polls were actually conducted and reported by the media
free of charge print space or air time for campaign or other without any difficulty or problem. (Note: this concerns the
political purposes except to the COMELEC elections of May 1998 and the case is resolved on January
2000)
Issue:
W/N RA 6646 is valid? YES ISSUE:
W/N the COMELEC, in the exercise of its powers, can totally
Held: ban exit polls
1. There is no suppression of political ads but only a
regulation of the time and manner of advertising. The law's HELD & RATIO:
concern is not with the message or content of the ad but with NO. Absolute ban is unreasonable.
ensuring media equality between candidates with "deep Exit poll is a species of electoral survey for the purpose of
pockets." determining the probable result of an election by
2. The main purpose of 11(b) is regulatory. Any confidentially asking randomly selected voters whom the have
restriction on speech is only incidental. voted for immediately after they have officially cast their
3. The restriction on speech, is limited both as to time ballots. The results of the survey are announced to the public
and as to scope. It is reasonable because it applies only to the through mass media.
election period. It does not impose a ban on media political
advertising- it is a prohibition against paid or sponsored No law prohibits the holding and reporting of exit polls.
political advertising but mandating the COMELEC to procure Freedom of expression is a fundamental principle of our
print space and air time so that these can be allocated free of democratic government. It is a preferred right and therefore
charge to the candidates. stands on a higher level than substantive economic or other
4. O’Brien Test: A government regulation is sufficiently liberties. However, they are not immune to regulation by the
justified if it furthers an important or substantial governmental State in the exercise of its power.
interest; if the governmental interest is unrelated to the
suppression of free expression; and if the incident restriction There are two tests for testing the validity of restrictions to
on alleged First Amendment freedoms is no greater than is such freedoms – clear and present danger rule and dangerous
essential to the furtherance of that interest. The latter is an tendency rule. The Court adheres to the clear and present
appropriate test for restrictions on speech which, like 11(b), danger test. Hence the question is whether the words used
are content-neutral. These restrictions, are censorial and the words are used in such circumstances and are of such
therefore they bear a heavy presumption of constitutional nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will
invalidity. In addition. they will be tested for possible bring about the substantive evils that Congers has the right to
overbreadth and vagueness. prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree.
5. The dissent invokes the clear-and-present-danger
test and argues that "media ads do not partake of the 'real The Court always has ruled in favor of the freedom of
substantive evil' that the state has a right to prevent.” The expression and any restriction is treated as an exception. The
clear-and-present-danger test is not a sovereign remedy for power to exercise prior restraint is not to be presumed; rather
all free speech problems. It was originally formulated for the the presumption is against its validity. To justify a restriction,
criminal law and only later for free speech cases. It is the promotion of a substantial government interest must be
inappropriate as a test for determining the constitutional clearly shown. But even though the government’s purposes
validity of laws which are not concerned with the content of are legiltimate and substantial, they cannot be pursued by
political ads but only with their incidents. means that broadly stifle fundamental personal liberties when
6. The reason for this difference in the level of the end can be more narrowly achieved. When faced with
justification for the restriction of speech is that content-based borderline situations, this Court shall lean in favor of freedom.
restrictions distort public debate, have improper motivation, In order to justify a restriction of people’s freedoms of speech
and are usually imposed because of fear of how people will and of the press, the state’s responsibility of ensuring orderly
react to a particular speech. No such reasons underlie voting must far outweigh them.
content-neutral regulations. Applying the O'Brien test in this
case, we find that 11(b) of R.A. No. 6646 is a valid exercise of In the case at bar, COMELEC’s justification of destroying the
the power of the State to regulate media of communication or credibility and integrity of the electoral process are purely
information; that the regulation is unrelated to the speculative and clearly untenable. The assailed resolution is
suppression of speech; that any restriction on freedom of too broad since its application is without qualification as to
expression is only incidental and no more than is necessary to whether the polling is disruptive or not. The absolute ban
achieve the purpose of promoting equality. cannot be justified. It does not leave any alternative channel

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 15
of communication to gather the type of information obtained theorists, and other opinion takers. In effect, it shows a bias
through exit polling. There are other valid and reasonable for a particular subject matter, if not viewpoint, by referring
ways and means to achieve the COMELEC end of avoiding or personal opinion to statistical results.
minimizing disorder and confusion that may be brought about Sec 5.4 aims at the prevention of last-minute pressure on
by exit surveys. voters, the creation of bandwagon effect, "junking" of weak or
"losing" candidates, and resort to the form of election
Moreover, the sanctity and secrecy of the ballot is not cheating called "dagdag-bawas." Praiseworthy as these aims
sacrificed. Petitioner does not seek access to the ballots cast of the regulation might be, they cannot be attained at the
by the voters. The contents of the official ballots are not sacrifice of the fundamental right of expression, when such
actually exposed. Furthermore, the revelation of whom an aim can be more narrowly pursued by punishing unlawful
elector has voted for is not compulsory but voluntary. acts, rather than speech because of apprehension that such
speech creates the danger of such evils.

SWS v. COMELEC
FACTS: COMMERCIAL SPEECH
Petitioner, Social Weather Stations, Inc. (SWS), is a private
non-stock, non-profit social research institution conducting Rubin, Secretary of Treasury v. Coors Brewing Company
surveys in various fields brought this action for prohibition to
enjoin COMELEC from implementing Resolution 3636, The Federal Alcohol Administration Act (FAAA) prohibits beers
pursuant to Section 5.4 of RA. No.9006 (Fair Election Act), from displaying its alcohol content in its labels. The
which provides: Government's for this was to protect its interest in
Surveys affecting national candidates shall not be suppressing "strength wars" between brewing companies.
published 15 days before an election and surveys Coors submitted their labels for approval at the federal
affecting local candidates shall not be published seven Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) but the label
7 days before an election. was rejected. Now, Coors is contesting the constitutionality of
COMELEC contends that the prohibition on the publication of section 205(e)(2) of the FAAA alleging that it violates the First
election survey results is intended for the prevention of the Amendment's protection of Commercial Speech.
debasement of the electoral process resulting from
manipulated surveys, bandwagon effect, and absence of reply Issue: Does the section 205(e)(2) of the FAAA which bans
and that the impairment of freedom of expression is minimal, Brewing companies from displaying the alcohol content in
the restriction being limited both in duration and in scope as it their labels violate the protection of Commercial Speech
does not prohibit election survey results but only require
timeliness. HELD: YES
ISSUE:
W/N the restriction on the publication of election survey Rationale:
results constitutes a prior restraint on the exercise of freedom
of speech without any clear and present danger to justify such Both parties have agreed that information on labels
restraint. constitutes commercial speech. The case of Central Hudson
HELD: has identified several factors that courts should consider in
Yes. Sec 5.4 is invalid because (1) it imposes a prior restraint determining whether a regulation of commercial speech
on the freedom of expression, (2) it is a direct and total survives First Amendment scrutiny.
suppression of a category of expression even though such 1. It must concern a lawful activity and not be misleading
suppression is only for a limited period, and (3) the 2. Whether the asserted governmental interest is substantial
governmental interest sought to be promoted can be 3. Whether the regulation directly advances the governmental
achieved by means other than suppression of freedom of interest asserted
expression. 4. Whether it is not more extensive than necessary to serve
Section 5.4 of the Fair Election Act did not pass the O’Brien that interest
test which is the most influential test
Both parties agree that COORS seeks to disclose only truthful,
verifiable, and nonmisleading factual information about
alcohol content on its beer labels. as for the second factor the
Government identifies 2 interests. One is the goal of curbing
for distinguishing content-based from content neutral "strength wars" by beer brewer's who might seek to compete
regulation. In United States v. O 'Brien it was held that a for customers on the basis of alcohol content.They view that
government regulation is sufficiently justified granted the restricting disclosure regarding the particular product
following requisites: characteristic will decrease the extent to which consumers will
(1 ) it is within the constitutional power of the select the product on the basis of that characteristics. COORS
Government; however contends that this was not the purpose that FAAA
[2] if it furthers an important or substantial intended to achieve. In fact the BATF requires wines and other
governmental interest; sprits to disclose alcohol content on its labels. The FAAA's
[3] if the governmental interest is unrelated to the general thrust appears to favor greater disclosure than less.
suppression of free expression; and The goal of suppressing "strength wars" was found to be a
[4] if the incidental restriction on alleged First substantial interest. the next thing to look at is whether the
Amendment freedoms [of speech, expression and legislature 's means fit its end. it was concluded that it cannot
press] is no greater than is essential to the furtherance directly and materially advance its asserted interest because
of that interest of the overall irrationality of the Government's scheme. The
Sec 5.4 fails to meet criterion 3 and 4 of the O 'Brien test. prohibition only applies to States who accept such statute and
By prohibiting the publication of election survey results the rule does not prohibit disclosing the same information in
because of the possibility that such publication might advertisements which would seem to constitute a more
undermine the integrity of the election, Sec. 5.4 actually influential weapon in any strength wars than labels. There is
suppresses a whole class of expression, while allowing the little chance that it can directly advance its aims. The
expression of opinion concerning the same subject matter by Government had failed to present any credible evidence
newspaper columnists, radio and TV commentators, armchair showing that the disclosure of alcohol would promote strength

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 16
wars. This led to the conclusion that 205(e)(2) did not survive of responding to those interests. Thus, on this record, the
the First Amendment scrutiny. city has failed to make a showing that would justify its
differential treatment of the two types of newsracks.
c. Because the city's regulation of newsracks is predicated on
City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc. the difference in content between ordinary newspapers and
*guys, sorry I just copied this syllabus from the case. It’s not commercial speech, it is not content neutral and cannot
that I’m lazy, it’s just that it’s a good digest. It’s pretty much qualify as a valid time, place, or manner restriction on
complete I just added some stuff  protected speech.

Facts:
In 1989, petitioner city authorized respondent
companies to place 62 freestanding newsracks on public City of Ladue v. Gilleo
property for the purpose of distributing free magazines that
consisted primarily of advertisements for respondents' Facts: An ordinance of City of Ladue bans all residential signs
services. (However, Discovery Network’s magazines also but those falling within one of ten exemptions, for the
contained some information about current events of general principal purpose of minimizing the visual clutter associated
interest and Harmon Publishing Company’s magazines had with such signs.
some information about interest rates, market trends, and
other real estate matters) Issue: W/N the ordinance violated her right to free speech by
In 1990, motivated by its interest in the safety and prohibiting her from displaying a sign stating, “For peace in
attractive appearance of its streets and sidewalks, the city the gulf,” from her home. YES.
revoked respondents' permits on the ground that the
magazines were "commercial handbills," whose distribution on
public property was prohibited by a pre-existing ordinance. Held:
(Newsracks dispensing traditional newspapers were however, Signs are subject to municipalities' police powers but
allowed to stay.) measures regulating them inevitably affect communication. A
In respondents' ensuing lawsuit, the District Court regulation may be challenged on the ground that it restricts
concluded that this categorical ban violated the First too little speech because its exemptions discriminate on the
Amendment under the "reasonable fit" standard applied to basis of the signs' messages or that they prohibit too much
the regulation of commercial speech in Board of Trustees of protected speech.
State Univ. of New York v. Fox. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
Ladue's interest in minimizing the visual clutter associated
Issue: Whether this refusal is consistent with the First with sign is valid but certainly no more compelling than the
Amendment (Freedom of expression) interests at stake in Linmark. Moreover, whereas the
ordinance in Linmark applied only to a form of commercial
Held: No. speech, Ladue's ordinance covers even such absolutely
pivotal speech as a sign protesting an imminent governmental
Rationale: decision to go to war.
a. The record amply supports the conclusion that the city has Ladue has almost completely foreclosed a unique and
not met its burden of establishing a "reasonable fit" between important medium to political, religious, or personal
its legitimate interests in safety and esthetics and the means messages. Prohibitions foreclosing entire media may be
it chose to serve those interests. The ordinance's outdated completely free of content or viewpoint discrimination, but
prohibition of handbill distribution was enacted long before such measures can suppress too much speech.
any concern about newsracks developed, for the apparent Ladue contends that its ordinance is a mere regulation of the
purpose of preventing the kind of visual blight caused by "time, place, or manner" of speech because residents remain
littering, rather than any harm associated with permanent, free to convey their desired messages by other means. We are
freestanding dispensing devices. The fact that the city failed not persuaded that adequate substitutes exist for the
to address its recently developed concern about newsracks by important medium of speech. Displaying a sign from one's
regulating their size, shape, appearance, or number indicates own residence often carries a message quite distinct from
that it has not "carefully calculated" the costs and benefits placing the same sign elsewhere. Precisely because of their
associated with the burden on speech imposed by its location, such signs provide information about the identity of
prohibition. The lower courts correctly ruled that the benefit to the "speaker." Also, residential signs are an unusually cheap
be derived from the removal of 62 newsracks out of a total of and convenient. Furthermore, a person who puts up a sign at
1,500-2,000 on public property was small. her residence often intends to reach neighbors, an audience
b. The Court rejects the city's argument that, because every that could not be reached nearly as well by other means.
decrease in the overall number of newsracks on its sidewalks Our decision that Ladue's ban on almost all residential signs
necessarily effects an increase in safety and an improvement violates the First Amendment by no means leaves the City
in the attractiveness of the cityscape, there is a close fit powerless to address the ills that may be associated with
between its ban on newsracks dispensing "commercial residential signs. Also, Residents' self-interest diminishes the
handbills" and its interests in safety and esthetics. This danger of the "unlimited" proliferation of residential signs.
argument is premised upon the distinction the city has drawn
between commercial speech such as respondents', which is UNPROTECTED SPEECH (LIBEL)
viewed as having only a low value, and the assertedly more
valuable noncommercial speech of "newspapers," whose Policarpio v. Manila Times Pub. Corp.
distribution on public land is specifically authorized by
separate provisions of the city code. The argument attaches Facts:
more importance to that distinction than the Court's cases Lumen Policarpio is a member of the Philippine Bar. She was
warrant and seriously underestimates the value of commercial also the secretary of the local UNESCO National Commission.
speech. Moreover, because commercial and noncommercial As such officer, she had preferred charges against Herminia
publications are equally responsible for the safety concerns Reyes, one of her subordinates and caused her to be
and visual blight that motivated the city, the distinction bears separated from the service. Miss Reyes, in turn, preferred
no relationship whatsoever to the admittedly legitimate counter-charges which were referred to Col. Alba, a Special
interests asserted by the city and is an impermissible means Investigator in the Office of the President. Reyes also filed a

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 17
case in the Office of the City Fiscal against Policarpio for newspaper offices, but when the news quiz format was
malversation of public funds and another complaint for estafa prepared, the two photographs were in advertently switched.
through falsification of documents. The respondent As soon, however, as the inadvertent error was brought to the
corporation published two articles regarding the case against attention of petitioners, the following correction was
Policarpio. The first article was entitled “Woman of Official immediately published in This Week Magazine on January 27,
Sued PCAC RAPS L. Policarpio ON FRAUDS” with a subtitle 1957: "While we were rushing to meet: the deadline for
“UNESCO Official Head Accused on Supplies, Funds Use by January 13th issue of This Week, we inadvertently published
Colleague. The second article was entitled: “Fraud Charges the picture of former Mayor Fidel G. Cruz of Sta. Maria,
Against Unesco Woman Official; Fiscal Sets Prelim Quiz of Bulacan, businessman and contractor, in 'Our Own Who's Who
Criminal Suit on Aug. 22”. Furthermore, the first article did not feature in the Year End Quiz' of This Week in lieu of the health
state how many sheets of stencils were misused by Policarpio. inspector Fidel Cruz, who was connected with a story about a
murderer running loose on Calayan Island. We here express
Issue: W/N Manila Times is guilty of libel? (I think this is the our profound regrets that such an error occurred." Together
crime involved) with the foregoing correction, petitioners published the picture
of Fidel Cruz; the photographs and the correction moreover
Ruling: Yes. were enclosed by four lines the type used was bolder than
ordinary, and the item was placed in a conspicuous place in
order to call the attention of the readers to such amends
being made.
Ratio: Cruz sued petitioners in CFI Manila for the recovery of
Although the Constitution guarantees the freedom of speech damages alleging the defamatory character of the above
and of the press, it does not guarantee immunity from cases publication of his picture. After trial duly had, he was awarded
filed against them in case it is found that they have abused P5,000 as actual damages, P5,000 as moral damages, and
such freedom. In this case, it was not the PCAC (Alba’s office) P1,000 for attorney's fees..
who filed the case in the Office of the City Fiscal. The effect of Issue: W/N damages for libel should be decreased? YES.
such statement is material in such a way that when the PCAC
files the case, there is a finding of guilt as differentiated when Ratio:
the case is filed by Reyes, a private individual. Furthermore, a) Why libel law has both a criminal and a civil aspect is
the failure of the respondent to include how many sheets of explained by Hale in his Law of the Press thus: "On the one
stencils were misused is material to the case of estafa, hand, libeling a person results in depriving him of his good
because the penalty can be properly reduced or increased reputation. Since reputation is a thing of value, truly rather to
depending on the volume of misused supplies. Furthermore, be chosen than great riches , an impairment of it is a personal
the respondents cannot argue that the publication of the wrong. To redress this personal wrong money damages are
article was done without malice. Under Art. 354 of the RPC, awarded to the injured person.
every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious. In another civil action for libel, such a thought is expressed
differently in this wise: "So long as it is done in good faith,
newspapers have the legal right to have and express opinions
EUGENIO LOPEZ V. CA on legal questions. To deny them that right would infringe
(July 31, 1970) upon the freedom of the press." The last word on the subject,
Ponente: Fernando up to now at least, came from Quisumbing v. Lopez. In the
language of the then Chief Justice Paras, who penned the
Facts: In the early part of January, 1956, there appeared on opinion: "The Court of Appeals found as a fact that "there is no
the front page of The Manila Chronicle, of w/c petitioner evidence in the record to prove that the publication of the
Eugenio Lopez was the publisher, a news story of a sanitary news item under Consideration was prompted by personal ill
inspector assigned to the Babuyan Islands, Fidel Cruz. An will or spite, or that there was intention to do harm,' and that
American Army plane dropped on the beach of an island an on the other hand there was 'an honest and high sense of
emergency-sustenance kit containing, among other things, a duty to serve the best interests of the public, without self-
two-way radio set. He utilized it to inform authorities in Manila seeking motive and with malice towards none. The
that the people in the place were living in terror, due to a newspapers should be given such leeway and tolerance as to
series of killings committed since Christmas of 1955. Losing enable them to courageously and effectively perform their
no time, the Philippines defense establishment rushed to the important role in our democracy. In the preparation of stories,
island a platoon of scout rangers. Upon arriving at the press reporters and edition usually have to race with their
reported killer-menaced Babuyan Claro, however, instead of deadlines; and consistently with good faith and reasonable
the alleged killers, they found Fidel Cruz, who merely wanted care, they should not be held to account, to a point of
transportation home to Manila. In view of this finding, Major suppression, for honest mistakes or imperfection in the choice
Wilfredo Encarnacion branded as a "hoax," to use his own of words."
descriptive word, the report of Fidel Cruz. That was the term The correction promptly made by petitioners would thus call
employed by the other newspapers when referring to the for a reduction in the damages awarded. It should be noted
above-mentioned incident. that there was no proof of any actual pecuniary logs arising
This Week Magazine of the Manila Chronicle, then edited by from the above publication. It is worthwhile to recall what
petitioner Juan T. Gatbonton, devoted a pictorial article on Justice Malcolm referred to as the tolerant attitude on the part
Cruz. In a later issue, the "January News Quiz" included an of appellate courts on this score, the usual practice being
item on the central figure in what was known as the Calayan "more likely to reduce damages for libel than to increase
Hoax. Earlier in its Special Year End Quiz appearing in its issue them."
of January 13, 1956, reference was made to the "Hoax of the
Year. The magazine on both occasions carried photographs of
the person purporting to be Fidel Cruz. Unfortunately, the New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (summary from case itself)
pictures that were published on both occasions were that of
private respondent Fidel G. Cruz, a businessman contractor Facts:
from Santa Maria, Bulacan. It turned out that the photographs Respondent, an elected official in Montgomery, Alabama,
of respondent Cruz and that of Fidel Cruz, sanitary inspector, brought suit in a state court alleging that he had been libeled
were on file in the library of the Manila Chronicle in by an advertisement in corporate petitioner's newspaper, the
accordance with the standard procedure observed in other text of which appeared over the names of the four individual

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 18
petitioners and many others. The advertisement included Facts: respondent’s radio station, which broadcast news
statements, some of which were false, about police action reports every half hour, broadcast news stories of petitioner’s
allegedly directed against students who participated in a civil arrest for possession of obscene literature and the police
rights demonstration and against a leader of the civil rights seizure of “obscene books”, and stories concerning
movement; respondent claimed the statements referred to petitioner’s lawsuit against certain officials alleging that the
him because his duties included supervision of the police magazines he distributed were not obscene and seeking
department. The trial judge instructed the jury that such injunctive relief from police interference with his business.
statements were "libelous per se," legal injury being implied These latter stories didn’t mention petitioner’s name, but used
without proof of actual damages, and that for the purpose of the terms “smut literature racket” and “girlie-book peddlers”.
compensatory damages malice was presumed, so that such Following petitioner’s acquittal of criminal obscenity charges,
damages could be awarded against petitioners if the he filed this diversity action in District Court seeking damages
statements were found to have been published by them and under Pennsylvania’s libel law. The jury found for petitioner
to have related to respondent. As to punitive damages, the and awarded $25,000 in general damages; and $725,000 in
judge instructed that mere negligence was not evidence of punitive damages, which was reduced by the court on
actual malice and would not justify an award of punitive remittitur to $250, 000. The CA reversed, holding that the NY
damages; he refused to instruct that actual intent to harm or Times Co. v. Sullivan, standard applied, and “the fact that
recklessness had to be found before punitive damages could plaintiff was not a public figure cannot be accorded decisive
be awarded, or that a verdict for respondent should significance”.
differentiate between compensatory and punitive damages.
The jury found for respondent and the State Supreme Court Issue: Whether the defamatory falsehoods uttered by the
affirmed. Held: A State cannot under the First and Fourteenth radio station could be cause for the recovery of damages.
Amendments award damages to a public official for
defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct unless he Held: the judgment is affirmed
proves "actual malice" - that the statement was made with
knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard of whether it In a series of cases beginning with NY Times Co. v. Sullivan,
was true or false. the court has considered the limitations upon state libel laws
imposed by the constitutional guarantees of freedom of
2. (a) Application by state courts of a rule of law, whether speech and of the press. NY Times held that in a civil libel
statutory or not, to award a judgment in a civil action, is "state action by a public official against a newspaper those
action" under the Fourteenth Amendment. guarantees required clear and convincing proof that a
3. defamatory falsehood alleged as libel was uttered with
1. (b) Expression does not lose constitutional protection to which “knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of
it would otherwise be entitled because it appears in the form whether it was false or not”. The same requirement was later
of a paid advertisement. held to apply to “public figures” who sued in libel on the basis
2. of alleged defamatory falsehoods. The several cases
- (c) Factual error, content defamatory of official reputation, or considered since NY Times involved actions of “public
both, are insufficient to warrant an award of damages for false officials” or “public figures”, usually, but not always, against
statements unless "actual malice" - knowledge that newspapers or magazines. Common to all the cases was a
statements are false or in reckless disregard of the truth - is defamatory falsehood in the report of an event of “public or
alleged and proved. general interest”. The instant case presents the question
- whether the NY Times’ knowing-or-reckless-falsity standard
- (d) State court judgment entered upon a general verdict applies in a state civil libel action brought not by a public
which does not differentiate between punitive damages, as to official or a public figure but by a private indiv for a
which under state law actual malice must be proved, and defamatory falsehood uttered in a news broadcast by a radio
general damages, as to which it is "presumed," precludes any station about the individ’s involvement in an even of public or
determination as to the basis of the verdict and requires general.
reversal, where presumption of malice is inconsistent with
federal constitutional requirements. In general the values being protected by our libel laws conceal
- important distinction. Traditional arguments suggest that 2
(e) The evidence was constitutionally insufficient to interests are being protected
support the judgment for respondent, since it failed
to support a finding that the statements were made
• 1st, his desire to preserve a certain privacy
with actual malice or that they related to respondent. around his personality from unwarranted
intrusion
• 2nd a desire to preserve his public good name
Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc. and reputation
• these are important interests, however, they can
Doctrine: the general rule is that there is profound national be subordinated in certain circumstances. Thus,
commitment to the principle that debate on public issues high gocvernment officials are immune from
should be uninhabited, robust, and wide open. If a matter is a liability even if they publish of utter such
subject of public interest, I cannot suddenly become less so falsities. This absolute privilege attaches to
merely because a private individual is involved, or because in judges, attoryneys-at-law in connection with a
some sense the individual didn’t voluntarily choose to become judicial proceeding, parties and witnesses.
involved. The public’s primary interest is in the event; the Congressmen, and state legislators, and high
public focus us on the conduct of the participant and the national and state executives also enjoy
content, effect, and significance of the conduct, not the immunity during privilege speeches.
participant’s prior anonymity. There is constitutional • Moreover, a conditional privilege allows
protection to all discusssion and communication involving newspapers to report the false defamatory
matters of public or general concern is extended without material originally published under the absolute
regard to whether the persons involved are famous or privileges listed above, if done accurately.
anonymous but the commitment to robust debate on public
issues can’t be displaced.
Gertz v. Welch

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 19

Sorry guys. I also just copied the case summary. It’s good (a) Neither petitioner's past service on certain city
naman e. committees nor his appearance as an attorney at the
coroner's inquest into the death of the murder victim
Facts: made him a public official.
A Chicago policeman named Nuccio was convicted of murder.
The victim's family retained petitioner, a reputable attorney, (b) Petitioner was also not a public figure. Absent
to represent them in civil litigation against Nuccio. An article clear evidence of general fame or notoriety in the
appearing in respondent's magazine alleged that Nuccio's community and pervasive involvement in ordering
murder trial was part of a Communist conspiracy to discredit the affairs of society, an individual should not be
the local police, and it falsely stated that petitioner had deemed a public figure for all aspects of his life.
arranged Nuccio's "frame-up," implied that petitioner had a Rather, the public-figure question should be
criminal record, and labeled him a "Communist-fronter." determined by reference to the individual's
Petitioner brought this diversity libel action against participation in the particular controversy giving rise
respondent. After the jury returned a verdict for petitioner, the to the defamation. Petitioner's role in the Nuccio
District Court decided that the standard enunciated in New affair did not make him a public figure.
York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 , which bars media
liability for defamation of a public official absent proof that the
defamatory statements were published with knowledge of In Re Jurado
their falsity or in reckless disregard of the truth, should apply
to this suit. The court concluded that that standard protects Facts:
media discussion of a public issue without regard to whether Emiliano Jurado is a lawyer and a journalist of Manila
the person defamed is a public official as in New York Times Standard, with a column entitled “Opinion”. Jurado had been
Co. v. Sullivan, supra, or a public figure, as in Curtis Publishing writing about alleged irregularities in the judiciary over
Co. v. Butts, 388 U.S. 130 . The court found that petitioner had several months (from about October, 1992 to March, 1993).
failed to prove knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for Other journalists had also been making reports or comments
the truth and therefore entered judgment n. o. v. for on the same subject. At the same time, anonymous
respondent. The Court of Appeals affirmed. communications were being extensively circulated, by hand
and through the mail, about alleged venality and corruption in
Held: the courts. And all these were being repeatedly and insistently
4. 1. A publisher or broadcaster of defamatory falsehoods about adverted to by certain sectors of society.
an individual who is neither a public official nor a public figure In light of these abnormal developments, the Chief Justice
may not claim the New York Times protection against liability took an extraordinary step. He issued Administrative Order
for defamation on the ground that the defamatory statements No. 11-93 dated January 25, 1993, "Creating an Ad Hoc
concern an issue of public or general interest. Committee to Investigate Reports of Corruption in the
5. Judiciary," composed of CJ Narvasa, former justices Relova and
3. (a) Because private individuals characteristically Melencio-Herrera.
have less effective opportunities for rebuttal than do
public officials and public figures, they are more Issue:
vulnerable to injury from defamation. Because they W/N Jurado should be punished for the publication of judiciary
have not voluntarily exposed themselves to stories that he made no effort whatsoever to substantiate?
increased risk of injury from defamatory falsehoods, YES
they are also more deserving of recovery. The state
interest in compensating injury to the reputation of Ruling:
private individuals is therefore greater than for public WHEREFORE, the Court declares Atty. Emil (Emiliano) P.
officials and public figures. Jurado guilty of contempt of court and in accordance with
4. Section 6, Rule 71 of the Rules of Court, hereby sentences him
- (b) To extend the New York Times standard to media to pay a fine of one thousand pesos (P1,000,00).
defamation of private persons whenever an issue of
general or public interest is involved would abridge
to an unacceptable degree the legitimate state Ratio:
interest in compensating private individuals for injury The issue therefore had nothing to do with any failure of
to reputation and would occasion the additional Jurado's to obey a subpoena, none ever having been issued to
difficulty of forcing courts to decide on an ad hoc him, and the Ad Hoc Committee having foreborne to take any
basis which publications and broadcasts address action at all as regards his failure to accept its invitations. The
issues of general or public interest and which do not. issue, as set out in the opening sentence of this opinion,
- essentially concerns "(l)iability for published statements
- (c) So long as they do not impose liability without demonstrably false or misleading, and derogatory of the
fault, the States may define for themselves the courts and individual judges."
appropriate standard of liability for a publisher or Jurado is not being called to account for declining to identify
broadcaster of defamatory falsehood which injures a the sources of his news stories, or for refusing to appear and
private individual and whose substance makes give testimony before the Ad Hoc Committee. He is not being
substantial danger to reputation apparent. compelled to guarantee the truth of what he publishes, but to
- exercise honest and reasonable efforts to determine the truth
2. The States, however, may not permit recovery of presumed of defamatory statements before publishing them. He is being
or punitive damages when liability is not based on meted the punishment appropriate to the publication of
knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the stories shown to be false and defamatory of the judiciary �
truth, and the private defamation plaintiff who stories that he made no effort whatsoever to verify and which,
establishes liability under a less demanding standard after being denounced as lies, he has refused, or is unable, to
than the New York Times test may recover substantiate.
compensation only for actual injury.
Norms for Proper Exercise of Press Freedom
3. Petitioner was neither a public official nor a public figure (a) Constitutional Law Norms

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 20
In Zaldivar v. Gonzalez, the Court underscored the importance Code of Ethics adopted by the journalism profession in the
both of the constitutional guarantee of free speech and the Philippines.
reality that there are fundamental and equally important
public interests which need on occasion to be balanced OBSCENITY
against and accommodated with one and the other. There, the
Court stressed the importance of the public interest in the Marvin MILLER v. State of CALIFORNIA 1973 (U.S.
maintenance of the integrity and orderly functioning of the Landmark Case)
administration of justice.
(b) Civil Law Norms Facts: This is one of a group of `obscenity-pornography'
The Civil Code, in its Article 19 lays down the norm for the cases. Miller conducted a mass mailing campaign to advertise
proper exercise of any right, constitutional or otherwise, viz.: the sale of illustrated ‘adult’ material books. He mailed 5
Art. 19. Every person must, in the exercise unsolicited brochures addressed to a resto in Newport Beach,
of his rights and in the performance of his California. The envelope was opened by the manager of the
duties, act with justice, give everyone his restaurant and his mother. They had not requested the
due, and observe honesty and good faith. brochures so they complained to the police. The brochures
Freedom of expression, the right of speech and of the press is, advertise four books entitled `Intercourse,' `Man-Woman,'
to be sure, among the most zealously protected rights in the `Sex Orgies Illustrated,' and `An Illustrated History of
Constitution. But every person exercising it is, as the Civil Pornography,' and a film entitled `Marital Intercourse.' While
Code stresses, obliged "to act with justice, give everyone his the brochures contain some descriptive printed material,
due, and observe honesty and good faith." The constitutional primarily they consist of pictures and drawings very explicitly
right of freedom of expression may not be availed of to depicting men and women in groups of two or more engaging
broadcast lies or half-truths this would not be "to observe in a variety of sexual activities, with genitals often
honesty and good faith;" it may not be used to insult others; prominently displayed. He was convicted for violating
destroy their name or reputation or bring them into disrepute. California Penal Code s 311.2(a), a misdemeanor, by
this would not be "to act with justice" or "give everyone his knowingly distributing obscene matter.
due."
(c) Philippine Journalist's Code of Ethics Issue: Is obscenity within the area of constitutionally
Also relevant to the determination of the propriety of Jurado's protected speech or press?
acts subject of the inquiry at bar are the norms laid down in
"The Philippine Journalist's Code of Ethics." The Code was Held: No. Obscenity is not within the area of constitutionally
published in the issue of February 11, 1993 of the Manila protected speech or press
Standard, for which Jurado writes, as part of the paper's
"Anniversary Supplement." The first paragraph of the Code, Ratio:
and its corresponding annotations, read as follows: In Roth v. United States: Court sustained a conviction under a
(d) Right to Private Honor and Reputation federal statute punishing the mailing of `obscene, lewd,
In the present proceeding, there is also involved an lascivious or filthy . . .' materials because obscene materials
acknowledged and important interest of individual persons: were NOT protected by the First Amendment.
the right to private reputation. Judges, by becoming such, are
commonly and rightly regarded as voluntarily subjecting Roth v. U.S. (a and b) and Memoirs v. Massachusetts (added
themselves to norms of conduct which embody more stringent c) test of obscenity:
standards of honesty, integrity, and competence than are (a) the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole
commonly required from private persons. Nevertheless, appeals to a prurient interest in sex;
persons who seek or accept from appointment to the Judiciary (b) the material is patently offensive because it affronts
cannot reasonably be regarded as having thereby forfeited contemporary community standards relating to the
any right whatsoever to private honor and reputation. For so description or representation of sexual matters; and
to rule will be simply, in the generality of cases, to discourage (c) the material is utterly without redeeming social value.'
all save those who feel no need to maintain their self-respect
as a human being in society, from becoming judges, with MILLER NEW TEST OF OBSCENITY:
obviously grievous consequences for the quality of our judges (a) whether `the average person, applying contemporary
and the quality of the justice that they will dispense. Thus, the community standards' would find that the work, taken as a
protection of the right of individual persons to private whole, appeals to the prurient interest (prurient: Arousing or
reputations is also a matter of public interest and must be appealing to sexual desire)
reckoned with as a factor in identifying and laying down the
norms concerning the exercise of press freedom and free (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently
speech. offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the
Clearly, the public interest involved in freedom of speech and applicable state law (sexual acts, maturbation, excretory
the individual interest of judges (and for that matter, all other functions, and lewd exhibition of the genitals)
public officials) in the maintenance of private honor and
reputation need to be accommodated one to the other. And (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary,
the point of adjustment or accommodation between these two artistic, political, or scientific value. We do not adopt as a
legitimate interest is precisely found in the norm which constitutional standard the `utterly without redeeming social
requires those who, invoking freedom of speech, publish value' test of Memoirs v. Massachusetts
statements which are clearly defamatory to identifiable judges
or other public officials to exercise bona fide care in At a minimum, prurient, patently offensive depiction or
ascertaining the truth of the statements they publish. The description of sexual conduct must have serious literary,
norm does not require that a journalist guarantee the truth of artistic, political, or scientific value to merit First Amendment
what he says or publishes. But the norm does prohibit the protection. For example, medical books. Sppression of
reckless disregard of private reputation by publishing or unprotected obscene material is permissible to avoid
circulating defamatory statements without any bona fide exposure to unconsenting adults, as in this case, and to
effort to ascertain the truth thereof. That this norm represents juveniles. No one will be subject to prosecution for the sale or
the generally accepted point of balance or adjustment exposure of obscene materials unless these materials depict
between the two interests involved is clear from a or describe patently offensive `hard core' sexual conduct
consideration of both the pertinent civil law norms and the specifically defined by the regulating state law, as written or

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 21
construed. manner appealing to prurient interest. The portrayal of sex,
e.g., in art, literature and scientific works, is not itself
There are NO fixed, uniform national standards of precisely sufficient reason to deny material the constitutional protection
what appeals to the `prurient interest' or is `patently of freedom of speech and press. Sex, a great and mysterious
offensive.' These are essentially questions of fact, and our motive force in human life has indisputably been a subject of
Nation is simply too big and too diverse for this Court to absorbing interest to mankind through the ages; it is one of
reasonably expect that such standards could be articulated the vital problems of human interest and public concern
for all 50 States in a single formulation.
Where television is concerned: a less liberal approach calls for
In sum, we (a) reaffirm the Roth holding that obscene material observance. This is so because unlike motion pictures where
is not protected by the First Amendment; (b) hold that such the patrons have to pay their way, television reaches every
material can be regulated by the States, subject to the home where there is a set.
specific safeguards enunciated above, without a showing that
the material is `utterly without redeeming social value'; and
(c) hold that obscenity is to be determined by applying Pita v. CA
`contemporary community standards.' Obscenity

Facts: Leo Pita publishes Pinoy Playboy magazine. On Dec. 1

Gonzales vs. Kalaw and 3 1983 Mayor Bagatsing of Manila enforces his Anti-Smut
policy and seizes obscene materials along CM Recto among
Facts: these were copies of Pinoy Playboy magazine.
Board of Review for Motion Pictures and Television classified
Kapit sa Patalim was "For Adults Only." The film is an integral Unjust seizure of property according to Pita, voluntary
whole and all its portions, including those to which the Board surrender according to Bagatsing etc.
now offers belated objection, are essential for the integrity of
the film. Viewed as a whole, there is no basis even for the Pita sues Bagatsing in RTC, decision appealed to CA, CA
vague speculations advanced by the Board as basis for its decision appealed to SC.
classification. Issues:
1. The Court of Appeals erred in affirming the decision of the
Issue: trial court and, in effect, holding that the police officers could
Was the classification of the film as "For Adults Only." For without any court warrant or order seize and confiscate
petitioners, such classification "is without legal and factual petitioner's magazines on the basis simply of their
basis and is exercised as impermissible restraint of artistic determination that they are obscene.
expression. YES 2. The Court of Appeals erred in affirming the decision of the
trial court and, in effect, holding that the trial court could
Ratio: dismiss the case on its merits without any hearing thereon
It would be unduly restrictive under the circumstances to limit when what was submitted to it for resolution was merely the
the issue to one of the sufficiency of standards to guide application of petitioner for the writ of preliminary injunction.
respondent Board in the exercise of its power. Even if such Held:
were the case, there is justification for an inquiry into the Petition granted CA decision reversed and set aside. (Case
controlling standard to warrant the classification of "For Adults moot and academic as magazines subject of seizure were
Only." This is especially so, when obscenity is the basis for destroyed.
any alleged invasion of the right to the freedom of artistic and Ratio:
literary expression embraced in the free speech and free "Whether to the average person, applying contemporary
press guarantees of the Constitution standards, the dominant theme of the material taken as a
whole appeals to prurient interest." – Gonzales v. Kalaw
Censorship or previous restraint certainly is not all there is to Katigbak “But neither should we say that "obscenity" is a bare
free speech or free press. If it were so, then such basic rights (no pun intended) matter of opinion. As we said earlier, it is
are emasculated. It is however, except in exceptional the divergent perceptions of men and women that have
circumstances a sine qua non for the meaningful exercise of probably compounded the problem rather than resolved it.”
such right. This is not to deny that equally basic is the other (Is it pornographic?)
important aspect of freedom from liability. Amoral love or literature falls under the free speech clause
though not necessarily under its protection (i.e. clear and
The test, to repeat, to determine whether freedom of present danger test)
excession may be limited is the (1) clear and present danger Actions of Mayor under guise of police power cannot deny an
of an evil of a substantive character that the State has a right individual’s right to due process, right to unreasonable search
to prevent. Such danger must not only be clear but also and seizure. Police here did not apply for search warrant
present. (2) There should be no doubt that what is feared arguing incidental to a lawful arrest however no arrest was
may be traced to the expression complained of. The causal made here, so no search and seizure.
connection must be evident. Also, (3) there must be
reasonable apprehension about its imminence. The time
element cannot be ignored. Nor does it suffice if such danger Barnes v. Glen Theatre
be only probable. There is the require of its being well-nigh Facts:
inevitable. The basic postulate, wherefore, as noted earlier, is - Respondents are two Indiana establishments wishing
that where the movies, theatrical productions radio scripts, to provide totally nude dancing as entertainment
television programs, and other such media of expression are - The individual dancers employed at those
concerned included as they are in freedom of expression establishments, brought suit in the District Court to
censorship, especially so if an entire production is banned, is enjoin enforcement of the state public indecency law
allowable only under the clearest proof of a clear and present — which requires respondent dancers to wear pasties
danger of a substantive evil to public public morals, public and a G-string — asserting that the law's prohibition
health or any other legitimate public interest. against total nudity in public places violates the First
Amendment.
"Obscene material is material which deals with sex in a - The court held that the nude dancing involved here

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 22
was not expressive conduct. The Court of Appeals governmental regulation.
reversed, ruling that non-obscene nude dancing • Contrary to the claim of respondents, prurient appeal
performed for entertainment is protected expression, is not an essential component of incident language.
and that the statute was an improper infringement of • Section 326 does not limit the authority to impose
that activity because its purpose was to prevent the sanctions on licenses to engage in obscene, incident or
message of eroticism and sexuality conveyed by the profane broadcasting.
dancers. • If an offensive broadcast had literary, artistic,
Issue/Held: political, and scientific value, and was preceded by
- W/N the enforcement of Indiana's public indecency warnings, it might not be incident in the late evening but
law to prevent totally nude dancing violates the First would be so during the day when children are in the
Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of expression? audience.
NO. • First Amendment – Congress shall make no law
Ratio: respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting
1) Nude dancing of the kind sought to be performed here is the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
expressive conduct within the outer perimeters of the First speech, or of press, or the right of the people peaceably
Amendment. to assemble and to petition the government of a regress
2) Applying the four-part test of United States v. O'Brien, of grievances.
which rejected the contention that symbolic speech is entitled
to full First Amendment protection — the statute is justified
despite its incidental limitations on some expressive activity.
RENTON v. PLAYTIME THEATER
The law is clearly within the State's constitutional power. And
it furthers a substantial governmental interest in protecting
FACTS:
societal order and morality. This governmental interest is
This case involves a constitutional challenge to a zoning
unrelated to the suppression of free expression, since public
ordinance, enacted by appellant city of Renton, Washington,
nudity is the evil the State seeks to prevent, whether or not it
that prohibits adult motion picture theaters from locating
is combined with expressive activity. The law does not
within 1,000 feet of any residential zone, single- or multiple-
proscribe nudity in these establishments because the dancers
family dwelling, church, park, or school.
are conveying an erotic message. To the contrary, an erotic
performance may be presented without any state
ISSUE: W/N the ordinance violates the First Amendment
interference, so long as the performers wear a scant amount
of clothing. Finally, the incidental restriction on First
HELD:
Amendment freedom is no greater than is essential to the
No. The Renton ordinance does not ban adult theaters
furtherance of the governmental interest. Since the statutory
altogether, but merely provides that such theaters may not be
prohibition is not a means to some greater end, but an end
located within 1,000 feet of any residential zone, single- or
itself, it is without cavil that the statute is narrowly tailored.
multiple-family dwelling, church, park, or school. The
3) The statute as a general law regulates conduct and not
ordinance is therefore properly analyzed as a form of
specifically directed at expression, either in practice or on its
time, place, and manner regulation. It is designed to
face and is therefore not subject to normal First Amendment
serve a substantial governmental interest which is attempting
scrutiny and should be upheld on the ground that moral
to preserve the quality of urban life, and allows for reasonable
opposition to nudity supplies a rational basis for its
alternative avenues of communication. Cities may regulate
prohibition. There is no intermediate level of scrutiny requiring
adult theaters by dispersing them, as in Detroit, or by
that an incidental restriction on expression, such as that
effectively concentrating them, as in Renton Also, the
involved here, be justified by an important or substantial
ordinance allows for reasonable alternative avenues of
governmental interest.
communication, as it leaves some 520 acres, or more than
five percent of the entire land area of Renton, open to use as
adult theater sites.
FCC v PACIFICA FOUNDATION
Renton relied on the experience of, and studies produced by,
FACTS: the city of Seattle. In Seattle, as in Renton, the adult theater
• A New York radio station, owned by Pacifica zoning ordinance was aimed at preventing the secondary
Foundation, broadcasted the “Filthy Words” monologue effects caused by the presence of even one such theater in a
of a satiric humorist named George Carlin. In the given neighborhood. The First Amendment does not require a
monologue, Carlin repeated over and over a number of city, before enacting such an ordinance, to conduct new
colloquial expressions for sexual and excretory activities studies or produce evidence independent of that already
and organs. generated by other cities, so long as whatever evidence the
• A man wrote a complaint to FCC who stated that he city relies upon is reasonably believed to be relevant to the
heard the broadcast while driving with his young son. problem that the city addresses.
• The complaint was forwarded to Pacifica. Pacifica
explained that the monologue had been played during a
program about contemporary society’s attitude toward Bethel School Dist v. Fraser
language and characterized Carlin as a “significant
social satirist” like Twain and Sahl, not a person who Facts:
mouths obscenities. Matthew Fraser, a student at Bethel High School delivered a
• FCC concluded that the language broadcasted was speech nominating a fellow student for student elective office
incident and prohibited. but in his speech Fraser referred to his candidate in terms of
• US CA for the District of Columbia reversed the an elaborate, graphic and explicit sexual metaphor. This
decision of FCC. offended the teachers and some 600 students who are mostly
14 years old.
ISSUE: Whether FCC has the power to regulate a radio The Assistant Principal called Fraser to his office the next day
broadcast that is incident but not obscene. YES informing him of his offense which was a violation of the rule
of Bethel school that states " Conduct which materially and
RATIO: substantially interferes educational process is prohibited,
• The First Amendment does not prohibit all including the use of obscene, profane language or gestures".

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 23
Fraser was given the chance to explain himself and he censor similar speech outside the school.
admitted to having given the speech that he deliberately used (b) The Court of Appeals characterized the newspaper as a
sexual innuendo in the speech. Fraser was then informed that public forum, thus, using this as basis for deciding that the 1st
he would be suspended for 3 days and that he would be Amendment rights were violated. However, the SC said the
removed from the list of candidates for speaker at the school newspaper here cannot be characterized as a forum for
school's commencement exercises. public expression. School facilities may be deemed to be
public forums only if school authorities have by policy or by
issue: whether the sanctions violated the First and Fourteenth practice opened the facilities for indiscriminate use by the
Amendments general public, or by some segment of the public, such as
student organizations. If the facilities have instead been
Held: No reserved for other intended purposes, communicative or
otherwise, then no public forum has been created, and school
Ratio: officials may impose reasonable restrictions on the speech of
The speech had a disruptive effect on the education process students, teachers, and other members of the school
and that the school district had a n interest in protecting the community. The school officials in this case did not deviate
students from lewd and indecent language in a school- from their policy that the newspaper's production was to be
sponsored setting. It cannot be likened to that case which part of the educational curriculum and a regular classroom
involves the issue of wearing black armbands because the activity under the journalism teacher's control as to almost
speech had no political motivation. The school acted within every aspect of publication. The officials did not evince any
the permissible authority in imposing sanctions upon Fraser in intent to open the paper's pages to indiscriminate use by its
response to his speech. A high school assembly or classroom student reporters and editors, or by the student body
is no place for a sexually explicit monologue directed towards generally. Accordingly, school officials were entitled to
an unsuspecting audience of teenage students. The regulate the paper's contents in any reasonable manner.
constitutional rights of students in public school are not (c) The standard for determining when a school may punish
automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in other student expression that happens to occur on school premises
settings. The determination of the manner of speech in the is not the standard for determining when a school may refuse
classroom or in school assembly is inappropriate properly to lend its name and resources to the dissemination of
rests with the school board. student expression. Educators do not offend the First
Amendment by exercising editorial control over the style and
content of student speech in school-sponsored expressive
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier activities so long as their actions are reasonably related to
legitimate pedagogical concerns.
Facts: (d) The school principal acted reasonably in this case in
Respondents, former high school students who were staff requiring the deletion of the pregnancy article, the divorce
members of the school's newspaper, Spectrum, filed suit in article, and the other articles that were to appear on the same
Federal District Court against petitioners, the school district pages of the newspaper.
and school officials, alleging that their First Amendment rights
were violated by the deletion from a certain issue of the paper
of two pages that included an article describing school Fernando v. Court of Appeals
students' experiences with pregnancy and another article
discussing the impact of divorce on students at the school. Facts:
The newspaper was written and edited by a journalism class, Acting on reports of sale and distribution of pornographic
as part of the school's curriculum. Pursuant to the school's materials, the police searched the Gaudencio E. Fernando
practice, the teacher in charge of the paper submitted page Music Fair (Music Fair) store and confiscated 25 pornographic
proofs to the school's principal, who objected to the VHS tapes and 10 different magazines.
pregnancy story because the pregnant students, although not
named, might be identified from the text, and because he The RTC convicted Rudy Estorninos, the store attendant, and
believed that the article's references to sexual activity and Fernando of violating Art 201 0f the RPC (Immoral doctrines,
birth control were inappropriate for some of the younger obscene publications and exhibitions, and indecent shows)
students. The principal objected to the divorce article because
the page proofs he was furnished identified by name (deleted
by the teacher from the final version) a student who Issue:
complained of her father's conduct, and the principal believed W/N Court erred in convicting petitioner
that the student's parents should have been given an 1. Fernando even if he was not present at the time of
opportunity to respond to the remarks or to consent to their the raid
publication. Believing that there was no time to make 2. Estorninos who was not doing anything illegal at the
necessary changes in the articles if the paper was to be time of the raid
issued before the end of the school year, the principal
directed that the pages on which they appeared be withheld Held:
from publication even though other, unobjectionable articles
were included on such pages. As obscenity is an unprotected speech which the State has
the right to regulate, the State in pursuing its mandate to
Issue: W/N the First Amendment rights were violated. protect, as parens patriae, the public from obscene, immoral
and indecent materials must justify the regulation or
Held: No. limitation.

Rationale: The Court defined obscenity as something which is offensive

(a) First Amendment rights of students in the public schools to chastity, decency or delicacy. Miller v. California
are not automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in established basic guidelines, to wit: (a) whether to the
other settings, and must be applied in light of the special average person, applying contemporary standards would find
characteristics of the school environment. A school need not the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
tolerate student speech that is inconsistent with its basic (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently
educational mission, even though the government could not offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 24
applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a dispersed by policemen implementing BP880 (“The Public
whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific Assembly Act of 1985”). The 2nd group consists of 26
value. No one will be subject to prosecution for the sale or individual petitioners, Jess del Prado, et al., who allege that
exposure of obscene materials unless these materials depict they were injured, arrested and detained when a peaceful
or describe patently offensive “hard core” sexual conduct. mass action they held on September 26, 2005 was preempted
Obscenity is an issue proper for judicial determination and and violently dispersed by the police. They further assert that
should be treated on a case to case basis. on October 5, 2005, a group they participated in marched to
Malacañang to protest issuances of the Palace which, they
The confiscated materials here were found to be obscene for claim, put the country under an “undeclared” martial rule, and
it was made and shown not for the sake of art but rather for the protest was likewise dispersed violently and many among
commercial purposes. them were arrested and suffered injuries. The 3rd group,
Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU), et al., allege that they conduct
Mere possession of obscene materials, without intention to peaceful mass actions and that their rights as organizations
sell, exhibit, or give them away, is not punishable under and those of their individual members as citizens, specifically
Article 201, considering the purpose of the law is to prohibit the right to peaceful assembly, are affected by BP880 and the
the dissemination of obscene materials to the public. The policy of “Calibrated Preemptive Response” (CPR) being
offense in any of the forms under Article 201 is committed followed to implement it.
only when there is publicity. The law does not require that a
person be caught in the act of selling, giving away or CP is a policy set forth in a press release by Malacañang on
exhibiting obscene materials to be liable, for as long as the September 21, 2005:
said materials are offered for sale, displayed or exhibited to STATEMENT OF EXECUTIVE SECRETARY EDUARDO ERMITA
the public. “In view of intelligence reports pointing to credible plans of
anti-government groups to inflame the political situation, sow
In the present case, petitioners neither presented contrary disorder and incite people against the duty constituted
evidence nor questioned the trial court’s findings. There is authorities, we have instructed the PNP as well as the
also no showing that the trial court acted arbitrarily. We find local government units to strictly enforce a “no permit,
that petitioners are engaged in selling and exhibiting obscene no rally” policy, disperse groups that run afoul of this
materials. standard and arrest all persons violating the laws of
the land as well as ordinances on the proper conduct
ASSEMBLY and PETITION of mass actions and demonstrations…”
BAYAN, ET AL.  They contend that BP880 is clearly a
Malabanan v. Ramento violation of the Constitution and the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights and other human rights treaties of
Facts: which the Philippines is a signatory (Included this just in
Petitioners here are students of the Gregorio Araneta case…Sir seems to ask about all these international treaties a
University Foundation. These students are members of the SC lot!!!). They argue that B.P. No. 880 requires a permit before
of their said university. They applied for an assembly permit. one can stage a public assembly regardless of the presence or
Pursuant to the permit, they were supposed to hold a general absence of a clear and present danger. It also curtails the
assembly at the Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science choice of venue and is thus repugnant to the freedom of
basketball from 8 a.m. – 12 p.m. However, the students held expression clause as the time and place of a public assembly
the assembly not in the basketball court, as stated in the form part of the message for which the expression is sought.
permit, but in the second floor lobby. At such gathering, they Furthermore, it is not content-neutral as it does not apply to
protested against the proposed merger of the Institute of mass actions in support of the government. The words “lawful
Animal Science with the Institute of Agriculture. At 10:30 the cause,” “opinion,” “protesting or influencing” suggest the
same day, they marched toward the Life Science Building and exposition of some cause not espoused by the government.
continued their rally. As a result of the rally, there was Also, the phrase “maximum tolerance” shows that the law
disturbance of the classes held as well as the non-academic applies to assemblies against the government because they
work performed by the employees. The respondents subjected are being tolerated. As a content-based legislation, it cannot
the petitioners to discipline by suspending them for 1 school pass the strict scrutiny test.
year.
JESS DEL PRADO, ET AL.  argue that B.P. No. 880 is
Issue: W/N it is a violation of their right to peaceably unconstitutional as it is a curtailment of the right to peacefully
assemble. assemble and petition for redress of grievances because it
puts a condition for the valid exercise of that right. It
Ruling: No. also characterizes public assemblies without a permit as
illegal and penalizes them and allows their dispersal. Thus, its
Rational: provisions are not mere regulations but are actually
The students have the right to peaceably assemble. However, prohibitions.
since they were assembling in the school grounds, a private KMU, ET AL.  They argue that the Constitution sets no
place, they have to abide by the rules set forth in the school limits on the right to assembly and therefore B.P. No. 880
policy. Furthermore, when they caused commotion, as a result cannot put the prior requirement of securing a permit. And
of which classes and work were disturbed, there speeches and even assuming that the legislature can set limits to this right,
actions are not immunized by the Constitutional guarantee the limits provided are unreasonable: First, allowing the
regarding freedom of speech and assembly. Hence, they can Mayor to deny the permit on clear and convincing evidence of
be subjected to discipline by the school authorities. a clear and present danger is too comprehensive. Second,
the five-day requirement to apply for a permit is too long as
certain events require instant public assembly, otherwise
BAYAN V. ERMITA (April 25, 2006) interest on the issue would possibly wane.
Ponente: Azcuna As for the CPR policy, they argue that it is preemptive, that
the government takes action even before the rallyists can
Facts: The 1st petitioners, Bayan, et al. allege that their perform their act, and that no law, ordinance or executive
rights as organizations and individuals were violated when the order supports the policy. Furthermore, it contravenes the
rally they participated in on October 6, 2005 was violently maximum tolerance policy of B.P. No. 880 and violates the

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 25
Constitution as it causes a chilling effect on the exercise by B.P. No. 880 cannot be condemned as unconstitutional; it
the people of the right to peaceably assemble. does not curtail or unduly restrict freedoms; it merely
regulates the use of public places as to the time, place and
Issue: a) W/N BB880 is constitutional? YES. manner of assemblies. Far from being insidious, “maximum
b) W/N the CPR policy is constitutional? NO. tolerance” is for the benefit of rallyists, not the government.

Ratio: Art. III, Sec. 5: No law shall be made respecting an

a) It is very clear that B.P. No. 880 is not an absolute ban establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
of public assemblies but a restriction that simply regulates thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious
the time, place and manner of the assemblies. This was profession and worship, without discrimination or preference,
adverted to in Osmeña v. Comelec, where the Court referred shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for
to it as a “content-neutral” regulation of the time, place, and the exercise of civil or political rights.
manner of holding public assemblies.

A fair and impartial reading of B.P. No. 880 thus readily shows NON-ESTABLISHMENT of RELIGION
that it refers to all kinds of public assemblies that would use Aglipay v. Ruiz
public places. The reference to “lawful cause” does not make
it content-based because assemblies really have to be for Doctrine: The issuance and sale of the stamps
lawful causes, otherwise they would not be “peaceable” and commemorating the International Eucharistic Congress is
entitled to protection. Neither are the words “opinion,” Valid. The government should not be precluded from
“protesting” and “influencing” in the definition of public pursuing valid objectives secular in character even if the
assembly content based, since they can refer to any subject. incidental result would be favorable to a religion or sect.
The words “petitioning the government for redress of
grievances” come from the wording of the Constitution, so its FACTS:
use cannot be avoided. Finally, maximum tolerance is for the On May 1936, the Director of Posts announced that he would
protection and benefit of all rallyists and is independent of the order the issuance of postage stamps commemorating the
content of the expressions in the rally. Furthermore, the City of Manila of the 33rd International Eucharistic Congress,
permit can only be denied on the ground of clear and present organized by the Roman Catholic Church. The stamps
danger to public order, public safety, public convenience, contained a map of the Philippines, the location of the City of
public morals or public health. This is a recognized exception Manila, and an inscription that reads “Seat XXXIII International
to the exercise of the right even under the Universal Eucharistic Congress, Feb 3-7, 1937”. Agplipay, Supreme
Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant Head of the Philippine Independent Church, requested Vicente
on Civil and Political Rights Sotto, Esq., member of the Philippine Bar, to denounce the
matter to the President of the Philippines. In spite the protest,
Not every expression of opinion is a public assembly. The law the Director of Posts publicly announced that the designs of
refers to “rally, demonstration, march, parade, procession or the postage for printing have been sent to the United States.
any other form of mass or concerted action held in a public The stamps were already issued and sold though the greater
place.” So it does not cover any and all kinds of gatherings. part remained unsold. Aglipay sought to prevent further sale
Neither is the law overbroad. It regulates the exercise of the of the stamps and alleged the unconstitutionality of Act 4052.
right to peaceful assembly and petition only to the extent
needed to avoid a clear and present danger of the substantive ISSUE: W/N the stamps violate the Non-Establishment clause
evils Congress has the right to prevent. There is, likewise, no by promoting the Catholic religion
prior restraint, since the content of the speech is not relevant
to the regulation. For those who cannot wait, Section 15 of the HELD: NO
law provides for an alternative forum through the creation of Act 4052 contemplates no religious purpose in view. What it
freedom parks where no prior permit is needed for peaceful gives the Director of Posts is the discretionary power to
assembly and petition at any time determine when the issuance of special postage stamps would
be “advantageous to the Government.” Of course the phrase
b) The Court rules that in view of the maximum tolerance “advantageous to the Government” does not authorize the
mandated by B.P. No. 880, CPR serves no valid purpose if violation of the constitution. The issuance of the postage
it means the same thing as maximum tolerance and is stamps were not inspired by any sectarian feeling to favor a
illegal if it means something else. Accordingly, what is to particular church or religious denominations. The stamps were
be followed is and should be that mandated by the law itself, not issued and sold for the benefit of the Roman Catholic
namely, maximum tolerance, which specifically means “the Church, nor money derived from the sale of the stamps given
highest degree of restraint that the military, police and other to that church.
peace keeping authorities shall observe during a public The purpose of issuing of the stamps was to take advantage
assembly or in the dispersal of the same.” of an event considered to give publicity to the Philippines and
The Court reiterates its basic policy of upholding the its people and attract more tourists to the country. Thus,
fundamental rights of our people, especially freedom of instead of showing a Catholic chalice, the stamp contained a
expression and freedom of assembly. In several policy map of the Philippines, the location of the City of Manila, and
addresses, Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban has repeatedly the inscription that reads “Seat XXXIII International Eucharistic
vowed to uphold the liberty of our people and to nurture their Congress, Feb 3-7, 1937”. Moreover, while the issuance and
prosperity. He said that “in cases involving liberty, the scales sale of the stamps is inseparably linked with an event of a
of justice should weigh heavily against the government and in religious character, the resulting propaganda received by the
favor of the poor, the oppressed, the marginalized, the Roman Catholic Church, was not the aim and purpose of
dispossessed and the weak. Indeed, laws and actions that government. The Government should not be embarrassed in
restrict fundamental rights come to the courts with a heavy its activities simply because of incidental results, more or less
presumption against their validity. These laws and actions are religious in character, if the purpose had in view is one which
subjected to heightened scrutiny.” could legitimately be undertaken by appropriate legislation.
For this reason, the CPR policy has no place in our legal The main purpose should not be frustrated by its
firmament and must be struck down as a darkness that subordination to mere incidental results not intended.
shrouds freedom. It merely confuses our people and is used
by some police agents to justify abuses. On the other hand, Garces v. Estenzo

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 26

Facts: The case is about the constitutionality of four • There was a Pennsylvania law requiring that at least 10
resolutions of the barangay council of Valencia, Ormoc City, verses of the Bible shall be read at the opening of each
regarding the acquisition of the wooden image of San Vicente public school on every school day. This was followed by
Ferrer to be used in the celebration of his annual feast day. the recitation of the Lords Prayer over the school’s PA
system. There are no prefatory statements, no questions
The resolution designated the members of 9 committees to asked or solicited, no comments or explanations made
who would take charge of the 1976 festivity. It provided for and no interpretations given at or during the exercises.
the acquisition of the image of San Vicente Ferrer and the To be excused from such Bible reading, the student must
construction of a waiting shed. Funds for the 2 projects would preset a written request by his parents.
be obtained through the selling of tickets and cash donations. • The Schempp family sought to enjoin the enforcement of
The chairman of the fiesta would be the caretaker of the the statute, as violative of the Non-establishment clause.
image of San Vicente and that the image would remain in his • The Schempps are members of the Unitarian faith in
residence for 1 year and until the election of the next Germantown.
chairman. It was provided that the image would be made
available to the Catholic parish church during the celebration • In another case, the City of Baltimore adopted the same
of the saint’s feast day. practice.
• The Murrays however were atheists. They also sought the
A controversy arose after the mass when the parish priest, nullification of the statute as it threatens their religious
Father Sergio Osmena (baduy naman. Just because his family liberty by placing a premium of belief as against non-
name is osmena, his parents named him Sergio.), refused to belief.
return that image to the barangay council on the pretext that
it was the property of the church because church funds were Issue: Was the non-establishment rule violated by the
used for its acquisition. Pennsylvania statute? YES
Osmena and 3 other people (one of them was Garces who is a Ratio:
member of the Aglipayan church) filed a complaint praying for Even if the purpose of the state rule in schools was not strictly
the annulment of the resolutions. They said the resolutions religious, in that included in their secular purposes are the
contravene the consti provision that “no law shall be made promotion of moral values, the contradiction to materialistic
respecting an establishment of religion” and that “no public trends of the present times, the perpetuation of American
money or prop shall ever be appropriated, applied, paid, or institutions and teachings of literature, this purpose cannot be
used, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, accomplished through Bible reading.
denomination, sectarian institution, or system of religion, or
for the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, Applying the Establishment Clause principles to the cases at
minister or other religious teacher or dignitary. bar we find that the States are requiring the selection and
reading at the opening of the school day of verses from the
Issue: W/n the resolution favors a particular religion Holy Bible and the recitation of the Lord's Prayer by the
W/n the parish priest or layman should have the custody of students in unison. These exercises are prescribed as part of
the image the curricular activities of students who are required by law to
attend school. They are held in the school buildings under the
Ruling: supervision and with the participation of teachers employed in
The contention is devoid of merit. The resolutions don’t those schools.
establish any religion, nor abridge religious liberty, nor
appropriate public money or property fort he benefit of any It might well be said that one's education is not complete
sex priest or clergyman. The image was purchased with without a study of comparative religion or the history of
PRIVATE funds, not with tax money. The construction of a religion and its relationship to the advancement of civilization.
waiting shed was entirely a SECULAR matter. It certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its
literary and historic qualities. Nothing we have said here
The wooden image was purchased in connection with the indicates that such study of the Bible or of religion, when
celebration of the barrio fiesta honoring the patron saint, San presented objectively as part of a secular program of
Vicente, and not for the purpose of favoring any religion nor education, may not be effected consistently with the First
interfering with religious matters or the religious beliefs of the Amendment. But the exercises here do not fall into
barrio residents. If there is nothing unconsti or illegal in those categories. They are religious exercises, required
holding a fiesta and having a patron saint for the barrio, then by the States in violation of the command of the First
any activity intended to facilitate the worship of the patron Amendment that the Government maintain strict
saint can’t be branded as illegal. The barrio fiesta is a socio- neutrality, neither aiding nor opposing religion.
religious affair. Its celebration is an ingrained tradition in rural
communities. Doctrine:
The establishment clause of the 1st amendment prohibits as
There can be no question that the image in question belongs state or the federal government from placing official support
to the baragay council. They have the right to determine who behind the tenets of one or all orthodoxies, and the free
should have custody thereof since it was acquired with private exercise clause guarantees the right of every person to freely
funds and is private property. choose his own course with reference to religious training,
teaching, and observances, free of any compulsion from the
Not every governmental activity which involves the state.
expenditure of public funds and which has some religious tint
is violative of the consti provisions regarding separation of The test may be stated as follows: what are the purpose
church and state, freedom of worship and banning the use of and the primary effect of the enactment? If either is the
public money or property. advancement or inhibition of religion then the enactment
exceeds the scope of legislative power as circumscribed by
the Constitution. To be valid:
ABINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. SCHEMPP
freedom of religion 1) there must be a secular legislative purpose

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 27
2) the statute should not advance nor inhibit any religion judicial notice, it cannot be concluded that the statute
3) three must be no excessive entanglement between results in unconstitutional state involvement with religious
government and religion. instruction or violates the Establishment Clause.

Freedom conscience and freedom to adhere to such religious (5) Since appellants have not shown that the law coerces
organization or form of worship as the individual may choose them in any way in the practice of religion, there is no
cannot be restricted by law. On the other hand, it safeguards violation of the Free Exercise Clause.
the free exercise of the chosen form of religion. Thus the
Amendment embraces two concepts, - freedom to believe
and freedom to act. The first is absolute but, in the nature
of things, the second cannot be. LEMON v KURTZMAN

The Establishment Clause, unlike the Free Exercise Clause, Facts:

does not depend upon any showing of direct governmental There are two Acts being contested:
compulsion and is violated by the enactment of laws which 1. Rhode Island’s 1969 Salary Supplement Act:
establish an official religion whether those laws operate The Act authorizes state officials to supplement the salaries of
directly to coerce non-observing individuals or not. When the teachers of secular subjects in nonpublic elementary schools
power, prestige and financial support of government is placed by paying directly to a teacher an amount not in excess of
behind a particular religious belief, the indirect coercive 15% of his current annual salary. Eligible teachers must teach
pressure upon religious minorities to conform to the prevailing only courses offered in the public schools, using only
officially approved religion is plain. materials used in the public schools, and must agree not to
teach courses in religion. The records of the school in question
must be examined in order to assess how much of the
Board of Education v. Allen expenditure is attributable to secular education and how
much to religious activity
Facts: 2. The Pennsylvania Statute, 1968: Nonpublic
New York's Education Law requires local public school Elementary and Secondary Education Act
authorities to lend textbooks free of charge to all students in authorizes the state Superintendent of Public Instruction to
grades seven to 12, including those in private schools. "purchase" certain "secular educational services" from
Appellant school boards sought a declaration that the nonpublic schools, directly reimbursing those schools solely
statutory requirement was invalid as violative of the State and for teachers' salaries, textbooks, and instructional materials.
Federal Constitutions, an order barring appellee Commissioner Reimbursement is restricted to courses in specific secular
of Education from removing appellants' members from office subjects, the textbooks and materials must be approved by
for failing to comply with it, and an order preventing the use the Superintendent, and no payment is to be made for any
of state funds for the purchase of textbooks to be lent to course containing "any subject matter expressing religious
parochial students. The trial court held the law teaching, or the morals or forms of worship of any sect."
unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments
and entered summary judgment for appellants on the Lemon is a citizen, a taxpayer, and a parent of a child
pleadings; the Appellate Division reversed and ordered the attending public school in Pennsylvania. Lemon also alleges
complaint dismissed since appellant school boards had no that he purchased a ticket at a race track, and thus had paid
standing to attack the statute; and the New York Court of the specific tax that supports the expenditures under the Act
Appeals held that appellants did have standing but that the
statute did not violate the State or Federal Constitution. The Issue: Do the two Acts violate the Establishment and Free
Court of Appeals said that the law was to benefit all school Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment and the Due Process
children, without regard to the type of school attended, that Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
only textbooks approved by school authorities could be
loaned, and therefore the statute was "completely neutral Held: YES. Both statutes are unconstitutional under the
with respect to religion." Religion Clauses of the First Amendment, as the cumulative
impact of the entire relationship arising under the statutes
Held: The statute does not violate the Establishment or the involves excessive entanglement between government and
Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. religion

(1) The express purpose of the statute was the furtherance of Ratio:
educational opportunities for the young, and the law merely
makes available to all children the benefits of a general the three main evils against which the Establishment Clause
program to lend school books free of charge, and the financial was intended to afford protection:
benefit is to parents and children, not to schools. 1. sponsorship,
2. financial support,
(2) There is no evidence that religious books have been 3. and active involvement of the sovereign in religious
loaned, and it cannot be assumed that school authorities are activity
unable to distinguish between secular and religious books or
that they will not honestly discharge their duties to approve Three such tests may be gleaned from our cases:
only secular books. 1. The statute must have a secular legislative purpose;
2. its principal or primary effect must be one that
(3) Parochial schools, in addition to their sectarian function, neither advances nor inhibits religion
perform the task of secular education, and, on the basis of 3. the statute must not foster "an excessive
this meager record, the Court cannot agree with appellants government entanglement with religion."
that all teaching in a sectarian school is religious or that the
intertwining of secular and religious training is such that While the two items on the test are okay, the third is in
secular textbooks furnished to students are in fact question:
instrumental in teaching religion.
In order to determine whether the government entanglement
(4) In the absence of specific evidence, and based solely on with religion is excessive, we must examine the character and

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 28
purposes of the institutions that are benefited, the nature of portions of the grant.
the aid that the State provides, and the resulting relationship
between the government and the religious authority Issues:
1. Is the Act constitutional or does it violate the freedom of
Road Island Act: religion clause?
a. Roman Catholic elementary schools of Rhode Island, 2. Is the 20 year period constitutional or does it violate too?
to date the sole beneficiaries of the Rhode Island
Salary Supplement Act. The substantial religious Held:
character of these church-related schools gives rise 1. VALID ACT. Using the test in Lemon:
to entangling church-state relationships of the kind a. it’s primary effect did not aid a religion, it was aiding
the Religion Clauses sought to avoid. Although the universities and colleges in general since there was a
District Court found that concern for religious values growing demand for higher education and more
did not inevitably or necessarily intrude into the facilities were needed
content of secular subjects, the considerable b. even if the 20 year agreement is not valid, it does
religious activities of these schools led the legislature not make the whole Act invalid
to provide for careful governmental controls and c. no excessive estranglement between the religion and
surveillance by state authorities in order to ensure the government since the purpose was not a
that state aid supports only secular education religious one
b. We cannot, however, refuse here to recognize that d. even though the citizens are compelled to pay taxes
teachers have a substantially different ideological and part of their taxes go to these grants, there is no
character from books. In terms of potential for direct coercion to the practice or exercise of their
involving some aspect of faith or morals in secular religious beliefs
subjects, a textbook's content is ascertainable, but a
teacher's handling of a subject is not. We cannot 2. INVALID 20 YEAR AGREEMENT. After the agreement
ignore the danger that a teacher under religious expires, the schools can use the buildings for non-secular
control and discipline poses to the separation of the purposes and that would provide an added value to religion.
religious from the purely secular aspects of pre-
college education
c. The Handbook of school Regulations (nonpuplic) also County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union
states that: "Religious formation is not confined to
formal courses; nor is it restricted to a single subject Facts:
area." Finally, the Handbook advises teachers to In the courthouse in the county of Allegheny, during the
stimulate interest in religious vocations and winter season, the entrance was decorated by a crèche
missionary work. Given the mission of the church (depicting the nativity, I guess it’s like our belen). In the
school, these instructions are consistent and logical scene, there an angel that says, “Glory to God in the highest!”
d. In the event that the total expenditures of an The crèche displayed a plaque that says that it was donated
otherwise eligible school exceed this norm, the by the Holy Name society, a Roman Catholic group. Within the
program requires the government to examine the premises, there as also in display a menorah to symbolize
school's records in order to determine how much of Chanuka (Jewish winter holiday) and a Christmas tree.
the total expenditures is attributable to secular
education and how much to religious activity. This Issue:
kind of state inspection and evaluation of the Does the display of the crèche violate of the
religious content of a religious organization is fraught (non)establishment clause? YES
with the sort of entanglement that the Constitution Is the display of the menorah violative? NO
forbids. It is a relationship pregnant with dangers of
excessive government direction of church schools, Ratio:
and hence of churches. Creche: the county associated itself with the display by means
of press releases and by placing similar decorations next to
Pennsylvania program the official county signs. The sign demonstrate that the
a. the very restrictions and surveillance necessary to government is endorsing a religious message of the
ensure that teachers play a strictly nonideological organization. The government should only consider Christmas
role give rise to entanglements between church and a cultural phenomenon.
state. The Pennsylvania statute, like that of Rhode
Island, fosters this kind of relationship. Menorah: does not violate because it does not have the effect
b. The Pennsylvania statute, moreover, has the further of advancing the religion s. The sign in the menorah that
defect of providing state financial aid directly to the bears that the city salutes liberty during the holiday season is
church-related school. This factor distinguishes both okay. It’s physical setting with the Christmas tree simply
Everson and Allen, for, in both those cases, the Court acknowledges that Chanukah is a winter holiday.
was careful to point out that state aid was provided
to the student and his parents -- not to the church- Doctrine
related school - T he establishment clause and free exercise clause
not only protect the diversity within Christianity , but
also guarantees religious liberty and equality to the
infidel, the atheist, or the adherent to the non-
Tilton v. Richardson
Christian faith such as Islam or Judaism
- The establishment clause means that government
Facts: Taxpayers contested the constitutionality of HIGHER
may not:
EDUCATION FACILITIES ACT OF 1963 which was going to give
o Promote or affiliate itself with any religious
federal construction grants to universities and colleges, 4 of
doctrine or organization
which were religious: (a lib for Sacred Heart Univ, science
o Discriminate among persons on the basis of
building at Fairfield University, language lab and music, arts,
and drama building for 2 other church colleges). The buildings their religious beliefs and practices
have to be used for strictly secular purposes for at least 20 o Delegate a governmental power to a
years. If they violate this agreement, the State can take back religious institution

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 29
o Involve itself too deeply in such an Capitol Square v. Pinette
institution’s affairs.
Facts:

Zobrest v. Catalina (case summary) - Capitol Square is a state owned plaza surrounding
the statehouse in Coulumbus Ohio. The square has
Facts: been used for public speeches, gatherings and
Petitioners, a deaf child and his parents, filed this suit after festivals advocating and celebrating a variety of
respondent school district refused to provide a sign-language causes both secular and religious
interpreter to accompany the child to classes at a Roman - Ohio Administrative Code makes the square available
Catholic high school. ames Zobrest attended grades one “for use by the public for free discussion of public
through five in a school for the deaf, and grades six through questions or for activities of a broad public purpose”
eight in a public school operated by respondent. While he - The Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board has
attended public school, respondent furnished him with a sign- the responsibility for regulating public access, to use
language interpreter. For religious reasons, James' parents the square, a group must simply fill out an
(also petitioners here) enrolled him for the ninth grade in application form and meet several criteria (safety,
Salpointe Catholic High School, a sectarian institution. They sanitation, non0interference with other uses of the
alleged that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act square)
(IDEA) and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment - Board received an application from an officer of the
required respondent to provide the interpreter, and that the Ohio Ku Klux Klan to place a cross on the square but
Establishment Clause did not bar such relief. The District the board denied the application for violation of the
Court granted respondent summary judgment on the ground Establishment Clause.
that the interpreter would act as a conduit for the child's
religious inculcation, thereby promoting his religious Issue/Held: W/N the display of the Ku Klux Klan is a violation of
development at government expense in violation of the the Establishment Clause? NO.
Establishment Clause. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
Ratio:
Held:
1. The prudential rule of avoiding constitutional questions if 1. There is a crucial difference between government
there is a nonconstitutional ground for decision is inapplicable speech endorsing religion which the Establishment
here, since respondent did not urge upon the District Court or Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion
the Court of Appeals any of the nonconstitutional grounds it which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clause
now raises in this Court. protects.
2. The Establishment Clause does not prevent respondent 2. Petitioners contend that the distinction disappears
from furnishing a disabled child enrolled in a sectarian school when the private speech is conducted too close to
with a sign-language interpreter in order to facilitate his the symbols of government (as in the case here). The
education. Government programs that neutrally provide Court admits that giving sectarian religious speech
benefits to a broad class of citizens defined without reference preferential access to a forum close to the seat of
to religion are not readily subject to an Establishment Clause government would violate the Establishment Clause
challenge just because sectarian institutions may also [509 however this does not apply to the present case,
U.S. 1, 2] receive an attenuated financial benefit. Mueller v. because Capitol Square is a public forum.
Allen, 463 U.S. 388 ; Witters v. Washington Dept. of Services 3. The terms of the Establishment Clause applies only
for Blind, 474 U.S. 481 . The same reasoning used in Mueller to words and acts of government and was not meant
and Witters applies here. The service in this case is part of a to be an impediment to purely private religious
general government program that distributes benefits speech that has been connected to the State
neutrally to any child qualifying as disabled under the IDEA, because of its occurrence in a public forum.
without regard to the sectarian-nonsectarian, or public- 4. it is sufficient that the group’s activity was not
nonpublic nature of the school the child attends. By according government sponsored, the event was open to the
parents freedom to select a school of their choice, the statute public and the benefit of the facilities was shared by
ensures that a government-paid interpreter will be present in various organizations
a sectarian school only as a result of individual parents' 5. religious expression cannot violate the Establishment
private decisions. Since the IDEA creates no financial Clause where (1) it is purely private and (2) occurs in
incentive for parents to choose a sectarian school, an a traditional or designated public forum, publicly
interpreter's presence there cannot be attributed to state announced and open to all on equal terms
decisionmaking. The fact that a public employee will be
physically present in a sectarian school does not by itself
make this the same type of aid that was disapproved in Meek Manosca v. CA
v. Pittenger, 421 U.S. 349 , and School Dist. of Grand Rapids
v. Ball, 473 U.S. 373 . In those cases, the challenged programs FACTS:
gave direct grants of government aid - instructional • Petitioners (Manoscas) inherited a piece of land
equipment and material, teachers, and guidance counselors - declared by the NHI (national historical institute) as
which relieved sectarian schools of costs they otherwise would the birthplace of Felix Manalo (founder of Iglesia ni
have borne in educating their students. Here, the child is the Cristo) and thus a national historical landmark
primary beneficiary, and the school receives only an incidental • Republic through the office of the Solicitor General
benefit. In addition, an interpreter, unlike a teacher or instituted a complaint for expropriation
guidance counselor, neither adds to nor subtracts from the simultaneously filing an urgent motion for the
sectarian school's environment, but merely interprets issuance of the order to permit the immediate
whatever material is presented to the class as a whole. There possession of the property.
is no absolute bar to the placing of a public employee in a • Petitioners contend that intended expropriation is not
sectarian school. for a public purpose and that act would constitute an
application of public funds, for the use (direct and
indirect) benefit, or support of INC contrary to the
Constitution.

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 30
• They also contend that the expropriation failed to community” and not as a religious group. Thus, bearing in
meet guidelines set by court in Guido case regarding mind the constitutional barrier between the Church and State,
size of land, number of people benefited, extent of the latter must make sure that OMA does not intrude into
reform. purely religious matters. Classifying a food product as halal is
a religious function because the standards used are drawn
ISSUES: from the Qur’an and Islamic beliefs. By giving OMA the
exclusive power to classify food products as halal, EO 46
• W/N the public use requirement of eminent domain encroached on the religious freedom of Muslim organizations
exists in the attempted expropriation by the republic like herein petitioner to interpret for Filipino Muslims what
of the parcel of land so declared by the national food products are fit for Muslim consumption. Also, by
historical landmark arrogating to itself the task of issuing halal certifications, the
• W/N the birthplace of Manalo as landmark has State has in effect forced Muslims to accept its own
become so important as “public use appropriate for interpretation of the Qur’an and Sunnah on halal food.
the exercise of eminent domain” when only member As to the respondent’s argument that the government only
of INC would benefit seeks to protect and promote the muslim Filipinos’ right to
health, and to instill health consciousness in them, the
HELD: Petition denied protection and promotion of the Muslim Filipinos’ right to
health are already provided for in existing laws and ministered
• Yes to by government agencies charged with ensuring that food
products released in the market are fit for human
• Yes
consumption, properly labeled and safe.
RATIO:
NOTE:
Only the prevention of an immediate and grave danger
• The view of the petitioners is much too limited and
to the security and welfare of the community can
restricted. The power of eminent domain should not
justify the infringement of religious freedom. If the
now be understood as being confined only to the
government fails to show the seriousness and
expropriation of vast tracts of land. The term public
immediacy of the threat, State intrusion is
use must be considered in its generic concept. The
constitutionally unacceptable.
idea that public use is strictly limited to clear cases
of use by public has long been discarded.
• This attempt to give religious perspective to the case
Taruc v. De la Cruz
deserves little consideration. What should be
significant is the principal objective the exercise of
Facts: The petitioners are lay members of the Philippine
the power, not the casual consequences that might
Independent Church (PIC) in Socorro, Surigao City. Petitioners
follow. The purpose is essentially to recognize the
led by Taruc clamored for the transfer of parish priest Rustom
distinctive e contribution of the late founder of the
Florano for the reason that Fr. Florano’s wife’s family
INC to the culture of the Philippines rather than to
belonged to a political party opposed to petitioner Taruc’s.
commemorate his founding and leadership of the
Bishop De la Cruz found this reason too flimsy so he did not
INC.
give in to the request. Things worsened when Taruc
conducted an open mass for the town Fiesta celebrated by Fr.
DOCRTINE:
Ambong who was not a member of the clergy of the diocese
of Surigao. Petitioners were then expelled/excommunicated
• The term public use must be considered in its generic
from the PIC for the reason of disobedience to duly
concept
constituted authority, inciting dissension resulting in division
• Indeed that only a few would actually benefit from of the Parish of Our Mother of Perpetual Help and threatening
the expropriation of property does not necessarily to forcible occupy the Parish Church causing anxiety among
diminish the essence and character of public use. the General Membership. Because of the order of
expulsion/excommunication petitioners filed a complaint for
damages with preliminary injunction against Bishop De la Cruz
ISLAMIC DA’WAH COUNCIL v. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY and impleaded Fr. Florano and a certain Delfin Bordas for
conspiring with the Bishop. They said that their rights to due
FACTS: process were violated because they were not heard before the
Petitioner Islamic Da’wah Council of the Philippines, Inc. order of expulsion was made.
(IDCP) prays for the declaration of nullity of Executive Order
EO 46 and the prohibition of its implementation by the Office Issue: Whether or not the courts have jurisdiction to hear a
of the Executive Secretary and Office of Muslim Affairs (OMA). case involving the expulsion/excommunication of members of
The Regional Islamic Da’wah Council of Southeast Asia and a religious institution
the Pacific (RISEAP) previously accredited petitioner to issue
halal certifications in the Philippines. On October 26, 2001, Held: No
respondent Office of the Executive Secretary issued EO 46
creating the Philippine Halal Certification Scheme and Ratio: Section 5 of Article III
designating respondent OMA to oversee its implementation. A form of government where the complete separation of civil
Under the EO, respondent OMA has the exclusive authority to and ecclesiastical authority is insisted upon, the civil courts
issue halal certificates and perform other related regulatory must not allow themselves to intrude unduly in matters of an
activities. Petitioner lost revenues after food manufacturers ecclesiastical in nature
stopped securing certifications from it. In disputes involving religious institutions or organizations,
there is one area, which the Court should not touch: doctrinal
ISSUE: and disciplinary differences.
W/N EO 46 encroached on the religious freedom of IDCP To the power of excluding form the church those allegedly
HELD: unworthy of membership, are unquestionably ecclesiastical
OMA deals with the societal, legal, political and economic matters, which are outside the province of civil courts.
concerns of the Muslim community as a “national cultural Comment of the court: records show that Bishop De la Cruz

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 31
pleaded with petitioners several times not to commit acts
inimical to the best interests of PIC. They were also warned of
the consequences of their actions yet these pleas and US v. Ballard
warnings fell on deaf ears.
Facts:
FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION There was an appeal of the conviction of Edna and Donald
Ballard, two leaders of the new religious "I AM" Activity
Cantwell v. Connecticut movement for fraudulently using the mails to seek and collect
donations on the basis of religious claims that the defendants
Facts: well knew were false. They claimed miraculous
Newton Cantwell and his two sons, Jesse and Russel, were communication with the spirit world and supernatural power
members of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and claimed to be to heal the sick.
ordained ministers. Appellants were engaged in going singly
from house to house on Cassius Street, a thickly populated Respondents argued that the indictment attacked the
neighborhood where 90% of the residents are Roman religious beliefs of respondents and sought to restrict the free
Catholic. They were arrested and charged for among others, exercise of their religion in violation of the Constitution of the
(1) violation of a Connecticut statute which required solicitors US.
to obtain a certificate from the secretary of the public welfare
council before soliciting funds from the public and (2) for The court conferred and confined the issues to the question of
breach of the peace. good faith belief of the respondents in their religious claims.
Respondents were found guilty. The CA reversed the
Jesse Cantwell was charged for as follows: judgment and granted a new trial for it felt the restriction of
He stopped two men in the street, asked and received the issue to that of good faith was an error.
permission to play a phonograph record. He played the record
“Enemies”, which attacked the religion and church of the two Issue:
men, who were Catholics. Both were offended by the contents W/N the District Court ruled properly when it withheld from
of the record and were tempted to strike Cantwell unless he the jury all questions concerning the truth or falsity of the
went away. On being told to be on his way, he left. There was religious beliefs or doctrines of the respondents? Yes, says SC.
no evidence that he was personally offensive or entered into
any argument with those he interviewed.
Held:
Issue: W/N the statute violated was constitutional. No The religious beliefs espoused by respondents might seem
W/N Jesse Cantwell’s conviction of breach of the peace incredible, if not preposterous, to most people. But if those
violated constitutional guarantees of religious liberty and doctrines are subject to trial before a jury charged with finding
freedom of speech. Yes their truth or falsity, then the same can be done with the
religious belief of any sect. When the triers of fact undertake
Rationale: that task, they enter a forbidden domain. The First
The statute, as construed and applied to the appellants, Amendment does not select one type of religion for preferred
deprives them of their liberty without due process of law in treatment. The freedom of religious belief embraces the right
contravention of the Fourteenth Amendment. It is a previous to maintain theories of life and of death and of the hereafter
restraint upon the free exercise of religion, and a deprivation which are rank heresy to followers of the orthodox faiths. CA
of liberty without due process of law in violation of the Judgment reversed. Cause is remanded to CA for further
Fourteenth Amendment. The fact that arbitrary or capricious proceedings.
action by the licensing officer is subject to judicial review
cannot validate the statute. A previous restraint by judicial Chief Justice Stone, dissenting, argued that the question was
decision after trial is as obnoxious under the Constitution as appropriate for the jury. “The constitutional guaranty of
restraint by administrative action. freedom of religion affords immunity from criminal
prosecution for the fraudulent procurement of money by false
Jesse Cantwell was upon a public street, where he had a right statements as to one's religious experiences, more than it
to be and where he had a right to peacefully impart his views renders polygamy or libel immune from criminal prosecution.
to others. There is no showing that his deportment was noisy, As no legally sufficient reason for disturbing it appears, the CA
truculent, overbearing, or offensive; nor was it claimed that he judgment should be reversed and that of the DC reinstated.
intended to insult or affront the listeners by playing the
record; nor was it shown that the sound of the phonograph Justice Robert Jackson, dissenting, said he would dismiss the
disturbed persons living nearby, drew a crowd, or impeded indictment and have done with this business of judicially
traffic. Thus, he had invaded no right or interest of the public examining other people’s faiths.
or of the men accosted.

Stuff he probably won’t ask but just in case: AMERICAN BIBLE SOCIETY v CITY OF MANILA
*When clear and present danger of riot, disorder, interference April 30, 1957
with traffic upon the public streets, or other immediate threat
to public safety, peace or order, appears, the power of the FACTS
state to prevent or punish is obvious. Equally obvious is it that American Bible Society (ABS) was a foreign, non-stock, non-
a state may not unduly suppress free communication of profit, religious missionary corporation which sold bibles and
views, religious or other, under the guise of conserving gospel portions of the bible in the course of its ministry. The
desirable conditions. – in this case, there was no clear and defendant City of Manila required plaintiff to secure a mayor’s
present danger. permit and a municipal license as ordinarily required of those
*The First Amendment embraces two concepts – the freedom engaged in the business of general merchandise under the
to believe and the freedom to act. The first is absolute but the city’s ordinances (Ordinance No 3000, as amended, and
second cannot be. Conduct remains subject to regulation for ordinances 2529, 3028, and 3364). ABS was forced to pay
the protection of society. The freedom to act must have Php 5,891.45 to avoid closing of its business as well as further
appropriate definition to preserve the enforcement of that fines.
protection.

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 32
ISSUE/HELD salute the flag and sing the national anthem and recite the
1) Whether the ordinances were still in force? YES (not that patriotic pledge for they believe that those are “acts of
important) worship” or “religious devotion” which they cannot
conscientiously give to anyone or anything except God. This
The Court discussed the provisions of each ordinance and issue had been long settled with the Gerona case. However,
proved that they were still in force at the time. the SC deemed it fit to revisit the Gerona ruling. The
petitioners contend that while they do not take part in the
2) Whether the ordinances amounted to religious censorship compulsory flag ceremony, they do not engage in external
and restrained the free exercise and enjoyment of religious acts or behavior that would offend their countrymen who
profession (to wit: the distribution and sale of bibles and other believe in expressing their love of country through the
religious literature to the people of the Philippines)? YES. observance of the flag ceremony. They quietly stand at
attention during the flag ceremony to show their respect for
The Court first defined religion as (1) a profession of faith to the right of those who choose to participate in the solemn
an active power that binds and elevates man to its Creator proceedings.
(Aglipay v Ruiz); (2) it has reference to one’s views of his
relations to His Creator and to the obligations they impose of Issue:
reverence to His being and character, and obedience to His W/N the students can be expelled for not taking part in the
Will (David v Beason). The Court, citing Tanada and Fernando, flag ceremony.
stated that:
The constitutional guaranty of the free exercise and Ruling: No.
enjoyment of religious profession and worship carries with it
the right to disseminate religious information. Any restraint of Ratio:
such right can only be justified like other restraints of Religious freedom is a fundamental right which is entitled to
freedom of expression on the grounds that there is a clear the highest priority and the amplest protection among human
and present danger of any substantive evil which the rights, for it involves the relationship of man to his Creator.
State has the right to prevent. The right to religious profession and worship has a two-fold
This was the Court’s maiden unequivocal affirmation of the aspect, namely, freedom to believe and freedom to act on
“clear and present danger” rule in the religious freedom area, one’s belief. The first is absolute as long as the belief is
and in Philippine jurisprudence, for that matter. The Court, confined within the realm of thought. The second is subject to
however, did not really use this test on the case at hand (see regulation where the belief is translated into external acts
EXTRA INFO for further clarification). The Court simply that affect the public welfare. The sole justification for a prior
proved how ABS was exempted from tax as a religious restraint or limitation on the exercise of religious freedom is
corporation pursuant to the National Internal Revenue Code. the existence of a grave and present danger of a character
The Court ruled that the ordinances could not be applied both grave and imminent of a serious evil to public safety,
because they would impair ABS’s free exercise and enjoyment public morals, public health, or any other legitimate public
of religious profession and worship as well as its rights of interest that the State has a right to prevent.
dissemination of religious beliefs.

Extra info
Don’t bring this up… this is only in case Cande asks about it. I WISCONSIN VS. YODER (May 15, 1972)
got this from Estrada v Escritor… Chief Justice Burger
The case did not clearly show, however, whether the
Court proceeded to apply the [clear and present danger] test Facts:
to the facts and issues of the case, i.e., it did not identify the • Wisconsin enacted a Compulsory School Attendance
secular value the government regulation sought to protect, Law, which required the families to send their children to
whether the religious speech posed a clear and present public or private school until age 16.
danger to this or other secular value protected by • Respondents Jonas Yoder and Wallace Miller are
government, or whether there was danger but it could not be members of the Old Order Amish Religion. Adin Yutzy is a
characterized as clear and present. It is one thing to apply member of the Conservative Amish Mennonite Church.
the test and find that there is no clear and present danger, Respondents are residents of Green County, Wisconsin. All 3
and quite another not to apply the test altogether. parties declined to send their children ages 14 to 15 to public
Instead, the Court categorically held that the questioned school after hacing completed 8th grade.
ordinances were not applicable to plaintiff as it was not • The School District Administrator complained, and
engaged in the business or occupation of selling said charged the Amish families. They were later convicted.
“merchandise” for profit. To add, the Court, citing Murdock v. • The defense of the Amish families was that the
Pennsylvania, ruled that applying the ordinance requiring it to attendance of their children to high school was contrary to
secure a license and pay a license fee or tax would impair its Amish religion and Amish way of life. They believed that
free exercise of religious profession and worship and its right sending their children to high school would expose them to
of dissemination of religious beliefs “as the power to tax the the danger of the censure of their church, and would
exercise of a privilege is the power to control or suppress its endanger their own salvation.
enjoyment.” Thus, in American Bible Society, the “clear and • The main contention was that the Amish religion has
present danger” rule was laid down but it was not the fundamental belief that salvation requires life in a church
clearly applied. community separate and apart from the world or worldly
-c/o Clique Supremacy influence. They are devoted to a life in harmony with nature
and the soil, making their living by farming or closely related
Ebralinag v. Division Superintendent of Schools of Cebu activities.
• They contend that high school education has a
Facts: worldly influence because it tends to emphasize intellection
Certain high school and grade school students of different and scientific accomplishments, competitiveness, success,
public schools of Cebu were expelled from school for refusing social life with other students. Amish people emphasize
to take part in the flag ceremony. These students are informal learning through doing, a life of goodness rather than
members of the religious sect known as Jehovah’s Witnesses. life of intellect. Wisdom rather than technical knowledge,
According to the belief of the said religious sect, they do not community welfare rather than competition, separation rather

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 33
than integration with worldly society. parent’s decision not to send the child to school does NOT
• Their belief is that once a child has learned basic impair the physical nor mental health of the child, nor result in
reading, writing and math, these are better learned through the inability to be self-supporting. (in short, the claim of
doing rather than in a classroom. parens patriae is too broad and sweeping.)
• The contention of the state was that the law was a
reasonable exercise of governmental power, where the State
has a high responsibility for education of its citizens.
Pamil v. Teleron
ISSUE: A state’s interest in universal education however is not
totally free from a BALANCING PROCESS., when it infringes on Ponente: Fernando
other fundamental rights and interests such as those
protected by the FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE. There is also the Doctrine: The law which disqualifies ecclesiastics from being
TRADITIONAL INTERESTS OF PARENTS with respect t the elected or appointed to a municipal office us a religious test
religious upbringing of the children. Thus the test must be: which is inconsistent with the religious clause of the
• Whether there is a denial of the free exercise of constitution (also held in MCDANIEL VS. PATY – ministers as
religious belief, or candidates to the constitutional convention). But the needed
• Whether there is a state interest of sufficient votes were not reached; therefore, said statute was not
magnitude to override the interest under the free exercise nullified.
clause.
Facts:
SC: FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE UPHELD. STATE CANNOT COMPEL
THE AMISH FAMILIES TO SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO FORMAL  Father Margarito R. Gonzaga, was, in 1971 elected to
HIGH SCHOOL AT AGE 16. the position of municipal mayor of Alburquerque, Bohol.
A way of life may not be interposed as a barrier to reasonable Thereafter, he was duly proclaimed.
regulation of education if it is based on purely secular  A suit for quo warranto was then filed by Forunato R.
considerations. To have the protection of the Religion Clause, Pamil, himself an aspirant for office, for his
the claims must be rooted in religious belief. The traditional disqualification based on the Administrative Code
way of life of the Amish people is not merely a matter of provision, which provides that “in no case shall there be
personal preference, but one of deep religious conviction elected or appointed to a municipal office ecclesiastics,
shared by an organized group and intimately related to daily soldiers in active service, persons receiving salaries or
living. compensation from provincial or national funds, or
contractors for public works of the municipality.”
The impact of the compulsory attendance law on Amish  The suit did not prosper. The CFI ruled that such statutory
religion is not only severe but inescapable because the law ineligibility was impliedly repealed by the Election Code
COMPELS THEM UNDER THREAT OF CRIMINAL SANCTION, to of 1971. Matter was elevated by Pamil to the SC
perform act undeniably at odds with their fundamental
religious beliefs. Issue: Whether an ecclesiastic or a priest may be elected as a
public official.
It carries with it an objective danger to the free exercise of
religion. It creates a very real threat of undermining the Amish Held:
community and religious practice. They must either abandon
 The Challenged Administrative Code provision,
the belief and be assimilated into society, or be forced to
certainly insofar as it declares ineligible
migrate to some other place.
ecclesiastics to any elective or appointive office,
is, on its face, inconsistent with the religious
The state argues tat while religious “beliefs” are absolutely
freedom guaranteed by the Constitution. To so
free from state control, “actions” are not protected such that
exclude them is to impose a religious test.
activities of individuals, even religiously based, can be
regulated.  Torcaso v. Watkins, has pervasive weight. What was
SC: There are still certain “acts” which are under the involved was the validity of a provision in the Maryland
protection of free exercise clause. The protection does not Constitution prescribing that “no religious test ought ever
cover only beliefs. A regulation may in its application, still to be required as a disqualification for any office or profit
infringe the free exercise clause, if it unduly burdens the free or trust in this State, other than a declaration of belief in
exercise of religion. the existence of God.” Such a constitutional requirement
was assailed as contrary to the First Amendment of the
The state argues that this formal education is to enable the US Constitution by an appointee to the office of notary
Amish to participate in a democratic process. public in Maryland, who was refused a commission as he
SC: The Amish alternative has already enabled them to would not declare a belief in God. He failed in the Mary
function effectively in their day to day lives. They have land Court of Appeals but prevailed in the US Supreme
survived for more than 200 years in this country. (They are Court, which reversed the state court decision. It could
self-sufficient and able to survive). not have been otherwise. As emphatically declared by
Justice Black: “this Maryland religious test for public office
unconstitutionally invades the appellant’s freedom of
The state invokes Parens Patriae role. belief and religion and therefore cannot be enforced
SC: The duty to prepare the child for additional obligations against him.”
includes the inculcation of moral standards, religious beliefs  The analogy appears to be obvious. In that case, it was
and elements of good citizenship. Thus, this case involves a lack of belief in God that was disqualification. Here being
more fundamental interest of the parents, as contrasted from an ecclesiastic and therefore professing a religious faith
that of the state, to guide the religious future and education of suffices to disqualify for a public office. There is thus an
their children. incompatibility between the Administrative Code
provision relied upon by Pamil and an express
The power of the parent may be limited only if it appears that constitutional mandate.
their decisions jeopardize the health and safety of the child or  It is not a valid argument against this conclusion to assert
home. But in the case of the Amish people, they have not. The that under the Philippine Autonomy Act of 1916, there

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 34
was such a prohibition against a religious test, and yet effect of inhibiting religion.
such a ban on holding a municipal position had not been
nullified. It suffices to answer that no question was raised
as to its validity. Thus, the view that the Administrative
Code provision is inoperative by virtue of the mandate of Goldman v Weinberger
the 1935 Constitution, similarly found in the present
Charter, failed to obtain the necessary eight votes Facts:
needed to give it binding force. The attack on the "Petitioner, an Orthodox Jew and ordained rabbi, was ordered
continuing effectivity of Section 2175 having failed, it not to wear a yarmulke while on duty and in uniform as a
must be given full force and application. commissioned officer in the Air Force at March Air Force Base,
pursuant to an Air Force regulation that provides that
authorized headgear may be worn out of doors but that
Mcdaniel v Paty indoors '[h]eadgear [may] not be worn . . . except by armed
security police in the performance of their duties.'
Facts: Petitioner then brought an action in Federal District Court,
claiming that the application of the regulation to prevent him
McDaniel, an ordained minister of a Baptist church in from wearing his yarmulke infringed upon his First
Tennessee filed as a candidate for delegate to the Amendment freedom to exercise his religious beliefs.
constitutional convention. An opposing candidate said he was The District Court permanently enjoined the Air Force from
disqualified from serving as a delegate under state law. enforcing the regulation against petitioner. The Court of
Provisions of Tennessee’s constitution disqualifies ministers or Appeals reversed.
priests of any denomination from serving as state legislators.
Issue: W/N the regulation to prevent him from wearing his
Issue: w/n it violates McDaniel’s free exercise of religion. yarmulke infringes upon his First Amendment freedom to
exercise religious beliefs?
Ruling:
Held: The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the
The right to the free exercise of religion unquestionably Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
encompasses the right to preach, proselyte, and perform
other similar religious functions, or to be a minister of the type The First Amendment does not prohibit the challenged
McDaniel was found to be. Tennesse also acknowledges the regulation from being applied to petitioner even though its
right of its adult citizens generally to seek and hold office as effect is to restrict the wearing of the headgear required by
legislators or delegates to the state constitutional convention. his religious beliefs. That Amendment does not require the
Yet under the clergy-disqualification provision, McDaniel can’t military to accommodate such practices as wearing a
exercise both rights simultaneously because the state has yarmulke in the face of its view that they would detract from
conditioned the exercise of one on the surrender of the other. the uniformity sought by dress regulations. Here, the Air Force
The state is punishing a religious profession with the privation has drawn the line essentially between religious apparel that
of a civil right. To condition the availability of benefits upon is visible and that which is not, and the challenged regulation
this appelant’s willingness to violate a cardinal principle of his reasonably and evenhandedly regulates dress in the interest
religious faith effectively penalizes the free exercise of his of the military's perceived need for uniformity.
consti liberties.

The Free Exercise Clause (FEC) forbids govt from regulating, German v Barangan
prohibiting, or rewarding religious beliefs. The Tennessee
disqualification operates against McDaniel bec of his status as Facts:
a priest. The Tenn disqualification is directed primarily, not at A group of 50 businessmen, students etc. wearing yellow
religious belief, but at the status, acts and conduct of the shirts met up in JP Laurel st in Manila and marched to St Jude
clergy. Therefore the FEC’s absolute prohibition against Chapel located within the Malacanang security area. The
infringements on the freedom to believe is inapposite here. group was not allowed to go in the church because they were
there to rally as shown by their anti-government chants and
Nevertheless, it violates McDaniel’s 1st Amendment right to clenched fists.
the free exercise of his religion on the surrender of his right to
seek office. Failed to demonstrate that its views of clergy Issue: Was the right to exercise their religion violated? NO
participation in the pol process have not lost whatever validity
they may once have enjoyed. The Tennessee restriction is Ratio: When mobs of demonstrators crashed through
based on the belief that if elected to public office would Malacanang gates using JP Laurel st in 1972, the area was
exercise their powers and influence to promote the interests restricted. In this case, petitioners are not denied or
of one sect or thwart the interests of another. But provided no restrained of their freedom of belief or choice of their religion,
persuasive support for this fear. but only in the manner by which they attempted to translate
the same into action.
In sum, The FEC is violated by: 1. Establishing as a condition
of office the willingness to eschew certain protected religious
practices. It therefore establishes a religious classification MARTIN CENTENO vs. HON. VICTORIA VILLALON-
governing eligibility for office that is absolutely prohibited. 2. PORNILLOS
Conditions eligibility for office on the abandonment of his
religious exercise. Facts:
The Tenn disqualify also violates the Establishment Clause. A civic organization known as the Samahang Katandaan ng
Govt generally may not use religion as a basis of classification Nayon ng Tikay launched a fund drive for the purpose of
for the imposition of duties, penalties, privileges, or benefits. renovating the chapel of Barrio Tikay, Malolos, Bulacan.
May not fence out from pol participation, people such as Petitioner Martin Centeno, the chairman of the group,
ministers whom it regards as over-involved in religion. It together with Vicente Yco, approached Judge Adoracion G.
establishes a religious classification that has the primary Angeles, a resident of Tikay, and solicited from her a

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 35
contribution of P1,500.00. It is admitted that the solicitation "May our aspirations for our country and for these young
was made without a permit from the Department of Social people, who are our hope for the future, be richly fulfilled.
Welfare and Development, in violation of PD 1564. AMEN"

Issues: Issue: Whether a religious exercise may be conducted at a

1. Are the petitioners punishable under PD 1564, since the graduation ceremony
term "religious purpose" is not expressly included in the
provisions of the statute? Held: No.
2. Do solicitations made for a religious purpose subject to
State regulation constitute an abridgment of the right to Ratio: No because it is subtly required that they take part of
freedom of religion guaranteed under the Constitution? the religious prayer = violation of freedom of religion.
The court applied the three part Establishment Clause test set
Held: forth in Lemon v. Kurtzman. Under that test as described in
1. Religious purpose is not within the purview of PD our past cases, to satisfy the Establishment Clause a
1564 governmental practice must (1) reflect a clearly secular
2. They can be subject to state regulation purpose; (2) have a primary effect that neither advances nor
inhibits religion; and (3) avoid excessive government
Ratio: entanglement with religion. The petitioners' actions violated
1. Presidential Decree No. 1564 (which amended Act the second part of the test, and so did not address either the
No. 4075, otherwise known as the Solicitation Permit first or the third.
Law), provides as follows: Even though you are not required to attend the ceremony, the
undeniable fact is that the school district's supervision and
Sec. 2. “Any person, corporation, organization, or association control of a high school graduation ceremony places public
desiring to solicit or receive contributions for charitable or pressure, as well as peer pressure, on attending
public welfare purposes shall first secure a permit from the students to stand as a group or, at least, maintain respectful
Regional Offices of the Department of Social Services and silence during the Invocation and Benediction. This pressure,
Development…” though subtle and indirect, can be as real as any overt
Indeed, it is an elementary rule of statutory construction that compulsion.
the express mention of one person, thing, act, or consequence The act of standing or remaining silent was an
excludes all others. We treat the words "charitable" and expression of participation in the Rabbi's prayer. We think
"religious" separately and independently of each other the State may not, consistent with the Establishment Clause,
place primary and secondary school children in this position.
2. “Whence, even the exercise of religion may be Research in psychology supports the common assumption
regulated, at some slight inconvenience, in order that that adolescents are often susceptible to pressure from their
the State may protect its citizens from injury. Without peers towards conformity, and that the influence is strongest
doubt, a State may protect its citizens from in matters of social convention.
fraudulent solicitation by requiring a stranger in the
community, before permitting him publicly to solicit
funds for any purpose, to establish his identity and CHURCH OF LUKUMI BABALU AYE, INC. V. CITY OF
his authority to act for the cause which he purports HIALEAH
to represent. The State is likewise free to regulate (508 U.S. 520)
the time and manner of solicitation generally, in the
interest of public safety, peace, comfort, or FACTS:
convenience.” • Petitioner Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. (Church)
and
“To conclude, solicitation for religious purposes may be Ernesto Picardo its president filed an action against the city if
subject to proper regulation by the State in the exercise of Hialeah and its city council named as defendants alleging
police power. However, in the case at bar, considering that violation
solicitations intended for a religious purpose are not within the of the their rights under the Free Exercise Clause.
coverage of Presidential Decree No. 1564, as earlier • In April 1987, the church announced plans to establish a
demonstrated, petitioner cannot be held criminally liable house
therefore” of worship, school, cultural center, and museum with the goal
to
bring the practice of the Santeria faith, including its ritual of
Robert E. Lee v. Daniel Weisman animal
sacrifice, into the open.
Facts: Deborah Weisman, 14, graduated from Nathan Bishop • On June 9, 1987 and other subsequent days the Hialeah city
Middle School, a public school in Providence, at a formal council held an emergency public session where several
ceremony in June 1989. The school principal, petitioner Robert ordinances
E. Lee, invited a rabbi to deliver prayers at the graduation and resolutions where passed in response to the distress of
exercises for Deborah's class. The principal advised the Rabbi members of the community regarding practices of the
that the invocation and benediction should be nonsectarian. Santeria
The students stood for the Pledge of Allegiance and remained religion specifically animal sacrifice.
standing during the Rabbi's prayers. The graduation ceremony
was optional and a student can still get his or her diploma (1) On June 9, Resolution 87-66, noted the "concern"
without attending. expressed by residents of the city "that certain religions may
A few lines from the prayer: (he might ask kasi) propose to engage in practices which are inconsistent with
"God of the Free, Hope of the Brave: public morals, peace or safety," and declared that the City
"For the legacy of America where diversity is celebrated and reiterates its commitment to a prohibition against any and all
the rights of minorities are protected, we thank You. May acts of any and all religious groups which are inconsistent
these young men and women grow up to enrich it. with public morals, peace or safety.
"For the liberty of America, we thank You. May these new (2) On June 9, Ordinance 87-40, incorporated in full, except
graduates grow up to guard it. as to penalty, Florida's animal cruelty laws which punishes

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 36
unnecessarily or cruelly killing of any animal. With the comprehensible to
consent of the attorney general of Florida the city attorney others in order to be protected by the First Amendment.
assured that the prohibition of sacrificing of animals in a
religious practice or ritual is not inconsistent with the state To support the constitutional protection for free exercise of
law therefore the city council can make ordinances against it. religion,
(3) On August 11, Resolution 87-90 opposing ritual (a) neutrality and (b) general applicability in the law needs to
sacrifices of animals within the City of Hialeah was passed. be
(4) On Sept. 8, Ordinance 87-52 prohibiting public established. A law failing to satisfy these requirements must
ritualistic animal sacrifice, other than for the primary purpose be
of food consumption was passed. justified by a compelling governmental interest, and must be
(5) On Sept. 22, Ordinance 87-71 stating that It shall be narrowly
unlawful for any person, persons, corporations or associations tailored to advance that interest even if it has the incidental
to sacrifice any animal within the corporate limits of the City effect of
of Hialeah, Florida where the word sacrifice shall mean: to burdening a particular religious practice. Employment Div.,
unnecessarily kill, torment, torture, or mutilate an animal in a Dept. of
public or private ritual or ceremony not for the primary Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith. The ordinances of the
purpose of food consumption was passed. Hialeah
(6) On Sept. 22, Ordinance 87-72 stating that it is unlawful city council fail to satisfy these Smith requirements.
for any person, persons, corporations or associations to (a) Neutrality need not only be facial (evident at the text
slaughter any animal on any premises in the City of Hialeah, used in the law) but can also be supported by the equal
Florida, except those properly zoned as a slaughter house, protection mode of analysis in the formulation of the law. The
and meeting all the health, safety and sanitation codes ordinances were found to be inconsistent with these
prescribed by the City for the operation of a slaughter house requirements and led to the conclusion that the ordinances
was passed. had
• After a 9-day bench trial the District Courts favored the as their object the suppression of religion.
defendants finding absolute immunity for their legislative acts (b) General applicability needs to be establish with laws
and burdening religious practice. The Free Exercise Clause
that no violation of the petitioners’ rights were made finding "protect[s] religious observers against unequal treatment and
four inequality results when a legislature decides that the
compelling reasons: (1) that animal sacrifices present a governmental interests it seeks to advance are worthy of
substantial being
health risk, both to participants and the general public, (2) pursued only against conduct with a religious motivation. The
that the ordinances fall well below the minimum standard necessary to
children who witness the sacrifice of animals suffer from protect First Amendments rights. The Ordinances 87-40, 87-
emotional 52,
injury, (3) that the city's interest in protecting animals from and 87-71 were claimed to advance two interests: protecting
cruel the
and unnecessary killing and (4) that the city's interest in public health and preventing cruelty to animals but this may
restricting be
the slaughter or sacrifice of animals to areas zoned for done not by prohibiting Santeria sacrifice alone and there are
slaughterhouse use. far
• The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the more greater ways to do this that would not discriminate the
judgment in a one-paragraph per curiam opinion stating that practice of the Santeria religion.
the
ordinances were consistent with the Constitution. Also a law burdening religious practice that is not neutral or
not of
ISSUE: general application must undergo the most rigorous of
Whether or not the Hialeah city council is in violation of the scrutiny it must
First satisfy ‘interests of the highest order,' and must be narrowly
Amendment in enacting Ordinances 87-14, 87-52, 87-71 and tailored in
87-72. pursuit of those interests. In this case the ordinances fail to
satisfy
HELD: these requirements as well.
The Supreme Court decided in favor of the petitioner and Lastly, the Free Exercise Clause commits government to
reversed the religious
previous decisions concluding that that each of Hialeah's tolerance, and upon even slight suspicion that proposals for
ordinances state
pursues the city's governmental interests only against intervention stem from animosity to religion or distrust of its
conduct practices,
motivated by religious belief. all officials must pause to remember their own high duty to
the
RATIONALE: Constitution and to the rights it secures.
The US Constitution provides that the Congress shall make no
law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free Lamb’s Chapel v. School District
exercise
thereof through the Free Exercise Clause of the First New York law authorizes local school boards to adopt
Amendment reasonable regulations permitting the after-hours use of
which was applied to the States through the Fourteenth school property for 10 specified purposes, not including
Amendment. meetings for religious purposes. Pursuant to this law,
Given that the Santeria is a religion, its beliefs such as animal respondent school board (District) issued rules and
sacrifice regulations allowing, inter alia, social, civic, and recreational
“need not be acceptable, logical, consistent or uses of its schools (Rule 10), but prohibiting use by any group

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 37
for religious purposes (Rule 7). After the District refused two Facts:
requests by petitioners, an evangelical church and its pastor - In 1973, a religious group known as "The Church In
(Church), to use school facilities for a religious-oriented film Quezon City (Church Assembly Hall), Incorporated"
series on family values and childrearing on the ground that was organized as "an entity of the brotherhood in
the film appeared to be church-related, the Church filed suit in Christ." It was registered in the same year with the
the District Court, claiming that the District's actions violated, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as a non-
among other things, the First Amendment's Freedom of stock, non-profit religious corporation for the
Speech Clause. The court granted summary judgment to the administration of its temporalities or the
District, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. It reasoned that management of its properties.
the school property, as a "limited public forum" open only for - the members of the CHURCH vested upon the Board
designated purposes, remained nonpublic except for the
of Directors the absolute power "to preserve and
specified purposes, and ruled that the exclusion of the
protect their faith" and to admit and expel a member
Church's film was reasonable and viewpoint neutral.
of the CHURCH.
- As early as 1988, the Board of Directors observed
Held:
that certain members of the CHURCH, including
Denying the Church access to school premises to exhibit the
petitioners herein, exhibited "conduct which was
film violates the Freedom of Speech Clause.
dishonorable, improper and injurious to the character
(a) There is no question that the District may legally preserve
and interest of the CHURCH"
the property under its control, and need not have permitted
after-hours use for any of the uses permitted under state law. - Confronted with this situation, members of the Board
This Court need not address the issue whether Rule 10, by of Directors advised the petitioners "to correct their
opening the property to a wide variety of communicative ways" and warned them that if they persist in their
purposes, has opened the property for religious uses, highly improper conduct, they will be dropped from
because, even if the District has not opened its property for the membership of the CHURCH. But petitioners
such uses, Rule 7 has been unconstitutionally applied in this ignored these repeated admonitions.
case. Access to a nonpublic forum can be based on subject - Alarmed that petitioners' conduct will continue to
matter or speaker identity so long as the distinctions drawn undermine the integrity of the Principles of Faith of
are reasonable and viewpoint-neutral. Cornelius v. NAACP the CHURCH, the Board of Directors, during its
Legal Defense and Ed. Fund, Inc., 473 U.S. 788, 806. That regular meeting held for the purpose of reviewing
Rule 7 treats all religions and religious purposes alike does not and updating the membership list of the CHURCH,
make its application in this case viewpoint-neutral, however, removed from the said list the names of the
for it discriminates on the basis of viewpoint by permitting petitioners
school property to be used for the presentation of all views - petitioners questioned their expulsion by filing with
about family issues and childrearing except those dealing with the SEC Securities Investigation and Clearing
the subject from a religious standpoint. Denial on this basis is Department a petition, SEC Hearing Officer Manuel
plainly invalid under the holding in Cornelius, supra, 473 U.S. Perea denied the same and ruled that the expulsion
at 806, that the government violates the First Amendment was in accordance with the provisions of the CHURCH
when it denies access to a speaker solely to suppress the By-laws
point of view he espouses on an otherwise includible subject. - Incidentally, during the pendency of these cases in
Pp. ___.
this Court, petitioners filed an application for a
(b) Permitting District property to be used to exhibit the film
TRO/writ of preliminary injunction claiming that
would not have been an establishment of religion under the
respondents are denying them access to the
three-part test articulated in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S.
premises of the CHURCH for purposes of exercising
602"]403 U.S. 602. Since the film would not have been
their right of worship. The Court issued a Special
shown during school hours, would not have been sponsored
Order and petitioners were allowed "entry into the
by the school, and would have been open to the public, there
CHURCH building of worship and participate in its
would be no realistic danger that the community would think
religious and social activities."
that the District was endorsing religion or any particular
- However respondents denied them access to the
creed, and any benefit to religion or the Church would have
worship halls for their special conference involving
been incidental. 403 U.S. 602. Since the film would not have
the spiritual training of some 1, 800 college students
been shown during school hours, would not have been
from Regions I to VI. Petitioners filed a petition to cite
sponsored by the school, and would have been open to the
respondents in contempt for refusing to comply with
public, there would be no realistic danger that the community
the Special Order of this Court.
would think that the District was endorsing religion or any
-
particular creed, and any benefit to religion or the Church
Issue/Held:
would have been incidental. Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S.
1. W/N petitioners’ expulsion was done in accordance
263, 271-272. Nor is there anything in the record to support
with law? YES.
the claim that the exclusion was justified on the ground that
allowing access to a "radical" church would lead to threats of - The Court find baseless petitioners’ claim that their
public unrest and violence. In addition, the Court of Appeals' expulsion was executed without prior notice or due
judgment was not based on the justification proffered here process ruling that the By-laws of the CHURCH, which
that the access rules' purpose is to promote the interests of the members have expressly adhered to, does not
the general public, rather than sectarian or other private require the Board of Directors to give prior notice to
interests. Moreover, that there was no express finding below the erring or dissident members in cases of
that the Church's application would have been granted absent expulsion. The Court also noted the peculiar nature
the religious connection is beside the point for the purposes of of a religious corporation vis-à-vis an ordinary
this opinion, which is concerned with the validity of the stated corporation organized for profit: “It must be stressed
reason for denying the application, namely, that the film that the basis of the relationship between a religious
appeared to be church-related. corporation and its members is the latter’s absolute
adherence to a common religious or spiritual belief.
Once this basis ceases, membership in the religious
Long v. Basa corporation must also cease.”
- Obviously recognizing the peculiarity of a religious

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 38
corporation, the Corporation Code leaves the matter religious expression. Whether it is subject of the police
of ecclesiastical discipline to the religious group power of the state.
concerned. Whether there was clear and present danger to stop the
- The petitioners really have no reason to bewail the program.
Whether MTRC has the power to censor religious programs.
lack of prior notice in the By-laws. They have waived
Whether the religious program is indecent and contrary to law
such notice by adhering to those By-laws. They
and good customs.
became members of the CHURCH voluntarily. They
entered into its covenant and subscribed to its rules.
SC: MTRCB WAS WRONG. INK IS CORRECT.
By doing so, they are bound by their consent.
- Even assuming that petitioners' expulsion falls within The law gives the Board the power to screen, review and
the Constitutional provisions on "prior notice" or "due examine all “television programs.” By the clear terms of
process," still we can not conclude that respondents the law, the Board has the power to “approve, delete x x x
committed a constitutional infraction. It bears and/or prohibit the x x x exhibition and/or television broadcast
emphasis that petitioners were given more than of x x x television programs x x x.” The law also directs the
sufficient notice of their impending expulsion, as Board to apply “contemporary Filipino cultural values as
shown by the records: as early as 1988, the standard” to determine those which are objectionable for
respondents reminded, advised and exhorted the being “immoral, indecent, contrary to law and/or good
petitioners to stop espousing doctrines, teachings customs, injurious to the prestige of the Republic of the
and religious belief diametrically opposed to the Philippines and its people, or with a dangerous tendency to
Principles of Faith embraced by the CHURCH. The encourage the commission of violence or of a wrong or
respondents further warned them during Sunday crime.”
worship gatherings, in small group meetings and
one-on-one talk, that they would face disciplinary Freedom of religion has been accorded a preferred status
action and be dropped from the membership roll by the framers of our fundamental laws, past and present.
should they continue to exhibit acts inimical and We have affirmed this preferred status well aware that it is
injurious to the teachings of the Holy Bible which the “designed to protect the broadest possible liberty of
CHURCH so zealously upholds. conscience, to allow each man to believe as his conscience
2. W/N the subsequent denial of petitioner’s access to directs, to profess his beliefs, and to live as he believes he
premises of the church a violation of the free ought to live, consistent with the liberty of others and with the
exercise of religion? NO. common good.
- The respondents’ refusal to lend the worship halls
was due to the fact that the intended special conference is not The right to religious profession and worship has a two-fold
a religious service/activity of the CHURCH and the participants aspect, viz., freedom to believe and freedom to act on one’s
are not members of the CHURCH. Thus, respondents did not beliefs. The first is absolute as long as the belief is confined
violate the Special Order of this Court. The Special Order within the realm of thought. The second is subject to
allows petitioners entry into the CHURCH building to regulation where the belief is translated into external
"participate in worship or other religious activities" "as acts that affect the public welfare.
members of the CHURCH". Clearly, the Special Order does not
allow petitioners unlimited or unrestrained access or use of Its essence is freedom from conformity to religious
the premises and properties of the CHURCH. The intended dogma, not freedom from conformity to law because of
special conference to be conducted by petitioners is not a religious dogma.
CHURCH activity and the participants therein are not
members of the CHURCH. We thus reject petitioner’s postulate that its religious program
is per se beyond review by the respondent Board. Its public
broadcast on TV of its religious program brings it out of the
IGLESIA NI KRISTO VS. CA bosom of internal belief. Television is a medium that reaches
freedom of religion. even the eyes and ears of children. For sure, we shall
continue to subject any act pinching the space for the
• Iglesia Ni Kristo (INK) has a tv program aired on Channel free exercise of religion to a heightened scrutiny but
2, every Saturday. It presents and propagates religious we shall not leave its rational exercise to the
beliefs, doctrines etc, and makes comparative studies irrationality of man. For when religion divides and its
with other religions. exercise destroys, the State should not stand still.
• The MTRCB classified one program as X, not for public
viewing because they allegedly offend and attack another First. Deeply ensconced in our fundamental law is its
religion. (In that program, the INK criticizes the Catholic hostility against all prior restraints on speech, including
Church for its veneration of the Virgin Mary. The INK religious speech. Hence, any act that restrains speech is
suggests a very literal translation of the Bible and hobbled by the presumption of invalidity and should be
nowhere in the Bible is there a veneration for the Virgin greeted with furrowed brows. It is the burden of the
Mary.) respondent Board to overthrow this presumption. If it fails to
• The INK appealed to the Office of the President, which discharge this burden, its act of censorship will be struck
reversed the MTRCB decision (allowed the showing of the down. It failed in the case at bar.
program). A civil case was filed by the INK against the (here the MTRCB violated the prohibition against prior
MTRCB for gadalej in giving them an X-rating and restraint). Prior restraint includes religious speech.
requiring them to submit VTR tapes.
Second. The evidence shows that the Board x-rated the TV
• MTRCB invoked their powers under PD1986.
series for “attacking” other religions, especially the Catholic
• The RTC ruled that INK should stop the program and
church. An examination of the evidence, especially Exhibits
refrain from attacking other religions.
“A”, “A-1”, “B, “C”, and “D” will show that the so-called
• The CA reversed. “attacks” are mere criticisms of some of the deeply held
dogmas and tenets of other religions. The CA also did
ISSUES: not review the VTR Tapes. The respondent Board may
Whether the program is constitutionally protected exercise of disagree with the criticisms of other religions by petitioner but

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 39
that gives it no excuse to interdict such criticisms, however, to warrant dismissal of the charge of immorality.
unclean they may be. Under our constitutional scheme, it is Accordingly, he recommended that respondent be found
not the task of the State to favor any religion by protecting it guilty of immorality and that she be penalized with suspension
against an attack by another religion. Religious dogmas and of 6 mos. and 1 day without pay with a warning that a
beliefs are often at war and to preserve peace among their repetition of a similar act will be dealt with more severely in
followers, especially the fanatics, the establishment clause of accordance with the Civil Service Rules.
freedom of religion prohibits the State from leaning towards .
any religion. Vis-a-vis religious differences, the State enjoys ISSUE:
no banquet of options. Neutrality alone is its fixed and W/N respondent should be found guilty of the administrative
immovable stance. In fine, respondent board cannot squelch charge of “gross and immoral conduct.
the speech of petitioner Iglesia ni Cristo simply because it
attacks other religions, even if said religion happens to be the HELD:
most numerous church in our country. In a State where there NO. The state interest sought to be upheld is the preservation
ought to be no difference between the appearance and the of the integrity of the judiciary by maintaining among its ranks
reality of freedom of religion, the remedy against bad a high standard of morality and decency. However, there is
theology is better theology. The bedrock of freedom of nothing in the OCA’s memorandum to the Court that
religion is freedom of thought and it is best served by demonstrates how this interest is so compelling that it should
encouraging the marketplace of dueling ideas. When the override respondent’s plea of religious freedom nor is it shown
luxury of time permits, the marketplace of ideas demands that the means employed by the government in pursuing its
that speech should be met by more speech for it is the spark interest is the least restrictive to respondent’s religious
of opposite speech, the heat of colliding ideas that can fan the exercise.
embers of truth. (ESSENCE OF FREEDOM TO DIFFER).
NOTE:
Third. The respondents cannot also rely on the ground The case is REMANDED to the Office of the Court
“attacks against another religion” in x-rating the religious Administrator. The Solicitor General is ordered to intervene in
program of petitioner. Even a sideglance at Section 3 of PD the case where it will be given the opportunity (a) to examine
1986 will reveal that it is not among the grounds to justify an the sincerity and centrality of respondent’s claimed religious
order prohibiting the broadcast of petitioner’s television belief and practice; (b) to present evidence on the state’s
program. The ground “attack against another religion” was “compelling interest” to override respondent’s religious belief
merely added by the respondent Board in its Rules. and practice; and (c) to show that the means the state adopts
in pursuing its interest is the least restrictive to respondent’s
Fourth. In x-rating the TV program of the petitioner, the religious freedom.
respondents failed to apply the clear and present RATIO:
danger rule. The records show that the decision of the The claim of religious freedom must be subject to the
respondent Board, affirmed by the respondent appellate “compelling state interest” test from a benevolent
court, is completely bereft of findings of facts to justify the neutrality stance - i.e. entertaining the possibility that
conclusion that the subject video tapes constitute respondent’s claim to religious freedom would warrant carving
impermissible attacks against another religion. There is no out an exception from the Civil Service Law; necessarily, her
showing whatsoever of the type of harm the tapes will bring defense of religious freedom will be unavailing should the
about especially the gravity and imminence of the threatened government succeed in demonstrating a more compelling
harm. Prior restraint on speech, including religious state interest.
speech, cannot be justified by hypothetical fears but In applying the test, the first inquiry is whether
only by the showing of a substantive and imminent evil respondent’s right to religious freedom has been
which has taken the life of a reality already on ground. burdened.
There is no doubt that choosing between keeping her
employment and abandoning her religious belief and practice
Peeps, tell me you read this case, my bad if this doesn’t get u and family on the one hand, and giving up her employment
anywhere as I am super lost myself.. if he asks tidbits on US and keeping her religious practice and family on the other
juri, history, etc- since the case is super long- let’s just say “A hand, puts a burden on her free exercise of religion. The
for effort?!!”.. one crappy JJ won’t kill us…goodluck!!! burden on respondent in the case at bar is even greater as
the price she has to pay for her employment is not only her
religious precept but also her family which, by the Declaration
ESTRADA v. ESRITOR (court interpreter: RTC Las Pinas Pledging Faithfulness, stands “honorable before God and
Branch 253) men.”
The second step is to ascertain respondent’s sincerity
FACTS: in her religious belief.
Complainant Estrada filed the charge against Escritor as he
believes that she is committing an immoral act (living with a Respondent appears to be sincere in her religious belief and
man not her husband) that tarnishes the image of the court. practice and is not merely using the “Declaration of Pledging
Thus she should not be allowed to remain employed within Faithfulness” to avoid punishment for immorality. She did not
the Judiciary. Judge Caoibes set a preliminary conference secure the Declaration only after entering the judiciary where
wherein Escritor admitted that she has been living with the moral standards are strict and defined, much less only
Luciano Quilapio, Jr. without the benefit of marriage for 20 yrs. after an administrative case for immorality was filed against
but as a member of the religious sect known as the Jehovah’s her. It is also worthy of notice that the Report and
Witnesses and the Watch Tower and Bible Tract Society, their Recommendation of the investigating judge annexed letters of
conjugal arrangement is in conformity with their religious the OCA to the respondent regarding her request to be
beliefs. In fact, after 10 yrs. of living together, she executed exempt from attending the flag ceremony in accordance with
on July 28, 1991 a Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness. her religious beliefs. Also, she is a practicing member of the
The Jehovah’s congregation requires that at the time the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Jehovah ministers testified that
declarations are executed, the couple cannot secure the civil she is a member in good standing
authorities’ approval of the marital relationship because of
legal impediments Consequently, Deputy Court Administrator DOCTRINE:
Lock found Escritor’s defense of freedom of religion unavailing Government action, including its proscription of immorality as

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 40
expressed in criminal law like concubinage, must have a except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right
secular purpose. That is, the government proscribes this to travel be impaired except in the interest of national
conduct because it is “detrimental (or dangerous) to those security, public safety, or public health, as may be provided
conditions upon which depend the existence and progress of by law.
human society” and not because the conduct is proscribed by
the beliefs of one religion or the other.
LIBERTIES of ABODE and of TRAVEL
The Philippine constitution’s religion clauses prescribe not a
strict but a benevolent neutrality. Benevolent neutrality Villavencio v. Lukban
recognizes that government must pursue its secular goals and
interests but at the same time strives to uphold religious Facts: Lukban, the Mayor of the City of Manila, to exterminate
liberty to the greatest extent possible within flexible vice, ordered the segregated district of women of ill repute
constitutional limits. Thus, although the morality closed. The women were kept confined to their houses in the
contemplated by laws is secular, benevolent neutrality district by the police. Presumably, the city authorities quietly
could allow for accommodation of morality based on perfected arrangements with the Bureau of Labor for sending
religion, provided it does not offend compelling state women to Davao as laborers. At midnight, the police
interests. descended upon the houses and hustled 170 inmates into
patrol wagons and placed them aboard steamers that awaited
their arrival. The women were given no opportunity to collect
In re: Request of Muslim employees their belongings, and apparently were under the impression
The Muslim employees of different course in City Iligan wrote that they were being taken to a police station for an
a letter to Executive Judge Valerio M. Salazar requesting that investigation. They had no knowledge that they were destined
they be allowed to enjoy the following privileges: for Mindanao. When the vessels reached Davao, they were
1. To hold office hours from 7:30 a.m. to 3:30p, without receipted as laborers by Francisco Sales, provincial governor
lunch break or coffee breaks during the month of of Davao, and Ynigo and Castillo. They had no previous
Ramadan notification that the women were prostitutes who had been
2. To be excused from work from 10:00am to 2:00pm expelled from the city of Manila.
every Friday (Muslim Prayer Day) during the entire The friends and relatives of the women filed for habeas
Calendar year corpus. Mayor Lukban refused to comply arguing that that the
In support of their requests, the Muslim employees invoke PD habeas corpus is not proper because the women were not
291 as amended by PD322 enacted by Marcos. The purpose restrained of their liberty, as they were free in Davao.
of PD 291 was to reinforce national unity by recognizing
Muslim Holidays and making them part of our national Issue: W/N the writ of habeas corpus was properly granted
holidays. Among the 6 recognized Muslim Holidays is the
Ramadan, which gives a legal basis for their first request but Held: Yes
not for their second request.
The Civil Service Commission enjoins civil servants to render Rationale:
public service not less that 8 hrs a day or 40 hours a week. To
replace the lost hours during the Muslim Prayer Day the The writ of habeas corpus was properly granted. Mayor
Muslim employees will observe flexible working schedule, Lukban, who was primarily responsible for the deportation, is
which should start from 7:00am to 10:00am and from 2:00pm in contempt of court for his failure to comply with the order of
to 7:00pm. the court.
The Court however is constrained to deny for lack of basis for
the request of the Muslim employees to be excused from work There is no law, order, or regulation, which even hints at the
on the Muslim Prayer Day. The CSC exceeded its authority right of the Mayor of the city of Manila or the chief of police of
insofar as it declared in Resolution no. 81-1277 that Muslim that city to force citizens of the Philippine Islands - and these
employees are excused from work from 10:00am to 2:00 women despite their being in a sense lepers of society are
every Friday subject to certain conditions. The 2 decrees nevertheless not chattels but Philippine citizens protected by
mentioned above which gave legal basis for the Ramadan or the same constitutional guaranties as are other citizens - to
the 1st request did not mention “Friday, The Muslim Prayer change their domicile from Manila to another locality.
Day” as one of the recognized holidays.
In the interest of the general public to be assured of The privilege of domicile is deemed so important as to be
continuous government service during office hours every found in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. Liberty of abode
Monday through Friday. The said rule enjoins all civil service is a principle so deeply imbedded in jurisprudence and
servants of whatever religious denomination, to render public considered so elementary in nature as not even to require a
service of no less than 8 hours a day or 40 hrs a week. To constitutional sanction. Even the Governor-General of the
allow the Muslim employees in the Judiciary to be excused Philippine Islands, even the President of the United States,
from work fro 10am-2pm everyday would mean diminution of who has often been said to exercise more power than any
the prescribed government working hours. They would be king or potentate has no such arbitrary prerogative, either
rendering service 12 hours less than that required by the Civil inherent or express. If the mayor and the chief of police could
Service rules for each month. Further, this would encourage at their mere behest or even for the most praiseworthy of
other religious denominations to request for similar treatment. motives, render the liberty of the citizen so insecure, then the
The performance of religious practices should not prejudice presidents and chiefs of police of one thousand other
the courts and the public. Religious freedom does not municipalities of the Philippines have the same privilege. And
exempt anyone from compliance with reasonable if any official can exercise the power, then all persons would
requirements of the law, including the civil service have just as much right to do so. And if a prostitute could be
laws. sent against her wishes and under no law from one locality to
another within the country, then officialdom can hold the
Request 1 – approved same club over the head of any citizen.
Request 2 – denied for lack of legal basis
A prime specification of an application for a writ of habeas
corpus is restraint of liberty. The essential object and purpose
Art III, Sec. 6: The liberty of abode and of changing the
of the writ of habeas corpus is to inquire into all manner of
same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be impaired

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 41
involuntary restraint as distinguished from voluntary, and to in the same context as those pertaining to the liberty of
relieve a person therefrom if such restraint is illegal. Any abode and the right to travel. It enjoys a different protection
restraint which will preclude freedom of action is sufficient. under the ICCPR, i.e., against being arbitrarily deprived
The forcible taking of these women from Manila by officials of thereof. The right to return to one’s country is not among the
that city who handed them over to other parties, who rights specifically guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. The right to
deposited them in a distant region, deprived these women of return may be considered, as a generally accepted principle of
freedom of locomotion just as effectively as if they had been international law and, under our Constitution, is part of the
imprisoned. The restraint of liberty which began in Manila law of the land. This issue is without precedent. It is also
continued until the aggrieved parties were returned to Manila consequently unnecessary to resolve the issue w/n there can
and released or until they freely and truly waived this right. be limitations on the right to travel in the absence of
legislation.
The court (Davao) ordered the Mayor to produce the bodies of
the persons they did not produce the bodies of the persons in
whose behalf the writ was granted; they did not show Santiago v Vasquez(Ombudsman) (1993)
impossibility of performance; and they did not present FACTS: Petition is a “Motion to Restrain the Sandiganbayan
writings that waived the right to be present by those from Enforcing its Hold Departure Order with Prayer for the
interested. Instead a few stereotyped affidavits purporting to Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary
show that the women were contented with their life in Davao, Injunction”
some of which have since been repudiated by the signers, Criminal Case filed against Miriam Defensor Santiago with the
were appended to the return. Sandiganbayan for alleged violation of Anti-Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act. (RA 3019) Warrant of arrest was issued. Court
Hence, the mayor is guilty of contempt of court. accepted her bail bond in the amount of P15,000 without her
physically appearing before the court for her provisional
liberty(she was injured in a vehicular accident) <in case he
Marcos v. Manglapus asks about jurisdiction, the bail bond serves as evidence of
submission to the courts jurisdiction>
Facts: During the pendency of her motion for reconsideration in the
Events like the Manila Hotel in 1986 by the political leaders of SC to dismiss her criminal case, she announced to the media
Mr. Marcos, the takeover of television station Channel 7 by that she would be leaving for U.S. to accept a fellowship at
rebel troops with the support of “Marcos loyalists” and the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.
unsuccessful plot of the Marcos spouses to return from Hawaii In response to her announcement, Sandiganbayan issued the
by a Lebanese arms dealer awakened the nation to the assailed Hold departure order.
capacity of the Marcoses to stir trouble even from afar and to
the fanaticism and blind loyalty of their followers in the ISSUE:
country. W/n the hold departure order violates her right to due
process, right to travel and freedom of speech? NO
Marcos, on his deathbed, signified his wish to return to the
Philippines to die. The petitioners assert that the right of the RATIO:
Marcoses to return to the Philippines is guaranteed under Sec Hold departure order was issued by the Sandiganbayan
1 and Sec 6 of the Bill of Rights. The petitioners contend that without notice and hearing; this is an incidental power of the
the President is without power to impair the liberty of abode court that is necessary to effectuate its jurisdiction. A court
because only a court may do so “within the limits prescribed has the inherent power to make interlocutory orders
by law.” They also contend that the President may not impair necessary to protect its jurisdiction.
their right to travel because no law has authorized her to do
so. They advance the view that before the right to travel may Petitioner may be legally prohibited from leaving the country
be impaired by any authority or agency of the government, during the pendency of the case. Manotoc, Jr v CA – “a court
there must legislation to that effect. The petitioners also cite has the power to prohibit a person admitted to bail from
Art 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Art leaving the Philippines…. The condition imposed upon
12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, petitioner to make himself available at all times whenever the
both of which guarantee liberty of movement and residence. court requires his presence operates as a valid restriction on
his right to travel.”
Issue:
Whether or not, in the exercise of the powers granted by the Petition should be made in the court that issued the assailed
Constitution, the President may prohibit the Marcoses from order and not towards the Supreme Court. Judicial Hierarchy.
returning to the Philippines.
Art III, Sec. 7: The right of the people to information on
Held: matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access to
Yes. The President has the obligation under the Constitution official records, and to documents and papers pertaining to
to protect the people, promote their general welfare and official acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to
advance the national interest. The power involved is the government research data used as basis for policy
President’s residual power. This case is unique. It should not development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such
create a precedent. limitations as may be provided by law.

Consti II: The individual right involved is not the right to

travel from the Philippines to other countries or within the INFORMATION and ACCESS to OFFICIAL RECORDS
Philippines. Essentially, the right involved is the right to return
to one’s country, a totally distinct right under international Legaspi v. CSC
law, independent from although related to the right to travel.
The UDHR and the ICCPR treat the right to freedom of Facts:
movement and abode within the territory of a state, the right The respondent earlier denied the request of the petitioner to
to leave a country, and the right to enter one’s country as view the information on the civil service eligibilities of certain
separate and distinct rights. It would be inappropriate to persons employed as sanitarians in the Health Depatment of
construe the limitations to the right to return to one’s country Cebu City. These government employees, Julian Sibonghanoy

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 42
and Mariano Agas, had allegedly represented themselves as Ratio:
civil service eligibles who passed the civil service As may be gleaned from the decree (PD 1986) creating the
examinations for sanitarians. respondent classification board, there is no doubt that its very
existence is public is character; it is an office created to serve
Issue: W/N the petitioner can view the information requested. public interest. It being the case, respondents can lay no valid
claim to privacy. The right to privacy belongs to the individual
Ruling: Yes. acting in his private capacity and not to a governmental
agency or officers tasked with, and acting in, the discharge of
Ratio: public duties . There can be no invasion of privacy in the case
The provision regarding the right to information is self- at bar since what is sought to be divulged is a product of
executing. They supply the rules by means of which the right action undertaken in the course of performing official
to information may be enjoyed by guaranteeing the right and functions. To declare otherwise would be to clothe every
mandating the duty to afford access to sources of information. public official with an impregnable mantle of protection
What may be provided by the Legislature are reasonable against public scrutiny for their official acts.
conditions and limitations upon the access to be afforded
which must, of necessity, be consistent with the declared Further, the decisions of the Board and the individual voting
State policy of full public disclosure of all transactions slips accomplished by the members concerned are acts made
involving public interests. It is not necessary that the pursuant to their official functions, and as such, are neither
petitioner prove that he has an interest over the information. personal nor private in nature but rather public in character.
When the question is one of public right and the object of the They are, therefore, public records access to which is
mandamus is to procure the enforcement of a public duty, the guaranteed to the citizenry by no less than the fundamental
people are regarded as the real party in interest and the law of the land. Being a public right, the exercise thereof
relator at whose instigation the proceedings are instituted cannot be made contingent on the discretion, nay, whim and
need not show that he has any legal or special interest in the caprice, of the agency charged with the custody of the official
result, it being sufficient to show that he is a citizen and as records sought to be examined. The constitutional recognition
such interested in the execution of the laws. The custodian of the citizen's right of access to official records cannot be
agency has no discretion on whatsoever as to what must be made dependent upon the consent of the members of the
included or excluded from the right of the people to board concerned, otherwise, the said right would be rendered
information. Except, perhaps when it is clear that the purpose nugatory.
of the examination is unlawful, or shell idle curiosity, the SC
believes it is the duty under the law of registration officers to The term private has been defined as "belonging to or
concern themselves with the motives, reasons, and objects of concerning, an individual person, company, or interest";
the person seeking access to the records. It is not their whereas, public means "pertaining to, or belonging to, or
prerogative to see that the information which the records affecting a nation, state, or community at large"
contain is not flaunted before public gaze, or that scandal is
not made of it. If it be wrong the publish the contents of the
records, it is the legislature and the officials having custody Sabio v. Gordon
thereof which is called upon the devise a remedy. However,
the SC ruled in Subido v. Ozaeta that the custodian agency FACTS:
can regulate the manner and hours of examination to the end Sabio, Chairman of PCGG, was invited to be one of the
that damage to or loss of, the records may be avoided, that resource persons in the public meeting jointly conducted by
undue interference with the duties of the custodian of the the Committee on Government Corporations and Public
books and documents and other employees may be Enterprises and Committee on Public Services. The purpose
prevented, that the right of other persons entitled to make of the meeting was to deliberate on Senate Res. No. 455
inspection may be insured. Furthermore, the right to (“directing an inquiry in aid of legislation on the anomalous
information is not absolute. The information sought to be losses incurred by the (POTC), (PHILCOMSAT), and (PHC) due
obtained must be of public concern or one that involves public to the alleged improprieties in their operations by their
interest and not being exempted by law from the operation of respective Board of Directors.”). Sabio declined the invitation,
the constitutional guarantee. In this case, the information is invoking Sec4 (b) of E.O. No. 1 which provides that: “No
considered to be of public concern because the people has the member or staff of the Commission shall be required to testify
right to know if the persons appointed in the CSC really or produce evidence in any judicial, legislative or
passed the civil service exams. Also, the respondents failed to administrative proceeding concerning matters within its
show that there are provisions in the law prohibiting the official cognizance.” The constitutionality of Section 4(b) is
publication of such information. being questioned.

Aquino Sarmiento v. Morato (he was MTRCB chair yata at that ISSUE:
time) W/N has been repealed by the 1987 Constitution and violative
of the right to information
Facts:
Sarmiento, member of the Board (MTRCB) requested to HELD: YES.
examine the board's records pertaining to the voting slips Section 4(b) is inconsistent with Art VI, Sec 21 (Congress’
accomplished by the individual board members after a review power of inquiry), Art XI, Sec 1 (principle of public
of the movies and television productions. It is on the basis of accountability), and Art II, Sec 28 (policy of full disclosure) and
said slips that films are either banned, cut or classified Art III, Sec 7 (right to public information). Art XVIII, Sec 3
accordingly. provides that all existing laws, executive orders,
proclamations, letters of instructions and other executive
Morato denied the petition saying that the individual voting is issuances inconsistent or repugnant to the Constitution are
private and classified in character. repealed.

Issue: Are the individual voting slip private? NO Section 4(b) runs counter to the following constitutional
(They are public documents: the public has the right to access provisions ensuring the people’s access to information: Art 2,
them) Sec 7 seeks to promote transparency in policy-making and in
the operations of the government, as well as provide the

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 43
people sufficient information to enable them to exercise however justifiable their reasons, not whether or not there
effectively their constitutional rights. An essential element of was in fact such a strike, it being equally evident from the
this freedom is to keep open a continuing dialogue or process pleadings that there was, and there being no dispute about
of communication between the government and the people. this. What therefore is brought before the court is the
This open dialogue can be effective only to the extent that the question of w/n any rights of the petitioners under the due
citizenry is informed and able to formulate its will intelligently. process clause as it applies to administrative proceedings
Only when the participants in the discussion are aware of the were violated in the initiation, conduct, or disposition of the
issues and have access to information relating thereto can investigations complained of.
such bear fruit.
Doctrine: govt workers cant use strike as employed by the
The right to information really goes hand-in-hand with the private sector to secure concessions from their employers for
constitutional policies of full public disclosure and honesty in the terms and conditions of employment through statutes and
the public service. It is meant to enhance the widening role of administrative rules and regulations and not through CBA.
the citizenry in governmental decision-making as well as in
checking abuse in the government. Art III., Sec 9: Private property shall not be taken for public
use without just compensation

Art III., Sec 8: The right of the people, including those

POWER TO UNDERTAKE EXPROPRIATION CASE
employed in the public and private sectors, to form unions,
associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to law
shall not be abridged Iron and Steel Authority v. CA

Facts:
RIGHT TO FORM ASSOCIATION PD 272 created the Iron and Steel Authority (ISA) to promote
this industry in the Philippines. The National Steel Corporation
Manila Public School Teachers v. Laguio (wholly owned by the National Govt) had a development
program that constituted building a steel mill in Iligan city in
Facts: public land that was about 30 hectares. A portion of that land
A mass action wa taken by 800 public school teachers to was being used by the Maria Cristina Fertilizer Corp (private)
dramatize and highlight the teachers’ plight resulting from the as locations for a non-operational chemical fertilizer plant.
alleged failure of the public authorities to act upon grievances
such as the immediate payment of due chalk, clothing A letter of instruction (LOI) was issued to NSC giving them
allowances, 13th month pay for 1989 arising from the authority to negotiate with MCFC as for compensation and if
implementation of the Salary Standardization Law, among they fail to reach an agreement, ISA will was to exercise their
others, that had time and again been brought to the latter’s power of eminent domain and initiate expropriation
attention. It was held on a Monday which was a regular school proceedings. The negotiation failed and ISA began eminent
day. They converged at Liwasang Bonifacio whence they domain proceedings.
proceeded to the National Office of the DECS
However, ISA’s term expired as agent of the Republic of the
The respondent secretary just brushed aside their grievances Philippines and now MCFC contends that they no longer
and warned them they could lose their jobs for going on illegal continue with the proceedings because ISA no longer has
and unauthorized mass leave. An order was issued to return juridical personality.
to work or face dismissal but the mass action continued. 20
teachers were subsequently dismissed. Issue:
W/N the Republic of the Philippines can take the place of ISA
Issue: Whether public school teachers had a right to strike in the proceedings? YES
W/N there is a need for new legislation to effect this? NO
Held: No.
Ratio:
That this court had already definitively ruled that employees ISA was vested with some powers or attributes associated
in the public (civil) service, unlike those in the private sector, with juridical personality. PD 272 does not recognize ISA to
don’t have the right to strike, although guaranteed the right have a separated juridical personality as that of the
to self-organization, to petition Congress for the betterment of Government. ISA is a non-incorporated agency or
employment terms and conditions and to negotiate with instrumentality of the RP.
appropriate govt agencies for the improvement of such
working conditions as are not fixed by law When the statutory term of the agency expires , the powers
and duties and functions revert back to and are re-assumed
That upon the foregoing premises, it was prima facie lawful by the RP, in the absence of special provisions of law…
and within his statutory authority fort he respondent
Secretary of Educ to take the actions complained of, to wit: The principal or the real party in interest in this case is the RP
issue a return-to-work order, prefer administrative charges and not the NSC even if the latter may be an ultimate user of
against, and place under preventive suspensions, those who the property.
failed to comply with said order, and dismiss from the service
those who failed to answer or controvert the charges;
RIGHTS OF OWNER BEFORE EXPROPRIATION
The court has not since been presented with any
consideration of law or established fact that would impair the Greater Balanga v Municipality of Balanga, Bataan
validity of these postulates or preclude continued reliance
thereon for the purpose of resolving the present petitions on Facts:
their merits This case involves a parcel of land of the subdivisvert bacion
plan, in the name of Greater Balanga Development
The underlying issue here is due-process; not whether the Corporation (Greater Balanga), situated in Barrio San Juan,
petitioners have a right to strike, which it is clear they do not, Municipality of Balanga, Province of Bataan. Greater Balanga

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 44
is a domestic corporation owned and controlled by the • Castellvi alleged, that being a residential land, it had a
Camacho family, which donated to the Municipality of Balanga fair market value of P15.00 per square meter, so it had a
the present site of the Balanga Public Market. The lot in total market value of P11,389,485.00; that the Republic,
dispute lies behind the Balanga Public Market. through the Armed Forces of the Philippines, particularly
the Philippine Air Force, had been, despite repeated
In 1987, petitioner conducted a relocation survey of the area demands, illegally occupying her property, preventing her
and discovered that certain portions of the property had be from using and disposing of it, thus causing her damages
“unlawfully usurped and invaded” by the Municipality of by way of unrealized profits.
Balanga, which had “allowed/tolerated/abetted” the • Republic argues that the "taking" should be reckoned
construction of shanties and market stalls while charging from the year 1947 when by virtue of a special lease
market fees and market entrance fees from the occupants agreement between the Republic and Castellvi, the
and users of the area. former was granted the "right and privilege" to buy the
property should the lessor wish to terminate the lease,
On January 1988, petitioner applied with the Office of the and that in the event of such sale, it was stipulated that
Mayor for a business permit to engage in business in the said the fair market value should be as of the time of
area. On the same day, Mayor Banzon issued the permit, occupancy; and that the permanent improvements
granting them the privilege of a “real estate dealer/privately- amounting to more than half a million pesos constructed
owned public market operator”. during a period of twelve years on the land, subject of
expropriation, were indicative of an agreed pattern of
On February 1988, the Sangguniang Bayan ng Balanga permanency and stability of occupancy by the Philippine
passed Resolution No. 12, s-88 annulling the Mayor’s permit Air Force in the interest of national security.
issued to petitioner and advised the Mayor to revoke the • Castellvi, on the other hand, maintains that the 'taking" of
permit “to operate a public market”. Pursuant to said property under the power of eminent domain requires
resolution, Mayor Banzon issued Executive Order No. 1, s-88 two essential elements, to wit: (1) entrance and
revoking the permit. occupation by condemnor upon the private property for
more than a momentary or limited period, and (2)
Issue: devoting it to a public use in such a way as to oust the
W/N the Resolution and Executive Order revoking the license owner and deprive him of all beneficial enjoyment of the
of Greater Balanga are valid? NO. property. This appellee argues that the first element is
wanting, for the contract of lease relied upon provides for
Held: a lease from year to year; that the second element is also
1. The application for Mayor’s permit requires the applicant to wanting, because the Republic was paying the lessor
state what type of “business, profession, occupation and/or Castellvi a monthly rental of P445.58; and that the
calling privileges” is being applied for. Petitioner left this entry contract of lease does not grant the Republic the "right
blank in the application form. It is only in the Mayor’s permit and privilege" to buy the premises "at the value at the
that the petitioner’s lines of business appear (as a real estate time of occupancy.
dealer and as a public market operator).
SC:
The permit should not have issued without the required 'Taking' under the power of eminent domain may be defined
information given in the application form. However, generally as
revoking the permit because of a false statement in 1) entering upon private property for
the application cannot be justified. There must be a proof 2) more than a momentary period, and,
of willful representation and deliberate intent to make a false 3) under the warrant or color of legal authority,
statement. Good faith is always presumed, and as it 4) devoting it to a public use, or otherwise informally
happened, petitioner did not make any false statement in the appropriating or injuriously affecting it 5) substantially to oust
pertinent entry. the owner and deprive him of all beneficial enjoyment thereof.

2. The main reason for the revocation of the Mayor’s permit 1) YES. This element is present in this case when by virtue of
was the controversy engendered by the filing of a civil case the lease, the Republic (AFP), took possession of the Castellvi
before the RTC involving the ownership of certain portions of property.
Lot 261-B, the land from which the land was derived.
However, the question over ownership has already been 2) NO. Momentary should be construed to mean a limited
settled with finality by the Supreme Court. period, not indefinite or permanent. Here, there was a lease
contract for 1 year, renewable. The entry on the property
The Court finds that the manner by which the Mayor revoked under lease is temporary and transitory. The fact the Republic
the permit transgressed petitioner’s right to due process. In constructed some installations does not alter the fact that the
view of the undisputed fact that the Municipality of Balanga is entry into the land was only momentary or transitory,
not the owner of the lot, then there is no legal basis for it to intended to last only a year, even if renewable. Even if there
impose and collect market fees and market entrance fees. was a “seeming intention to be permanent” such cannot
Only the owner has the right to do so. prevail over the clear and express terms of the lease contract.
If it was really intended to be more than momentary, then
why would the contract of lease be from year to year basis?
ELEMENTS OF “TAKING”
3) YES. There was entry under the warrant or color of legal
REPUBLIC VS. CASTELLVI authority since it was the republic who entered the property
eminent domain – elements of taking. as a lessee.

• Republic filed for eminent domain against Castellvi, over 4) YES. Property was devoted to public use because it was
a parcel of land Floridablanca, Pampanga. used by the AFP-Air Force
• Republic alleged, that the fair market value according to
the Committee on Appraisal for the Province of 5) NO. The entry of the republic into the property does NOT
Pampanga, was not more than P2,000 per hectare, or a oust Castellvi or deprive him of the use of the property.
total market value of P259,669.10. Castellvi remained the owner and was continuously

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 45
recognized as the owner, as shown by the yearly lease instituted an action for expropritation of a right-of-way
contract. Republic has also been paying its monthly rentals easement. Therefore, the rate used should be as of 1969 or
until the time when it filed for eminent domain. 15 pesos.

It is thus clear that the taking of the Castellvi property for DOCTRINE: WHERE THERE IS NO TAKING OF PROPERTY FOR
purposes of eminent domain cannot be considered to have PURPOSES OF EMINENT DOMAIN NOR CONDEMNATION
taken place in 1947, when the Republic merely commenced to PROCEEDINGS INSTITUTED, THE BASIS FOR DETERMINATION
occupy the property as lessee. Thus the JC should be OF JUST COMPENSATION IS THE TIME WHEN THE COURT MADE
determined as of the date of filing of petition for ED, not as of ITS ORDER OF EXPROPRIATION.
1947 when the Republic first occupied it as lessee.

City Government of Quezon City v. Ericta

ISSUE: The Republic claims that there was a right to buy the
property at the value it had at the time of first occupation as PONENTE: Gutierrez Jr.
lessee in 1947.
SC: NO. What was expressly agreed in the lease agreement is FACTS:
that should the lessor require the lessee to return the - Quezon City enacted Ordinance No. 6118 s-64
premises, then the lessee would have the right and privilege o Section 9 provides that at least 6 percent of
of paying the lessor what it would fairly cost to put the private memorial parks shall be set aside for
premises in the same condition as it was at the charity burial of deceased persons who are
commencement of the lease. The "fair value" at the time of paupers and have been residents of Quezon
occupancy, mentioned in the lease agreement, does not refer City for at least 5 years prior to death
to the value of the property if bought by the lessee, but refers - Section 9 was not enforced until 7 years later, the QC
to the cost of restoring the property in the same condition as Council ordered the City Engineer to stop selling of
of the time when the lessee took possession of the property. memorial park lots whose owners have not complied
with Section 9
Just compensation" is to be determined as of the date of the - Himalayang Pilipino filed a petition to declare the
filing of the complaint. This Court has ruled that when the said Section as void
taking of the property sought to be expropriated coincides
with the commencement of the expropriation proceedings, or ISSUE:
takes place subsequent to the filing of the complaint for - W/N the section is unconstitutional because it is an
eminent domain, the just compensation should be determined undue taking of private property without just
as of the date of the filing of the complaint. In the instant compensation
case, it is undisputed that the Republic was placed in
possession of the Castellvi property, by authority of the court, HELD:
on August 10, 1959. The "taking" of the Castellvi property for - YES
the purposes of determining the just compensation to be paid
must, therefore, be reckoned as of June 26, 1959 when the RATIO:
complaint for eminent domain was filed. - Police power under the general welfare clause of
Quezon City
o To make such further ordinance and
Garcia v. CA regulations not repugnant to law as may be
necessary to carry into effect and discharge
Facts: The Garcia’s owned 2 lots (Lot 633 and 634) in Mexico, the powers and duties conferred by this act
Pampanga. NPC, as early as 1957 occupied portions of the and such as it shall deem necessary and
lots for the construction of ‘steel towers and high power lines proper to provide for the health and safety,
for 230 KV Ambuklao-Manila Line and 69 KV Mexico-Tarlac promote, the prosperity, improve the
Line. Up to now, they haven’t paid anything, neither rental nor morals, peace, good order, comfort and
purchase price. Later on, the lots were turned into a convenience of this city and the inhabitants
residential subdivision except for Block 19 because NPC was thereof, and for the protection of property
occupying it. In 1969, NPC instituted an action for therein; and enforce obedience thereto with
expropriation of a right-of-way easement over a portion such lawful fines or penalties as the City
(Block 10 – adjacent to Block19) again of the 2 lots. They Council may prescribe under the provisions
intended to use it for construction and maintenance of a 69 of subsection (jj) of this section.
KV Mexico-Baligago Transmission Line. The Garcias seek just - Police power under corpus juris
compensation for NPC’s occupying of Block 19. (and Block 10
but they paid and there was no issue) The Garcias say that
o Police power is the power of promoting the
NPC has been occupying the lot since 1957. A tax declaration public welfare by restraining and regulating
at that time showed that the market value was .07 pesos per the use of liberty and property. It is usually
square meter and NPC said they should pay based on that. exerted in order to merely REGULATE the
The Garcias contend that as of 1969 the value was 15 pesos use of liberty and property. If he is
per square meter and that rate should be used. DEPRIVED outright, it is not taken for public
use but rather to destroy in order to
Issue: Which rate should be used for just compensation? .07 promote the general welfare
or 15? - Jurisprudence in Case v. Board of Health
o Under the provisions of municipal charters
Held: 15 which are known as general welfare clauses,
a city, by virtue of its police power, may
Ratio: Jurisprudence says that the time as of which market adopt ordinances to secure the peace,
value should be fixed is the time when the court makes safety, health, morals, and the bes and
its order of expropriation. In 1957, NPC just occupied the highest interests of the municipality
land without going to court to order expropriation, just a - The above are not applicable to the case at bar
permission to occupy the land. It was only in 1969 when NPC o There is no reasonable relation between the

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 46
setting aside of 6 percent of total area for have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the
charity burial grounds and the promotion of enveloping atmosphere. Otherwise, buildings could not be
health, morals, good order, safety, or the erected, trees could not be planted, and fences could not be
general welfare run. The fact that he does not occupy it ina a physical sense
o The ordinance is actually a taking without (by the erection of buildings) is not material. The flight of the
compensation airplanes, which skims the surface although not touch it, is as
o What the Revised Charter of Quezon City much as an appropriation of the use of the land as a more
provides is for the local government to conventional entry upon it.
provide its own city owned land or to buy or
expropriate with compensation private There is an intrusion so immediate and so direct as to subtract
properties to construct public cemeteries from the owner’s full enjoyment of the property. Thus, the
o Instead of complying with what is required adjacent airspace at this low altitude is so close to the land
of them, the local government merely that invasions of it affects the use of the land itself. This
passes the burden on to private invasion is the same as the invasion of the surface. It is the
ccemeteries. character of the invasion, and not the amount of damage
resulting, so long as the damage is substantial, that
determines whether there is a taking.
UNITED STATES VS. CAUSBY
eminent domain In short, flights over private lands are generally not a taking,
unless they are so low and so frequent as to be a direct and
• Respondents own 2.8 acres of land near the airport of immediate interference to the enjoyment and use of land.
North Carolina. They had a house and other buildings for
raising chickens. (But since it is not clear yet whether the taking is permanent
or temporary, then the case is remanded to the lower court
• Near them was the path of the runway, used by the US
before the amount of JC is determined.)
government under a lease contract. (this was during
WW2, so US fighter planes and bombers use the airport).
• Sometimes, the fighter planes would come close enough
People v. Fajardo
to miss the top of the trees. The noise is startling. At
night, the glare from the planes would brighten the place.
Facts:
As a result the respondents had to give up their chicken
-During the incumbency of defendant Fajardo as mayor the
business.
municipal council passed which prohibits construction of a
• 150 chickens were lost.  building without a permit from the mayor and if said building
• Thus the property depreciated in value and. destroys the view of the plaza it shall be removed at the
• The US relies on the Air Commerce Act of 1926, claiming expense of the owner
that the US has complete and exclusive national
sovereignty over the air space in the country. It claims -After the term of the Fajardo as mayor, he and his son-in-law
that navigable air space is the airspace above the filed a request for a permit to construct a building on a parcel
minimum space altitudes of flight prescribed by the Civil of land they own located on the national highway
Aeronautics Authority.
• It is argued that such navigable airspace is subject to -The request was denied for the reason among others that the
right of interstate and foreign air navigation. Now the US proposed building would destroy the view or beauty of the
claims that these flights were an exercise of this right to public plaza
travel in airspace. The US claims that the flight are made
within the navigable airspace without any physical -Defendants proceeded with the construction of the building
invasion of the property of landowners. There has been without a permit because they needed a place of residence
no taking of property but merely incidental damage badly, their former house being destroyed by a typhoon
resulting from authorized air navigation. It is also argued
that landowner does not own the airspace above. Issue/Held:
-W/N the ordinance amounts to taking of property without just
SC: The flights over the property rendered it inhabitable, thus compensation? YES
there is compensable taking of private property under the 5th
Am. Ratio:
It is the owner’s loss, not the taker’s gain, which is the 1.the fact that the mayor refuses to issue a building permit
measure of the value of the property taken. predicated on the ground that the proposed building would
destroy the view of the public plaza, the ordinance operates to
Because of the frequency and altitude of the flights, the permanently deprive defendants of their right to use their own
respondents could not use their land for any purpose, property, hence it oversteps the bounds of police power and
therefore, their loss would be complete. It is as complete as if amounts to taking of property without just compensation
the US had entered upon the surface of the land and taken
exclusive possession thereof. The land is appropriated as if it 2.while property may be regulated in the interest of the state,
were used for the runways themselves. the latter may not, in the guise of police power permanently
divest owners of the beneficial use of their property and
THUS there would be taking. Though it would only be an practically confiscate them solely to preserve aesthetic
easement of flight which was taken, that easement, if appearance of a community
permanent and not merely temporary normally would be
equivalent to a fee. It would be a definite exercise of complete 3.as the case now stands, every structure that may be
dominion and control over the surface of the land. The fact erected on defendant’s land regardless of its beauty would
that the planes never touched the land would be irrelevant interfere with the view of the public plaza from the highway
because the owner’s right to possess and exploit the land (his
beneficial ownership) would be destroyed.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES V. PLDT
If the landowner is to have full enjoyment of the land, he must

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 47
Facts: deposit "whatever differential between the amounts above
PLDT and Bureau of Telecommunications entered into a fixed and those already deposited within twenty four (24)
contract which allowed the Bureau to borrow PLDT’s trunk hours from receipt of the Order" and (3) holding in
lines. After a while, PLDT, complained to the Bureau of abeyance the issuance of the writ of possession
Telecommunications that said bureau was violating the pending compliance therewith.
conditions, referring to the rented trunk lines, for the Bureau
had used the trunk lines not only for the use of government Issue:
offices but even to serve private persons or the general W/N there was grave abuse of discretion by the judge granted
public, in competition with the business of the PLDT. So PLDT the aforementioned orders
disconnected the trunk lines being rented by the Bureau. The Held:
result was the isolation of the Philippines, on telephone Yes. P.D. No. 42 repealed Sec 2 Rule 67 of the Rules of Court,
services, from the rest of the world, except the United States. granting the court the discretion to determine the provisional
The trial court dismissed both the claims and counter-claims value which must be deposited by the plaintiff to enable it "to
but said that PLDT should reconnect and restore the trunk take or enter upon the possession of the property", insofar as
lines for the Bureau was not guilty of fraud for misuse of the the determination of the provisional value, the form of
trunk lines. payment and the agency with which the deposit shall be
Issue: Can the Bureau be allowed to use PLDT’s trunk lines? made, are concerned.
Held: The lower court should not have dismissed the case but Sec. 2. Entry of plaintiff upon depositing value
YES, the Bureau can use PLDT’s trunk lines even for non- with National or Provisional Treasurer. Upon the
government offices. filing of the complaint or at any time thereafter the
Ratio: The Republic may, in the exercise of the sovereign plaintiff shall have the right to take or enter upon the
power of eminent domain, require the telephone company to possession of the real or personal property involved if
permit interconnection of the government interconnection of he deposits with the National or Provincial Treasurer
the government telephone system and that of PLDT, as the its value, as provisionally and promptly ascertained
needs of the government service may require, subject to the and fixed by the court having jurisdiction of the
payment of just compensation to be determined by the court. proceedings
Normally, of course, the power of eminent domain results in P.D. No. 42 effectively removed the discretion of the court in
the taking or appropriation of title to, and possession of, the determining the provisional value. What is to be deposited
expropriated property; but no cogent reason appears why the is an amount equivalent to the assessed value for
said power may not be availed of to impose only a burden taxation purpose. No hearing is required for that purpose.
upon the owner of condemned party, without loss of title and All that is needed is notice to the owner of the property
possession. sought to be condemned. Upon the filing of the complaint or
It is unquestionable that real property may, through at any time thereafter, the petitioner has the right to take or
expropriation, be subjected to an easement of the right of enter upon the possession of the property involved upon
way. The use of the PLDT’s lines and services to allow compliance with P.D. No. 42
interservice connection between both telephone systems is
not much different. In either case private property is Sine petitioner deposited the provisional value fixed by the
subjected to a burden for public use and benefit. court, it was entitled to be placed in possession of the
If Section 6, Article XIII, of the Constitution says that the State property involved at once. The Judge was therefore remiss in
may, in the interest of national welfare, transfer utilities to his refusal to issue the writ of possession despite the fact that
public ownership upon payment of just compensation, there is NPC likewise deposited the additional amount called for by the
no reason why the State may not require a public utility to 12 July 1990 Order. Instead, he issued the 16 July 1990 Order
render services in the general interest, provided just directing the defendants to state in writing within twenty-four
compensation is paid therefore. (24) hours whether or not they would accept and withdraw the
Ultimately, the beneficiary of the interconnecting service amounts deposited by the petitioner for each of them " as
would be the users of both telephone systems, so that the final and full satisfaction of the value of their respective
condemnation would be for public use. property affected by the expropriation and stating at the same
time that the writ will be issued after such manifestation and
acceptance and receipt of the amounts.
NPC v. JOCSON
The above Order has absolutely no legal basis even as it
Facts: also unjustly, oppressively and capriciously compels the
petitioner to accept the respondent Judge's determination of
Petitioner filed seven (7) eminent domain cases before the the provisional value as the just compensation after the
Bacolod RTC for the acquisition of a right-of-way easement defendants shall have manifested their conformity thereto. He
over portions of the parcels of land described in the thus subordinated his own judgment to that of the defendants'
complaints for its Negros-Panay Interconnection Project, because he made the latter the final authority to determine
particularly the Bacolod-Tomonton Transmission Line. On 25 such just compensation
June 1990 an Order fixing the provisional values of the subject
areas, directing the petitioner to deposit the amount with the
PNB in escrow for the benefit of the defendants pending Penn Central Transportation Company v. City of New
decision on the merits was issued. The market values York
mentioned in the Order are the same values appearing in the
tax declarations of the properties and the notices of Background:
assessment issued by the Assessor. NPC complied. The Grand Central Terminal is a designated Landmark under
the New York City’s Landmarks Preservation Law. In NY they
Upon motions for reconsideration of the 25 June 1990 Order do not acquire the historic properties rather they involve
alleging that the provisional value of the property involved public entities in land-use decisions affecting these properties
therein "had been set much too low" and that there is need and providing services, standards, controls and incentives
for a re-evaluation of the provisional value of the subject (e.g. tax exemption) that will encourage preservation by
property, respondent Judge issued an Order (1) increasing the private owners and users. Being a designated Landmark the
provisional values of the properties enumerated in the property is subjected to rules of the Landmarks Preservation
motions for reconsideration, (2) directing the petitioner to Commission, which requires that the commission must

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 48
approve in advance any proposal to alter the exterior parcels in the vicinity of the Terminal and one or two of
architectural feature of the Landmark. In the event that the which have been found suitable foe the construction of new
owner wishes to alter the landmarks site, three 3 separate office buildings.
procedures are available through which administrative
approval may be obtained: The NY’s Landmarks Law has not effected a taking of
appellant’s property. The restrictions imposed are
1. Certificate of no effect – alteration will not change substantially related to the promotion of the general welfare
and not only permit reasonable beneficial use of the landmark
any architectural feature
site but also afford appellants opportunities further to
2. Certificate of appropriateness- change will not enhance not only the Terminal site proper but also other
unduly hinder the protection, enhancement, properties.
perpetuation and use of the landmark
3. Certificate of appropriateness on the ground of
insufficient return –ensure that designation does Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto
not cause economic hardship. Whether the owner
enjoys tax exemptions is put into consideration. Facts:
Facts: The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
Penn Central who owns Grand Central Terminal entered into a (FIFRA) authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
lease and sub-lease agreement with UGP (Union General to use data submitted by an applicant for registration of a
Properties) to construct a multistory office above the terminal. covered product (pesticide) in evaluating the application of a
UGP and Penn applied to the commission with 2 separate subsequent applicant, and to disclose publicly some of the
plans to construct a 55-story office building to be cantilevered submitted data. Under the data-consideration provisions,
above the existing façade and to rest on the roof of the Section 3, as amended in 1978, applicants are granted a 10-
Terminal. The 2nd plan called for a tearing down of a portion year period of exclusive use for data on new active
that included the 42d street façade. The commission denied ingredients contained in pesticides registered after September
these applications. Instead of filing for a judicial review for the 30, 1978, while all other data submitted after December 31,
Commission’s decision UGP and Penn filed at the NY Supreme 1969, may be cited and considered in support of another
court claiming that the application of the Landmarks application for 15 years after the original submission if the
Preservation Law had “taken” their property without just applicant offers to compensate the original submitter. If the
compensation in violation of the 5th and 14th amendment. parties cannot agree on the amount of compensation, either
may initiate a binding arbitration proceeding, and if an
Note: the Grand Central Terminal is already an 8-story original submitter refuses to participate in negotiations or
building. The other spaces are being rented-out for arbitration, he forfeits his claim for compensation. Data that
commercial purposes do not qualify for either the 10-year period of exclusive use or
the 15-year period of compensation may be considered by
Issue: EPA without limitation.
Does the Landmarks Preservation Law “take” their property Section 10, as amended in 1978, authorizes, in general, public
without just compensation? disclosure of all health, safety, and environmental data even
though it may result in disclosure of trade secrets. Appellee, a
Held: No company headquartered in Missouri, is an inventor, producer,
and seller of pesticides, and invests substantial sums in
Rationale: developing active ingredients for pesticides and in producing
They were unable to establish either that they were unable to end-use products that combine such ingredients with inert
increase the Terminal’s commercial income by transforming ingredients. Appellee brought suit alleging that the data-
vacant or underutilized space to revenue-producing use, or consideration and data-disclosure provisions of FIFRA effected
that the unused development rights over the Terminal could a "taking" of property without just compensation, in violation
not have been profitably transferred to one more nearby sites of the Fifth Amendment, and that the data-consideration
All that UGP and Penn had succeeded in showing was that provisions violated the Amendment because they effected a
they had been deprived of the property’s most profitable use. taking of property for a private, rather than a public, purpose.
This showing did not establish that appellants had been
unconstitutionally deprived of their property Held:
1. Does Monsanto have a property interest protected by the
There could be no “taking since the law had not transferred Fifth Amendment’s Taking Clause in the health, safety, and
control of the property to the city, but only restricted environmental data is has submitted to the EPA? Yes.
appellants’ exploitation of it
A “taking may more readily be found when the interference To the extent that appellee has an interest in its health,
with property can be characterized as a physical invasion by safety, and environmental data cognizable as a trade secret
the government than when interference arises from some property right under Missouri law, that property right is
public program adjusting the benefits and burdens of protected by the Taking Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
economic life to promote the common good. Despite their intangible nature, trade secrets have many of
the characteristics of more traditional forms of property.
Recognizing the constraints imposed on landmark site Moreover, this Court has found other kinds of intangible
constitute a taking for 5th amendment purposes, do not leave interests to be property for purposes of the Clause.
the property owner empty-handed. The property owner may
theoretically “transfer” his previous right to develop the 2. Does EPA’s use of the data to evaluate the applications of
landmark property to adjacent properties if they are under his others or EPA’s disclosure of the data to qualified members of
control. Appellees have coined this system TDRS or the the public effect a taking of that property interest? It depends.
Transfer Development Rights. The TDR’s constitute just
compensation. EPA's consideration or disclosure of data submitted by
appellee prior to October 22, 1972, or after September 30,
Appellants were not prohibited from occupying the airspace 1978, does not effect a taking, but EPA's consideration or
above the Terminal. Their ability to use these rights has not disclosure of certain health, safety, and environmental data
been abrogated; they are made transferable to at least 8 constituting a trade secret under state law and submitted by

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 49
appellee between those two dates may constitute a taking
under certain conditions. 4. If there is taking for public use, does the statute adequately
provide for just compensation?
Factors in determining whether a governmental action short
of acquisition or destruction of property has gone beyond A Tucker Act remedy is available to provide appellee with just
proper “regulation” and effects a “taking”: compensation for any taking of property that may occur as a
- character of governmental action result of FIFRA's data-consideration and data-disclosure
- economic impact provisions. Neither FIFRA nor its legislative history discusses
- interference with reasonable investment-backed the interaction between FIFRA and the Tucker Act, and
expectations (the court uses this one) inferring a withdrawal of Tucker Act jurisdiction would amount
a) With respect to any health, safety, and environmental data to a disfavored partial repeal by implication of the Tucker Act.
that appellee submitted to EPA after the effective date of the FIFRA's provision that an original submitter of data forfeits his
1978 FIFRA amendments, appellee could not have had a right to compensation from a later submitter for the use of the
reasonable, investment-backed expectation that EPA would original submitter's data if he fails to participate in, or comply
keep the data confidential beyond the limits prescribed in the with the terms of, a negotiated or arbitrated compensation
amended statute itself. As long as appellee is aware of the settlement merely requires a claimant to first seek
conditions under which the data are submitted, and the satisfaction through FIFRA's procedure before asserting a
conditions are rationally related to a legitimate Government Tucker Act claim.
interest, a voluntary submission of data in exchange for the Because the Tucker Act is available as a remedy for any
economic advantages of a registration can hardly be called a uncompensated taking appellee may suffer as a result of the
taking. operation of the challenged provisions of FIFRA, appellee's
(b) Prior to its amendment in 1972, FIFRA was silent with challenges to the constitutionality of the arbitration and
respect to EPA's authorized use and disclosure of data compensation scheme of FIFRA are not ripe for resolution.
submitted to it in connection with an application for The case is remanded for further proceedings.
registration. Although the Trade Secrets Act provides a
criminal penalty for a Government employee who discloses, in *I’m really sorry if this digest is confusing. It’s coz the case is
a manner not authorized by law, any trade secret information kinda confusing. Ask me nalang if you have any questions and
revealed to him during the course of his official duties, it is not ill TRY to answer them  - Miki
a guarantee of confidentiality to submitters of data, and,
absent an express promise, appellee had no reasonable,
investment-backed expectation that its information submitted NPC v. Manubay
to EPA before October 22, 1972, would remain inviolate in the
EPA's hands. The possibility was substantial that the Federal Facts:
Government at some future time would find disclosure to be
in the public interest. The Trade Secrets Act, which penalizes National Power Corporation commenced its 350 KV Leyte-
only unauthorized disclosure, cannot be construed as any sort Luzon HVDC Power Transmission Project. For this project,
of assurance against internal agency use of submitted data Napocor’s transmission lines had to cross over certain lands,
during consideration of the application of a subsequent one of these being owned by Manubay. Napocor filed a
applicant for registration. complaint for expropriation to acquire an easement of right of
(c) However, under the statutory scheme in effect between way. The court appointed 3 commissioners for the purpose of
October 22, 1972, and September 30, 1978, a submitter was fair and just compensation due to Manubay. The
given an opportunity to protect its trade secrets from Commissioner for Napocor recommened P115/sqm. The
disclosure by designating them as trade secrets at the time of Manubay Commissioner P550/sqm. The Court’s Commissioner
submission. The explicit governmental guarantee to and Chairperson of the board also recommended the P550.
registration applicants of confidentiality and exclusive use Total: P12,628,940.50.
with respect to trade secrets during this period formed the
basis of a reasonable investment-backed expectation. If EPA, RTC approved Chairperson Teoxon’s recommended amount of
consistent with current provisions of FIFRA, were now to P550/sqm. It opined that the installation of the Project would
disclose such trade secret data or consider those data in impose a limitation on the use of the land for an indefinite
evaluating the application of a subsequent applicant in a period of time, thereby justifying the payment of the full value
manner not authorized by the version of FIFRA in effect of the property.
between 1972 and 1978, its actions would frustrate appellee's
reasonable investment-backed expectation. If, however, Issue:
arbitration pursuant to FIFRA were to yield just compensation W/N the CA gravely erred in affirming the RTC Decision. NO.
for the loss in the market value of appellee's trade secret data
suffered because of EPA's consideration of the data in Held:
connection with another application (no arbitration having yet
occurred), then appellee would have no claim against the Petitioner contends that the valuation of the expropriated
Government for a taking. property was too high a price for the acquisition of an
easement of a mere aerial right of way, because respondent
3. Is the taking for public use? would continue to own and use the subject land anyway.
Petitioner argues that there is no “taking” of property, but
Any taking of private property that may occur in connection merely an imposition of an encumbrance or a personal
with EPA's use of data submitted to it by appellee between easement/servitude.
October 22, 1972, and September 30, 1978, is a taking for a
"public use," rather than for a "private use," even though We are not persuaded. The expropriation was not to be
subsequent applicants may be the most direct beneficiaries. limited to an easement of a right of way. The acquisition of
So long as a taking has a conceivable public character, the such an easement falls within the purview of the power of
means by which it will be attained is for Congress to eminent domain.
determine. With regard to FIFRA's data-disclosure provisions,
the optimum amount of disclosure to assure the public that a An easement of a right of way transmits no rights except the
product is safe and effective is to be determined by Congress, easement itself, and respondent retains full ownership of the
not the courts. property. The acquisition of such easement is, nevertheless,

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 50
not gratis. As correctly observed by the CA, considering the action and competition or the fair value of the property as
nature and the effect of the installation power lines, the between one who receives, and one who desires to sell it,
limitations on the use of the land for an indefinite period fixed at the time the of its actual taking by the government.
would deprive respondent of normal use of the property. The The BIR zonal value was outdated and did not proscribe the
latter is entitled to just compensation, which must be neither commissioners from making their own estimates of just
more nor less than the land’s monetary equivalent. compensation.

Just compensation is defined as the full and fair equivalent of The Commissioners tasked with assessing the value of the
the property taken from its owner by the expropriator. The property found that it was located in a highly developed area
word “just” is used to intensify the meaning of the word and was accessible through an all weather road. The report
“compensation” and to convey the idea that the equivalent to contained the ocular inspection made by the commissioners,
be rendered for the property to be taken shall be real, tax declaration of the property, NPC sketch plan, location
substantial, full and ample. In eminent domain or plan, zoning certificates, zonal evaluation of the BIR and the
expropriation proceedings, the just compensation is generally opinion values were also considered. NPC also was not able to
the market value. justify how the adjacent lot of San Pedro was valued at P499
while their assessment of the latter was only P230.00 and
The nature and character of the land at the time of its taking P89.00
is the principal criterion for determining how much just
compensation should be given to the landowner. The parcels In NPC v Gutierrez right of way easement resulting in
of land sought to be expropriated are undeniably raw restriction or limitation on property rights also falls within the
agricultural land but the locality had become highly urbanized ambit of “expropriation” as there was loud buzzing and
and would have greater economic value for residential or exploding sounds caused by the transmission lines, it affects
commercial use. the rights of the owner to use or sell such land.

The chairperson made a careful study of the property. No

documentary evidence was attached to substantiate the PUBLIC USE
opinions indicated in the petitioner commissioner’s Report.
We see no reason to disturb the factual findings as to the Sumulong v. Guerrero
valuation of the property. FYI, the reports of commissioners FACTS:
are merely advisory and recommendatory in character, as far The NHA sought to expropriate 25 hectares of land in
as the courts are concerned. Antipolo, Rizal; among those sought were properties of
Sumulong and Balaoing. The land sought to be expropriated
were valued by NHA at P1.00 per square meter adopting the
National Power Corporation v San Pedro market value fixed by the provincial assessor in accordance
with Presidential Decrees prescribing the valuation of property
FACTS: in expropriation proceedings.
The NPC is a government owned and controlled Together with the complaint was a motion for
corporation created to undertake the development of hydro immediate possession of the properties. The NHA deposited
electric generation of power. Under RA 6395, the NPC is the amount of P158,980.00 with the Philippine National Bank,
authorized to enter private property provided that owners representing the “total market value” of the subject 25
shall be indemnified for any actual damages caused. NPC hectares of land, pursuant to PD 1224 which defines “the
negotiated with Maria Mendoza San Pedro(subsequently died), policy on the expropriation of private property for socialized
represented by her son Vicente for an easement of right of housing upon payment of just compensation”.
way over her property in barangay Partida, Norzagaray On January 17, 1978, Judge Buenaventura Guerrero
Bulacan for P 6 M. However NPC board of directors passed a issued the order issuing a writ of possession in favor of NHA.
resolution saying that it would only pay P230 and P89 per sq Sumulong and Balaoing filed a motion of
m. While San Pedro asserts that it should be P600. The court reconsideration on the ground that they have been deprived
then appointed a committee of Commissioners to determine of due process of law. This was denied. They filed a petition
how much should be the just compensation. for certiorari with the Supreme Court.

ISSUE:
Whether the taking of private property for “socialized
housing” which would benefit a few and not all citizens,
constitutes taking for “public use”?
Residential Agricultural
NPC(Cuervo P230.00 per sq m P89.00 per sq m RULING:
Appraisal Inc) The “public use” requirement is a flexible,
San Pedro P600.00 per sq m P600.00 per sq m comprehensive, and evolving concept. Whatever may be
Commission P800.00 per sq m P600.00 per sq m beneficially employed for the general welfare satisfies the
requirement; the construction of low-cost housing (socialized
ISSUE: housing) is recognized as a public purpose. The fact that not
W/N the CA erred in affirming the judgment of the trial court all of the public but only some beneficiaries may avail thereof
in awarding just compensation in the amount of P499.00 for does not deprive the expropriation of its public character. It is
the agricultural portion and P800.00 for the residential made pursuant to the State’s mandate to promote social
portion? NO justice in all phases of national development. The NHA is
likewise vested with broad discretion to designate particular
W/N petitioner shall pay only an easement fee? NO properties to be taken for socialized housing purposes.

RATIO
The constitutional limitation of “just compensation” is Philippine Columbian Association v. Panis
considered to be the sum equivalent to the market value of FACTS: Petitioner Philippine Columbian Association is a non-
the property, broadly described to be the price fixed by the stock, non-profit domestic corporation and is engaged in the
seller in open market in the usual and ordinary course of legal business of providing sports and recreational facilities for its

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 51
members. Its office and facilities are located in the District of NO. To sustain the Court of Appeals would mean that the
Paco, Manila, and adjacent thereto, is a parcel of land local government units can no longer expropriate agricultural
consisting of 4,842.90 square meters owned by petitioners. lands needed for the construction of roads, bridges, schools,
The actual occupants of the said parcel of land are private hospitals, etc., without first applying for conversion of the use
respondents while respondents Antonio Gonzales, Jr. And of the lands with the Department of Agrarian Reform, because
Karlo Butiong were duly-elected councillors of the City of all of these projects would naturally involve a change in the
Manila. land use. In effect, it would then be the Department of
The land subject of this case was formerly a part of the Fabie Agrarian Reform to scrutinize whether the expropriation is for
Estate. As early as November 11, 1966, the Municipal Board of a public purpose or public use.
the City of Manila passed Ordinance No. 5971, seeking to Ordinarily, it is the legislative branch of the
expropriate the Fabie Estate. Through negotiated sales, the local government unit that shall determine whether the
City of Manila acquired a total of 18,017.10 square meters of use of the property sought to be expropriated shall be
the estate, and thereafter subdivided the land into home lots public, the same being an expression of legislative
and distributed the portions t the actual occupants thereof. policy. The courts defer to such legislative determination and
The remaining area of 4,842.90 square meters was sold in will intervene only when a particular undertaking has no real
1977 by its owner, Dolores Fabie-Posadas, to petitioner. Since or substantial relation to the public use.
then, the lot has been occupied by private respondents. On The expropriation of the property authorized by the
May 23, 1989, the City Council of Manila, with the approval of questioned resolution is for a public purpose. The
the Mayor, passed Ordinance No. 7704 for the expropriation of establishment of a pilot development center would inure to
the said lot. the direct benefit and advantage of the people of the Province
ISSUE: a.) Does the City of Manila has specific power to of Camarines Sur. Once operational, the center would make
expropriate private property? YES b.) Assuming available to the community invaluable information and
that it has such power, was it exercised properly and legally? technology on agriculture, fishery and the cottage industry.
YES (not so important issue) The housing project also satisfies the public purpose
RATIO: The Revised Charter of the City of Manila expressly requirement of the Constitution.
grants the City of Manila general powers over its territorial
jurisdiction, including the power of eminent domain. Section (Note: Just in case he asks… “There has been a shift from the
100 of said Revised Charter authorizes the City of Manila to literal to a broader interpretation of "public purpose" or
undertake urban land reform. The City of Manila, acting "public use" for which the power of eminent domain may be
through its legislative branch, has the express power to exercised. The old concept was that the condemned property
acquire private lands in the city and subdivide these lands must actually be used by the general public (e.g. roads,
into home lots for sale to bona fide tenants or occupants , and bridges, public plazas, etc.) before the taking thereof could
to laborers and low-salaried employees of the city. That only a satisfy the constitutional requirement of "public use". Under
few could actually benefit from the expropriation of the the new concept, "public use" means public advantage,
property does not diminish its public use character. It is convenience or benefit, which tends to contribute to the
simply not possible to provide all at once land and shelter for general welfare and the prosperity of the whole community,
all who need them (Sumulong v. Guerrero, 154 SCRA 461 like a resort complex for tourists or housing project.”)
[1987]). Public use now includes the broader notion of indirect
public benefit or advantage, including in particular, urban land
reform and housing. Reyes v NHA

Province of Camarines Sur v. CA (1993)

MASIKIP V CITY OF PASIG (Jan 23, 2006)
FACTS:
The Sangguniang Panlalawigan of the Province of FACTS
Camarines Sur, pursuant to the Local Government Code,
passed Resolution No. 129, Series of 1988, authorizing the Lourdes Dela Paz Masikip (Masikip) is the registered owner of
Provincial Governor to purchase or expropriate property a parcel of land located at Pag-Asa, Caniogan, Pasig City,
contiguous to the provincial capitol site, in order to establish a Metro Manila. The municipality of Pasig (Pasig) notified
pilot farm for non-food and non-traditional agricultural crops Masikip of its intention to expropriate a portion of her property
and a housing project for provincial government employees. to be used for “sports development and recreational
Pursuant to the Resolution, the Province of Camarines Sur, activities” of the residents of Barangay Caniogan pursuant to
through its Governor, Hon. Luis R. Villafuerte, filed two Ordinance No 42, Series of 1993 enacted by the Sanggunian
separate cases for expropriation against Ernesto N. San Bayan of Pasig.
Joaquin and Efren N. San Joaquin (herein private respondents). Later, Pasig again notified Masikip, but this time the purpose
The respondents moved to dismiss but the trial court denied was allegedly “in line with the program of the Municipal
the said motion and authorized the Province of Camarines Sur Government to provide land opportunities to deserving poor
to take possession of the property. sectors of our community”. Masikip replied, stating that the
Upon the respondents’ appeal, the Court of Appeals expropriation was unconstitutional, invalid, and oppressive, as
set aside the order of the trial court until after the Province of the area of her lot was neither sufficient nor suitable. Pasig
Camarines Sur shall have submitted the requisite approval of filed with the trial court a complaint for expropriation. Masikip
the Department of Agrarian Reform to convert the filed for a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of cause of
classification of the property of the private respondents from action for the exercise of the power of eminent domain. The
agricultural to non-agricultural land. Hence this petition. lower courts denied Masikip’s motion to dismiss.

ISSUE: ISSUES/HELD
W/N the expropriation of agricultural lands by local
government units is subject to the prior approval of the Procedural Issue (not that important… you can probably
Secretary of the Agrarian Reform, as the implementor of the skip this part for the recit)
agrarian reform program. W/N Masikip’s motion to dismiss should have been allowed in
the lower courts? YES
HELD:

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 52
At that time, the rule on expropriation was governed by Sec 3, constitutionality of R.A. 7942, DAO 96-40 and the CAMC
Rule 37 of the Revised Rules of Court. This rule required that FTAA.
in the single motion to dismiss, all his objections and defenses
must be specified in the complaint; those not presented in the ISSUES:
complaint are considered waived.
The lower courts dismissed the complaint because the 1.) Is Sec. 76 of R.A. 7942 a taking provision?
complaint hypothetically admitted that there was a genuine 2.) Do R.A. 7942 and Sec. 107 of DAO 96-40 encroach on
necessity to expropriate the property for public use. The lower the power of the courts to determine just
courts erred; they should set the case for reception of compensation?
evidence to determine whether there is indeed a genuine
necessity for the taking of property. RULING: Petition for prohibition and mandamus
dismissed.
Substantive Issue
W/N there was a genuine necessity for the taking of Masikip’s 1.) Yes, Sec. 76 of R.A. 7942 is a taking provision. The
property? NO mining industry is of public benefit. Mining activities
of exploration, extraction and processing of minerals
Pasig failed to establish a genuine necessity. In fact, after oust private owners from their land.
scrutinizing the records, the Court found that the basis of the 2.) No, power to determine just compensation still rests
ordinance was to benefit the Melendres Coumpound with the courts. Sec. 107 of DAO 96-40 contemplates
Homeowners Associaion, a private, non-profit organization, a voluntary transaction between private owners and
not the residents of Caniogan. It can be seen that the mining firms.
association wanted a private playground and recreational
facility – and Masikip’s property was the closest lot available. RATIONALE:
Thus, the taking was not of a public character. Moreover,
there was already an alternative facility for sports and Sec. 76 of R.A. 7942 provides that “holders of mining rights
recreation in the area, the Rainforest Park. shall not by prevented from entry into private lands and
concession areas by surface owners, occupants, or
DOCTRINES concessionaires when conducting mining operations.” It is not
a simple right-of-way which is ordinarily allowed by the Civil
Local governments have no inherent power of eminent Code. Mining operations consist of a considerable amount of
domain (can only be delegated by legislative branch) and may construction and deployment that will definitely oust owners
only exercise it when expressly authorized by statute. This is or occupants of beneficial ownership of their lands. Once
seen in sec 19 of the Local Gov Code of 1991. mining operations commence, there is already compensable
Judicial review of the exercise of eminent domain is limited taking. Moreover, mining is for a public benefit. All requisites
the following areas of concern: (a) adequacy of compensation, of taking are therefore present.
(b) necessity of the taking, and (c) public use character of the
purpose of the taking (FYI: This was cited from Fr. B’s book The situation contemplated in Sec. 107 of DAO 96-40 is a
The 1987 Consti of the Rep of the Phil) voluntary agreement or transaction between the holder of the
The very foundation of the right to exercise eminent mining rights and surface owners, occupants or
domain is a genuine necessity and that necessity must concessionaire as to the proper compensation for the latter.
be of a public character. The necessity must The courts are not excluded from the provision. Should there
precede/accompany – not follow – the taking of the land. be disagreement, Sec. 206 provides that recourse may be
made to the Panel of Arbitrators to the Mines Adjudication
Board. The latter’s disagreement is only preliminary and may
Didipio Earth-Savers’ Multi-Purpose Association, Inc. be reviewed by the Supreme Court under certiorari.
(DESAMA) v. Gozun
G.R. No. 157882, March 30, 2006, 485 SCRA 586. DOCTRINE:
First Division, J. Chico-Nazario, ponente
Mining is an industry of public benefit. Mining activities
SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION in the Supreme Court. amount to compensable taking for public use.
Prohibition and Mandamus.
JUST COMPENSATION
FACTS:
City of Manila V. Estrada
Before the Philippine Mining Act of 1995 (R.A. 7942) was
signed into law, then Pres. Fidel Ramos executed a Financial Facts:
and Technical Assistance Agreement (FTAA) with Australian This is an extended opinion by the Supreme Court to replace
mining firm Arimco Mining Corporation, later consolidated with the short opinion rendered on the same case. The Xity of
Climax Mining Ltd. to form Climax-Arimco Mining Corporation Manila sought to expropriate an entire parcel of land
(CAMC). belonging to respondent with its improvements with its use in
connection with a new market. There was a dispute as to the
Petitioners are various members of farmers, indigenous amount of just compensation that should be given for the
peoples, residents and communities affected by mining expropriation.
activities of CAMC. They sent various letters to the Several real estate agents placed the value of the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) land at P10 per square meter. Respondent Estrada estimated
and to Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo demanding for the that the land was worth P25 per square meter. Commissioners
cancellation of the CAMC FTAA because R.A. 7942 and its who were appointed to view the land and receive evidence,
implementing rules and regulations, DENR Administrative fixed the value at P20. After considering all the evidence, the
Order 96-40 (DAO 96-40) are allegedly unconstitutional. court pegged the compensation at P15. The Supreme court
reduced it to P10.
Their demand was referred to the Mines and Geosciences
Bureau which denied their request. Petitioners filed before the Issue:
Court for prohibition and mandamus assailing the Whether the P10 per square meter was properly established

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 53
as just compensation for the expropriation. before taking is unnecessary and it will be sufficient if a
certain and adequate remedy is provided by which the owner
Ruling: Yes can obtain compensation without any unreasonable delay.
According to this view, the usual constitutional provision that
Rationale: private property shall not be taken for a public use without
“Compensation” means an equivalent for the value just compensation does not require that compensation be
of the land taken. To compensate is to render something actually paid in advance of the occupancy of the land taken,
which is equal to that taken or received. The word “just” is and does not prohibit the legislature from authorizing a taking
used to intensify the meaning of the word compensation; to in advance of payment. It is held that the making of
convey the idea that the equivalent to be rendered for the compensation need not precede an entry upon the property,
property taken shall be real, substantial, full and ample. Just provided some definite provision is made whereby the owner
compensation therefore, means a fair and full equivalent for will certainly obtain compensation. The constitution does not
the loss sustained. require prepayment. Hence, the preliminary deposit amount
Several issues present themselves in its application. cannot be considered as unjust considering that the owners
First, testimony as to mere offers for the property desired or will be able to obtain payment after the ascertainment made
for contiguous property is not admissible. If evidence of offers by the court of the true value of the property.
is to be received, it will be important to know whether the
offer was made in good faith, by a man of good judgment, and
acquainted with the value of the article. Second, Testimony MUNICIPALITY OF DAET v. CA & LI SENG GIAP & CO.,
relative to real estate transactions in the vicinity of the land INC.
desired is admissible but with certain reservations. Testimony (October 18, 1979)
is based on sales of land similar in character, and situated in Ponente: Guerrero
the vicinity, if the transactions are not so remote in point of
the time that a fair comparison is impossible. Third, evidence Facts: The Municipality of Daet instituted proceedings against
showing prices paid for neighboring land under eminent Lis Seng Giap & Co., Inc. (LSGCI) for the purpose of acquiring
domain proceedings is inadmissible. Such sales are not a fair and subsequently converting respondent’s 2,717 sqm.
criterion of value for they are in the nature of a compromise. property into a public park. RTC dismissed the expropriation
It results in one party paying more or the other party taking proceedings on the ground that there is no “genuine need” for
less than is considered to be fair market value for the the expropriation nor could petitioner municipality exercise
property. Fourth, the purpose of the view made by appointed eminent domain for it had no funds to pay the reasonable
commissioners is for better enabling the appraisers to value of the land & building. In petitioner’s MR before the CA,
understand the evidence presented by the parties and giving the court reversed the lower court’s decision & directed the
it its proper weight. The report of the commissioners is not latter to fix the provisional value of the property.
final and conclusive so that the judgment of the court is a
mere formality. RTC issued “twin orders”:
o 1) Fixing the provisional value at P120/sqm.
The court justifies that the P10 was just & value of the improvement at P30,000, the
compensation was based on the great preponderance of land thus totaling P356,040. The
evidence submitted. Estrada’s estimation is inadmissible. municipality was thereafter required to
Uninterested third party experts pegged the price at P10. The deposit the amount w/ the provincial
court also has the power to revise the report of the treasurer in cash/security.
commissioners when the amount awarded is grossly o 2) Members of the Committee on Appraisal
inadequate or grossly excessive. were appointed – Atty. De Jesus (Provincial
Assessor), Atty. Jamito (PNB Branch Lawyer),
Dr. Aquino (municipal resident)
Manila Railroad v. Paredes The Commissioner’s report contained the following info:
• 1) Commissioners & counsels agreed to use
Facts: the “sale approach” (not really impt.)
Sometime prior to the first of April, 1913, the Railroad • 2) Commissioners based their appraisal of
Company entered upon and took possession of a long, narrow the value from the exhibits submitted by the
strip of land, running between the municipalities of Pagbilao parties
and Lopez in the Province of Tayabas, for use as a roadbed for • 3) Commissioners agreed that in 1962, the
a railroad which it was engaged in building under its charter. fair market value of the land was P60/sqm.
However, the company and the owners of the lands failed to & P15,000 for the building.
reach a settlement, hence the company instituted RTC rendered a decision disregarding the valuation by the
proceedings for the condemnation of the land thus taken. The Commissioners & used the appraisal of Eng. Aquino in 1969 as
CFI granted possession of the land upon depositing an amount the basis of determining the value of in 1962, fixing the
certified by the provincial treasurer to be equal to the average reasonable value at P117/sqm & value of improvement at
assessed value of all these lands which amounted to P36,500 thus totaling to P317,889.
P8,971.72 which is considered to be a provisional deposit. The Both parties filed MRs before the RTC but were denied,
owners of the land moved the court to increase the amount of followed by an appeal to the CA. The CA upheld the valuation.
the deposit from the provisional value to P1,000,000, which (Basically, the expropriation proceedings began in 1962 but
the CFI granted. judgment was not rendered til 1969 & the court fixed the
value of the property at the time the court decision was
Issue: delivered!)
W/N the provisional amount is considered just compensation. The Municipality of Daet contends that the value of the
property should be based on the time the petition was filed
Ruling: and that the Commissioner’s report must not be disregarded.
Yes. Moreover, PD42 allows the entry upon deposit w/ the PNB of
the amount equivalent to the assessed value of the property
Ratio: fore the purpose of taxation.
According to the weight of authority if the constitution or Issue(s):
statutes do not expressly require it, actual payment or tender

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 54
a) W/N the CA erred in determining the value of the
Facts:
property based on the time the judgment was
rendered & not the date the complaint was filed?
Proclamation No. 1811 was issued reserving a certain parcel
NO.
of land of the public domain in Cebu for the establishment of
b) W/N the CA erred in considering the findings of the an export processing zone by EPZA. Not al the reserved area,
appraiser & disregarding the Commissioners’ report? however was public land. 4 parcels belonged to Dulay. EPZA
NO. offered to purchase the parcels of land with the valuation set
c) W/N by virtue of PD42, LSGCI is estopped from forth in PD 464. The parties failed to reach an agreement
regarding the sale of the property.
claiming a valuation higher than the assessed value?
NO.
EPZA filed with the CFI of Cebu a complaint for expropriation
Ratio:
with a prayer for the issuance of a writ of possession against
a) Value should be fixed at the time the property is Dulay, to expropriate the 4 parcels of land pursuant to PD 66
taken possession of because at the time the (which empowers EPZA to acquire by condemnation
judgment was rendered, petitioner had not proceedings any property for the establishment of export
ACTUALLY taken possession of the property sought to processing zones in relation to Proclamation No. 1811, for the
be expropriated. Well-settled is the rule that JUST purpose of establishing the Mactan Export Processing Zone.)
COMPENSATION means the equivalent for the
value of the property at the time of its taking. The judge issued the order of condemnation declaring EPZA
b) The CA did not err because the commissioners’ as having the lawful right to take the 4 parcels of land, upon
report id not final & conclusive but merely advisory in the payment of just compensation (which hadn’t been agreed
character. upon yet)
c) PD42 does not limit just compensation in
expropriation proceedings to the assessed value of 3 commissioners submitted their consolidated report
the property. The decree fixes only the provisional recommending P15 per square meter as the fair and
value of the property, therefore, it does not reasonable value of just compensation for properties. EPZA
necessarily represent the true & correct value of the filed a motion for reconsideration of the order by the judge
land. and objection to commissioner’s report on the grounds that
PD 1533 suspended Sec 5-8, Rule 67 of the Rules of Court on
the ascertainment of just compensation through
NPC v. CA (first one)June 22, 1984 commissioners; and that compensation must not exceed the
maximum amount set therein.
Facts: In 1961, NPC started negotiations with spouses Sadang
for a portion of their land in Barrio San Mateo, Norzagaray, Issue:
Bulacan for purposes of constructing an access road to its 1. W/N sec 5-8, Rule 67 of the Revised Rules of Court
Angat River Hydroelectric Project. On November 1961, NPC has been repealed or amended by PD 1533 insofar as
was granted permission by the spouses to start construction the appt of commissioners to determine the just
of the road even if negotiations were not finished. On 1972, compensation is concerned (in other words, whether
B.E. San Diego Inc acquired a portion of the land at an auction the commissioners should determine just
and was issued a title. On 1963, eminent domain proceedings compensation or not) – 1st paragraph
commenced. 3 commissioners were to determine the just
compensation. Each party (spouses, Npc, court) were 2. Whether the court under PD 1533 still have the
assigned a commissioner. Trial Court ruled that just power and autho to determine just compensation,
compensation is 3.75 pesos per square meter with interest at independent of what is stated by the decree and to
12% per annum from March 11, 1963 until fully paid. Parties this effect, to appoint commissioners for such
appealed to CA and the CA increased just compensation to 7 purpose. – 2nd and 3rd paragraph
pesos.

Issue: Is CA correct in changing the rate to 7 pesos per square Ruling:

meter from 3.75? Is 12% still the applicable interest rate?
Under PD 1533, the basis of just compensation shall be the
Held: No. Trial Court was correct in making it 3.75. Interest fair and current market value declared by the owner of the
should by 6% from December 7, 1962. property sought to be expropriated or such market value as
determined by the assessor, whichever is lower. Therefore
Ratio: there is no more need to appoint commission. PD 1533 has
Factors taken into consideration to reach 3.75: vested on the assessors and the property owners themselves
- The commissioners recommended: NPC (.50), the power or duty to fix the market value of the properties
Spouses (20), Court (4). and that said property owners are given the full opportunity to
- The land was cogonales be heard before the Local Board of Assessment Appeals and
- During rainy season the road could only by passable the Central Board of Assessment Appeals. The promulgation
by animal-drawn carriages of the 4 decrees (PD 76, 464, 794, 1533) practically set aside
- The road NPC built was an improvement to the court proceedings. The decrees limited the definition of just
flourishing housing subdivision managed by San compensation. They leave the determination to the owner or
Diego the assessor, whichever may be lower. The provisions of the
- Offer was made 9 years ago and at first negotitation, decrees on just compensation are unconstitutional and void. It
the spouses were willing to sell at 4 pesos constitutes an impermissible encroachment on judicial
- Basis should be from the time of taking prerogatives. It tends to render the court inutile in a matter
- Interest was based from the time San Diego gained which under the consti is reserved to it for final determination.
title to a portion of the land Although in an expropriation proceeding the court technically
would still have the power to determine the just compensation
for the property, following the applicable decrees, its task
EXPORT PROCESSING ZONE AUTHORITY V. DULAY would be relegated to simply stating the lower value of the

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 55
property as declared either by the owner or the assessor. As The property has an area of 10,640 square meters and
its choice is always limited to the lower of the 2, the court belongs to B. H. Berkenkotter & Co. Vicente Viray, president of
can’t exercise its discretion or independence in determining the said school, sent the owner a written offer to buy the land
what is fair or just. Even a grade school pupil could substitute in line with the 5-year expansion program of ARASOF. In reply,
for the judge insofar as the determination of consti just Berkenkotter expressed its willingness to sell at P50.00 per
compensation is considered. As a necessary consequence, it square meter payable in cash. At Viray's request, the
would be useless for the court to appoint commissioners. Provincial Appraisal Committee, Office of the Provincial
Assessor, Batangas City, appraised the land and fixed its
The decree only establishes a uniform basis for determining market value at P32.00 per square meter. Viray then wrote
just compensation. The valuation in the decree may only Berkenkotter another letter and offered to buy the property at
serve as a guiding principles one of the factors in determining the said price. The latter stuck to its original valuation; later it
just compensation but it may NOT substitute the court’s own said that the property had in fact appreciated to as much as
judgment as to what amount should be awarded and how to P100.00 per square meter. Further negotiations failed to
arrive at such amount. Just compensation means the value of resolve the impasse between ARASOF and the petitioner. In
the property at the time of the taking. It is a fair and full the end, expropriation proceedings were commenced against
equivalent for the loss sustained. All the facts as to the the petitioner by the Republic of the Philippines on behalf of
condition of the property and its surroundings, its ARASOF.
improvements and capabilities, should be considered.
In its complaint, the Republic invoked the assessment made
The determination of just compensation in eminent domain by the Provincial Appraisal Committee at P32.00 per square
cases is a judicial function. The exec dept or legis may make meter and sought possession of the property upon payment of
the initial determinations but when a party claims a violation the 10% deposit required by P.D. 48. Berkenkotter originally
of the guarantee in the Bill of Rights that private property may questioned the purpose of the expropriation but later
not be taken for public use without just compensation, no abandoned this objection and concentrated only on what it
statute, decree, or EO can mandate that its own called the under-appraisal of the subject land.
determination shall prevail over the court’s findings. Much Issue:
less can the courts be precluded from looking into the W/N just compensation is to be paid for a parcel of land
justness of the decreed compensation. PD 1533 is unconsti sought to be expropriated for the use of the Apolinario R.
and void. Apacible School of Fisheries, a government institution in
Nasugbu, Batangas?

Maddumba v. GSIS Held:

The Court is disappointed that the petitioner should demand a
Facts: higher price for the Republic, which needs the lands for a
Maddumba participated in bidding for a foreclosed house. He public purpose, when it was willing to accept less from the
won the bidding, bought the house at P90k. He paid the three individual buyers who had only their private interests to
downpayment precribed by law and first monthly installment serve. But this is not only a matter of civic spirit. We recognize
in cash. Nevertheless, he requested that he pay the suceeding that the basic issue is the hard-nosed business of tit for tat.
installment in Landbank bonds. GSIS agreed on the condition Civic altruism aside, the simple fact is that, whatever its
that it will not be credited at face-value but at a discounted motive, the petitioner cannot now assert that its property is
rate. worth P85.00 per square meter as far as the Republic is
concerned although, by its own voluntary act, it sold similar
Issue: should the bonds wbe considered at face-value? YES property to private individuals for only P19.18 per square
meter. There is no satisfactory explanation for this incredible
Ratio: discrimination. The Republic should not pay more simply
These bonds are deemed contracts and the obligations because it is the Republic, as if it were a milking cow with
resulting therefrom fall within the purview of the non- unlimited resource to abuse.
impairment clause of the Constitution, and any impairment
thereof may take any encroachment in any respect upon the It may be asked why the petitioner should not be paid at the
obligation and cannot be permitted. Thus, the value of these rate at least of P32.00, which was the price offered by Viray
bonds cannot be diminished by any direct or indirect act, and in the complaint for expropriation later filled by the
particularly, since said bonds are fully guaranteed by the Republic. The Republic had no choice then because P.D. 1533
Government of the Philippines. fixed the just compensation at the valuation given by the
owner of the government, whichever was lower. The price
The preamble of PD 251 eloquently articulates government determined by the Provincial Appraisal Committee was lower.
intent to implement the state policy of 'diverting landlord True, the decree has since been declared unconstitutional in
capital in agriculture to industrial development' by Export Processing Zone Authority v. Dulay. Even so, the fact is
'mobilization and harnessing properly all available that the petitioner rejected that offer and has up to now been
government resources for the realization of the desired insisting on its own unit price of P85.00.
agrarian reform program.' For agrarian reform cannot be fully We agree with the respondent court that by selling its lands in
realized without the intervention of the government the three deed of sale indicated as Exhibits 1, 2 and 3, at the
particularly in the payment of just compensation. Surely, the uniform rate of P19.18 per square meter, the petitioner
tenant by himself does not have and cannot afford the thereby impliedly admitted that the lands subject of the
wherewithal to defray the cost of the land tranferred to him. It expropriation proceeding, being of the same topography and
is only with the full support and active assistance of the virtually in the same location is the said other lands, should
government principally through its financial institutions that also be valued at the same rate. This rule of inconsistency is
payment of just compensation to the landowner may be best expressed in the familiar saying, surely not unknown to
realized. the petitioner, that what is sauce for the goose is also
sauce for the gander. (Please say this during recits. Trip
lang!)
Berkenkotter v CA

Facts: MERALCO V PINEDA

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 56
1. where the Commissioners have applied illegal
Facts: principles to the evidence submitted to them or
Petitioner Manila Electric Company (MERALCO) takes action
2. where they have disregarded a clear
against Respondent Honorable Judge Gregorio G. Pineda is
preponderance of evidence, or
impleaded in his official capacity as the presiding judge of the
Court of First Instance 3. where the amount allowed is either grossly
On October 29, 1974, a complaint for eminent domain was inadequate or excessive
filed by petitioner MERALCO against forty-two (42) defendants
with the RTC
Pursuant to a government policy, the petitioners on October
30, 1979 sold to Napocor the power plants and transmission NPC v. CA and Mangondato
lines, including the transmission lines traversing private
respondents' property FACTS:
On June 5, 1980, petitioner filed a motion to dismiss the In 1978, NAPOCOR (NPC) took possession of a 21,995 sq. m.
complaint on the ground that it has lost all its interests over land which is a portion of Lot 1 of a subdivision plan (owned
the transmission lines and properties under expropriation by Mangondato) situated in Marawi City under the mistaken
because of their sale to the Napocor. In view of this motion, belief that it forms part of the public land reserved for use by
the work of the Commissioners was suspended (where the NAPOCOR for hydroelectric power purposes under
determination of the compensation amount was to take Proclamation No. 1354.
place)
But despite the opposition of the petitioner, the respondent In 1979, when NAPOCOR started building its Agus I HE
court issued questioned Orders: (Hydroelectric Plant) Project, Mangondato demanded
December 4, 1981 and December 15, 1981 granting the compensation from NAPOCOR. NAPOCOR refused to
motion for payment of private respondents compensate insisting that the property is public land and that
Private respondents filed another motion dated January 8, it had already paid ‘financial assistance’ of Php 40.00/sq. m.
1982 praying that petitioner be ordered to pay the sum of to Marawi City in exchange for the rights over the property.
P169, 200.00 Mangondato claimed that the land is his private property and
petitioner filed an opposition alleging that private respondents that he is not privy to any agreement between NAPOCOR and
are not entitled to payment of just compensation at this stage Marawi City. Any payment made to city cannot be considered
of the proceeding because there is still no appraisal and as payment to him. However, More than 10 years later, NPC
valuation of the property. finally agree that the property is Mangondatos.

Issue: the main issue of whether or not the respondent court In March, 1990, NPC’s regional legal counsel requested
can dispense with the assistance of a Board of Commissioners Marawi City’s City Appraisal Committee to appraise the
in an expropriation proceeding and determine for itself the market value of the property in Saduc, Marawi City affected
just compensation by the infrastructure projects of NPC without specifying any
particular land-owner. NPC wanted to pay Php 100/ sq. m. for
Held: No. 12,132 sq m portion plus 12% interest per annum from 1978.
Mangondato insisted that he should be paid at least Php 300/
Ratio: The applicable laws in the case at bar are Sections 5 sq. m. The lower court ordered NPC to pay Php 500/sq. m.
and 8 of Rule 67 of the Revised Rules of Court: P100.00 lower than the assessed value of the land appearing
Sec 5 “Sec. 5. Upon the entry of the order of in Tax Declaration No. 0873 for 1992 which was used as basis
condemnation, the court shall appoint not more than three (3) by the lower court. NPC opposed the provisional value quoted
competent and disinterested persons as commissioners to by the lower court saying that the basis of the provisional
ascertain and report to the court the just compensation for value of the land should be the assessed value of the property
the property sought to be taken…” as of the time of the taking which in this case is 1978 when
Sec 8 “…after all the interested parties have filed the assessed value of the land under Tax Declaration No.
their objections to the report or their statement of agreement 7394 was P100.00 per square meter.
therewith, the court may, after hearing, accept the report and
render judgment in accordance therewith;…” In the end, the lower court rendered its decision denying
Mangondato recovery of possession of the property but
Also, There are two (2) stages in every action of expropriation: ordering NPC to pay a monthly rent of P15,000.00 from 1978
1. determination of the authority of the plaintiff to up to July 1992 with 12% interest per annum and condemning
exercise the power of eminent domain and the the property in favor of NPC effective July, 1992 upon the
propriety of its exercise in the context of the facts payment of P1,000.00 per square meter as just compensation.
involved in the suit
2. determination by the Court of "the just compensation ISSUE:
for the property sought to be taken." This is done by At what point in time should the value of the land subject of
the Court with the assistance of not more than three expropriation be computed: at the date of the “taking” or
(3) commissioners the date of the filing of the complaint for eminent domain?

Respondent judge arrived at the amount of just compensation HELD: DATE OF FILING OF THE COMPLAINT
on its own, without the proper reception of evidence before
the Board of Commissioners. Private respondents as RATIO:
landowners have not proved by competent evidence the value The general rule in determining “just compensation” in
of their respective properties at a proper hearing. Likewise, eminent domain is the value of the property as of the date of
petitioner has not been given the opportunity to rebut any the filing of the complaint (Sec 4, Rule 67 of Rules of Court).
evidence that would have been presented by private Normally, the time of the taking coincides with the filing of the
respondents. The commission in expropriation cases is a complaint for expropriation. The general rule, however,
MANDATORY requirement. admits of an exception: where this Court fixed the value of the
property as of the date it was taken and not at the date of the
However, there are cases where the court may determine the commencement of the expropriation proceedings. The
price of compensation: exception finds application where the owner would be given

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 57
undue incremental advantages arising from the use to which corresponding payment or, in case of
the government devotes the property expropriated. rejection or no response from the
landowner, upon the deposit with an
When the filing of the case comes later than the time accessible bank designated by the DAR of
of taking and the value of the property has increased the compensation in cash or in LBP bonds
because of the use to which expropriator has put it, in accordance with this Act, the DAR shall
the value is at the time of the earlier taking. take immediate possession of the land and
Otherwise, the owner would gain undeserved profit. If shall request the proper Register of Deeds
the value increased independently of what the to issue a Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT)
expropriator did, then the value is at the later filing of in the name of the Republic of the
the case. Philippines. . . .
- Compensation must be made in a deposit of CASH or
In the instant case, however, it is difficult to conceive of how LBP bonds.
there could have been an extra-ordinary increase in the value - Nowhere in the law does it state that trust funds or
of the owner’s land arising from the expropriation, as indeed certification of earmarked funds may be a valid form
the records do not show any evidence that the valuation of of compensation
P1,000.00 reached in 1992 was due to increments directly - Petitioners contend that the funds cannot be
caused by petitioner’s use of the land. Since the petitioner is withdrawn because the final determination of the
claiming an exception, it has the burden of proving its claim value of the properties are still pending
that its occupancy and use - not ordinary inflation and o The CARP Law, for its part conditions the
increase in land values - was the direct cause of the increase transfer of possession and ownership of the
in valuation from 1978 to 1992. NPC has not been able to land to the government on receipt by the
prove that they fall under the exception. landowner of the corresponding payment or
the deposit by the DAR of the compensation
Side issue: When was there taking? in cash or LBP bonds with an accessible
NPC’s entrance in 1978 was without intent to expropriate or bank. Until then, title also remains with the
was not made under warrant or color of legal authority. It was landowner. No outright change of ownership
only in 1992, after Mangondato sued to recover possession is contemplated either.
and NPC filed its Complaint to expropriate, did NPC manifest o To withhold the right of the landowners to
its intention to exercise the power of eminent domain. Thus, appropriate the amounts already deposited
taking only occurred in 1992. in their behalf as compensation for their
properties simply because they rejected the
In summary, judgement of the court affirmed except as to the DAR's valuation, and notwithstanding that
interest on the monthly rentals, which is reduced from 12% to they have already been deprived of the
the legal rate 6% per annum. possession and use of such properties, is an
oppressive exercise of eminent domain. The
irresistible expropriation of private
LAND BANK v COURT OF APPEALS respondents' properties was painful enough
for them. But petitioner DAR rubbed it in all
PONENTE: Francisco the more by withholding that which
rightfully belongs to private respondents in
FACTS: exchange for the taking
- Pedro Yap’s TCT covering his property in Leyte was - Petitioners cite "Association of Small Landowners in
cancelled and transferred in the names of farmer the Phil. Inc. vs. Secretary of Agrarian Reform” which
beneficiaries He was not paid, he was just given a according to them allowed other forms of
certification that funds for compensation were compensation
already “earmarked” for him o The ruling in the "Association" case merely
- Heirs of Emiliano Santiago’s property in Nueva Ecija recognized the extraordinary nature of the
was given to beneficiaries of the CARP. In exchange, expropriation to be undertaken under RA
a trust fund was created by Landbank holding in trust 6657 thereby allowing a deviation from the
the compensation for the lot traditional mode of payment of
- Agricultural Management and Development compensation and recognized payment
Corporation (AMADCOR, for brevity) property in San other than in cash. It did not, however,
Francisco, Quezon and Tabaco, Albay was dispense with the settled rule that there
expropriated by the DAR for the CARP. Trust funds must be full payment of just compensation
were also established for compensation by the before the title to the expropriated property
Landbank is transferred.
o Holding funds in trust and not allowing the
ISSUE: recipients to withdraw the same is not full
- Is the certification of “earmarked” funds valid payment
compensation?
- Is the trust fund a valid compensation in lieu of MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION:
depositing cash or bonds in an accessible bank? Can - Land Bank allowed 50% withdrawal of the amount in
petitioners withdraw the money? the trust funds however:
- But the effort, through laudable, still falls short
HELD: because the release of the amount was
- Certification is not valid compensation unexplainably limited to only fifty per cent instead of
- Trust fund is not a valid compensation, petitioners the total amount of the rejected offer,
may immediately withdraw the money notwithstanding that the rejecting landowner's
property is taken in its entirety. The apprehension
RATIO: against the total release of the rejected
- Section 16 of CARP compensation is discounted since the government's
o (e) Upon receipt by the landowner of the interest is amply protected under the

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 58
aforementioned payment scheme because among
the conditions already imposed is that the landowner
must execute a Deed of Conditional Transfer for the National Housing Authority vs. Heirs of Isidro
subject property Guivelondo
FACTS:
NHA filed a complaint for eminent domain against the Heirs of
Panes v. Visayas State College of Agriculture Isidro Guivelondo for a socialized housing project. The latter
G.R. No. 56219-220 Nov. 27, 1996 waived their objections to the petitioner’s power to
expropriate their property and so the court declared NHA’s
Facts: lawful right to expropriate. After which, the court appointed 3
commissioners to determine the amount of just compensation
Petition for Review Expropriation Case for the property. The Commissioners recommended that the
property be valued at P11,200 per square meter. NHA filed for
PD 1107 by Marcos authorized Visayas State College of reconsideration assailing the amount of the just
Agriculture (VISCA) to expropriate land 250 ha in Barrios compensation. NHA filed with the Court of Appeals for a
Pangasugan and 75 ha in Guadalupe, Baybay, Leyte. This was certiorari but it was dismissed because the Trial Court already
for the establishment of a Root Crops Center for research. issued an Entry of Judgment over the Partial Judgment which
made it final and executory. Petitioner filed with the trial court
PD 42 authorized expropriation to commence once institution a motion to Dismiss the complaint for eminent domain
or agency deposited with PNB what was assessed to be alleging that the implementation of its socialized housing
amount of the land. project was rendered impossible by the unconscionable value
of the land sought to be expropriated, which the intended
Under PD 76 the amount paid by VISCA would be Php74 050 beneficiaries could not afford.
representing the assessed value of land for taxation purposes.
Since PD 42 was already in effect VISCA proceeded to Issue:
expropriate the land. Whether or not NHA could seek the dismissal of the
1298 tenants opposed the expropriation on 3 grounds, expropriation proceeding after it has been made final and
(1) tenants tenure in land that they till are secured by law and executory
protected from eminent domain
(2) PD 1107 unconstitutional because expropriation refers to Held: NO
landed estates and haciendas and not to small agricultural
lands Ratio:
(3) PD 27 precludes expropriation against tenants of Two case laws were presented (City of Manila v. Ruymann and
agricultural lands Metropolitan Water District v De Los Angeles) saying that the
Trial Court decided in favor of tenants. VISCA appealed to CA, state can dismiss action for eminent domain when the
CA reversed ruling, Tenants appealed to SC result of the action would be different from what he had
intended with the only exception that it cannot be withdrawn
ISSUES: when it is not to his advantage, but this can be done in the
W/N CA erred in ordering issuance of writ of possession pendency of the case. The judgment in this case has
W/N CA erred in reinstating expropriation proceedings already been final and executory.
W/N CA erred in procedural matters
Expropriation proceeding has two stages:
HELD: 1. Condemnation of the property after it is determined that
Judgment modified writ of possession to be issued subject to its acquisition will be for public purpose of public use
compliance with Section 2 Rule 67 2. The determination of just compensation to be paid for
the taking of the private property to be made by the
RATIO: court with the assistance of not more than 3
CA affirmed in reinstating expropriation proceedings commissioners
Once the first order becomes final and no appeal thereto is
PD 1553 determines just compensation as fair market value of taken the authority to expropriate and its public use can no
property to be expropriated as declared by owner or as longer be questioned
assessed by assessor whichever is lower. This transfers just Petitioner did not appeal the order of the trial court, which
compensation from being a judicial prerogative to executive declared that it has a lawful right to expropriate the properties
decision. This makes it unconstitutional as seen in Export of respondent heirs or Isidro Guivelondo. The order became
Processing Zone Authority v. Dulay. PD 42 and 76 are likewise final and executory and may no longer be made subject to
void for placing judicial prerogative into executive hands. review or reversal
Petitioner contends that the intended public use was rendered
Writ of possession must be issued subject to compliance with nugatory by the unreasonable just compensation. The public
Section 2 Rule 67 deposit with National or Regional Treasurer purpose of the socialized housing project is not in any way
of value of property to be expropriated as ascertained by diminished by the amount of just compensation that the court
Court with jurisdiction of proceedings. had fixed.
The respondent landowners had already been prejudiced by
Other errors assigned are questions of fact. the expropriation case. Petitioner cannot be permitted to
institute condemnation proceedings against respondents only
to abandon it later when it finds the amount of just
Republic compensation unacceptable.

NPC v. Henson Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Central Luzon Drug

Corporation

Sigre Facts:
Central Luzon Drug Corporation is a retailer of medicines and

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 59
other pharmaceutical products. They opened 3 drugstores as
a franchisee of Mercury Drug. In 1995, Bicolandia granted the 20% sales discount to
Pursuant to Revenue Regulations No. 2-94 implementing RA qualified senior citizens. It treated this discount as specified in
7432, petitioner granted a 20% discount on the sale of RR#2-94. In 1996, it filed a claim for tax refund or credit in
medicines to qualified senior citizens amounting to P219,778. the amount of PhP 259,659. It alleged that, “petitioner erred
The Regulation says that the discount given to senior citizens in treating the discount as a deduction from its gross income
shall be deducted by the establishment from its gross sales rather than as tax credit. Since R.A. No. 7432 provided that
for VAT and other percentage tax purposes. discounts may be claimed as tax credit, Section 2(i) of RR#2-
For the tax period, respondent reported a loss so he didn’t pay 94 is void for being inconsistent with the statute it
income tax for 1995. The next year, respondent claimed implements.”
according to Sec 4a of RA 7432, the amount of P219,778
should be applied as tax credit and the amount should be Issue:
deducted from his income tax. So: W/N the 20% sales discount granted pursuant to R.A. No.
7432 may be claimed as a tax credit, instead of a deduction
Net Income Before Tax: P217748.00 from gross income or gross sales. YES.

Income Tax (35%): 69585.00 Held:

Less: Tax Credit The attempt of RR#2-94 to define “tax credit” differently is
(20% tax discount) (219,778.00) the root of the conflict. It equated “tax credit” with “tax
----------------------- deduction,” contrary to the definition in Black’s Law
Income Tax Payable (P150,193.00) Dictionary, which defined tax credit as:
Income Tax Actually Paid 0
Tax Refundable / Overpaid Income Tax An amount subtracted from an individual’s or entity’s tax
(P150,193.00) liability to arrive at the total tax liability. A tax credit reduces
the taxpayer’s liability x x x, compared to a deduction which
Respondent claims that he is entitled to a refund of reduces taxable income upon which the tax liability is
P150,193.00 under RA 7432. calculated.

Issue: Whether the 20% sales discount granted by respondent RR#2-94 is null and void for failing to conform to the law it
may be claimed as a tax credit or as a deduction from gross sought to implement. It must be ruled that under R.A. No.
sales in accordance with Sec 2(1) of Revenue Regulations No. 7432, which was effective at the time, respondent is entitled
2-94. to its claim of a tax credit. CA decision affirmed. Petitioner is
ORDERED to issue a tax credit certificate in favor of the
Held: Tax credit. So he is not entitled to a refund. respondent in the amount of P 236,321.52.
*He pays zero tax this year and the extra balance can be
deducted the next time he has to pay tax. (FYI, R.A. No. 7432 has been amended by Republic Act No.
9257, the “Expanded Senior Citizens Act of 2003.” Under the
Rationale: new law, there is no tax credit to speak of, only deductions.
Sec.4 – Privileges for the Senior citizens But as it was R.A. No. 7432 in force at the time, this law
(a) the grant of 20% discount…anywhere in the country. controls.)
Provided, that private establishments may claim cost as tax
credit. Consti II:
While the purpose of the law to benefit senior citizens is
Sec. 4(a) of RA 7432 explicitly employed the word “tax praiseworthy, the concerns of the affected private
credit”. Nothing in the provision suggests for it to mean a establishments were also considered by the lawmakers. As in
deduction from gross sales. This means that the amount, other cases wherein private property is taken by the State for
when claimed, shall be treated as a reduction from any tax public use, there must be just compensation. In this particular
liability. The credit may be availed upon payment of the tax case, it took the form of the tax credit granted to private
due, if any. Where there is no tax liability or where a private establishments, purposely chosen by the lawmakers.
establishment reports a net loss for the period, the tax credit
can be availed of and carried over to the next taxable year. JUDICIAL REVIEW
The tax benefit granted to the establishments can be deemed
as their just compensation for private property taken by the
State for public use. The privilege enjoyed by senior citizens De Knecht v Baustista (judge of Rizal CFI) 1980
does not come directly from the State, but rather from the
private establishments concerned. FACTS:
More than 10 years ago, the government through the
Department of Public Works and Communications (now MPH)
CIR v. Bicolandia Drug Corporation prepared a plan to extend EDSA to Roxas Boulevard; the
proposed extension would pass through Cuneta Avenue up to
Facts: Roxas Boulevard. Shortly thereafter, Minister Balthazar
RA7432 (An Act to Maximize the Contribution of Senior Aquino of the MPH decided to make the proposed extension
Citizens to Nation Building, Grant Benefits and Special go through Fernando Rein and Del Pan Streets instead in
Privileges) granted senior citizens several privileges, one of which the petitioner was residing. Formal petition was made
which was obtaining a 20% discount from all establishments to President Marcos who directed the Minister to explain why
relative to the use of transportation services, hotels and also the project should not be suspended and afterwards referred
provided that the private establishments giving the discount the matter to the Human Settlement Commission (HSC) after
may claim the cost as tax credit. The BIR issued Revenue the minister submitted his defense for the project. The HSC
Regulation No. 2-94 which referred to the tax credit as the recommended the implementation of the original plan, but the
amount representing the 20% discount that “shall be Ministry of Public Highways insisted on implementing the
deducted by the said establishments from their gross income revised project and filed a complaint for expropriation in the
for income tax purposes and from their gross sales for value- CFI of Rizal. Republic of the Philippines also filed a motion for
added tax or other percentage tax purposes.’ the issuance of a writ of possession of the property after

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 60
making the required deposit in the Philippine National Bank and by directing the City Assessor to take into
which was granted by the judge. consideration the alleged existing conditions of the
properties in question, namely: that no "improvement has
ISSUE: been undertaken on the land and that the land is
W/N respondent court acted without jurisdiction or squatted upon by resident families which should
gravely abused its discretion in issuing the order authorizing considerably depress the expropriation costs," the City
the Republic of the Philippines to take over the properties Assessor is forced to accept, as actual and existing
sought to be expropriated having complied with all the conditions of the property, the foregoing statements in
statutory requirement? YES the decrees when in fact the Sunog-Apog area has been
subdivided into subdivision lots and leased to the
RATIO: occupants thereof under contracts of lease, making them
Art IV, section 2 of the Constitution provides that lessees and not squatters as assumed by Presidential
private property shall not be taken for public use without just Decree No. 1670.
compensation. However, it is recognized that the government • The government on the other hand argued, that the
may not capriciously or arbitrarily choose what private power of eminent domain is inherent in the State and
property should be taken. The Supreme Court rejected the when the legislature itself or the President through his
justification made by the solicitor general for the revised plan lawmaking prerogatives exercises this power, the public
that the government wanted to minimize the social impact use and public necessity of the expropriation, and the
factor or problem involved. The improvements along Cuneta fixing of the just compensation become political in nature,
Avenue to be affected are mostly motels as opposed to Del and the courts must respect the decision of the law-
Pan which was mostly residential lands occupied for making body, unless the legislative decision is clearly and
generations, even assuming arguendo that more people evidently arbitrary, unreasonable, and devoid of logic and
would be affected, the HSC has suggested coordinated efforts reason; and that all that is required is that just
with the National Housing Authority for the relocation and compensation be determined with due process of law
resettlement of those adversely affected. which does not necessarily entail judicial process. (the
HSC considered functionality, Social Impact and Cost. government argues that it was a political question)
Functionality – alignment 1(Cuneta Fisher) is shorter than • The government also argued that the PD supersedes the
alignment 2 ( Del Pan-Fernando Rein) by 3 meters. Rules of Court insofar as the procedure for expropriation
(considering that no less than 50 thousand vehicles a day is concerned.
would have to traverse that extra 3 meters.
Social Impact – social impact is greater on the residents of SC: PD UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
alignment 1. (more residents) The Tambunting subdivision is summarily proclaimed a
Cost – cost difference is only P269,796, alignment 1 is more blighted area and directly expropriated by decree without the
expensive, but not as expensive as alleged by MPH which was slightest semblance of a hearing or any proceeding
P2M whatsoever. The expropriation is instant and automatic to
take effect immediately upon the signing of the decree. No
deposit before taking is required under the decree. The
MANOTOK VS. NHA P3,400,000.00 appropriated from the general fund is not a
eminent domain deposit but constitutes an installment payment for the
property, the maximum price of which is fixed so as not to
• The president instituted a nationwide slum improvement exceed P17,000,000.00. There is no provision for any interests
and resettlement program. One such program under the to be paid on the unpaid installments spread out over a period
Zonal Improvement Program was the Tambunting Estate of five years. Not only are the owners given absolutely no
in Manila. opportunity to contest the expropriation, plead their side, or
• However, a fire razed almost the entire estate. Following question the amount of payments fixed by decree, but the
this calamity, the President made an announcement that decisions, rulings, orders, or resolutions of the NHA are
the national government would acquire the property for expressly declared as beyond the reach of judicial review. An
the benefit of the fire victims. appeal may be made to the Office of the President but the
• The President issued PD 1669 declaring the Tambunting courts are completely enjoined from any inquiry or
Estate expropriated, directing the NHA to administer the participation whatsoever in the expropriation of the
land subdivision or its incidents.
• Manotok, one of the owners of the Tambunting Estate
questioned the PD. Although there was already a deposit Constitutionally suspect methods or authoritarian procedures
of P5M, she did not yet withdraw the amount nor cannot be the basis for social justice. A program to alleviate
surrender her titles over the property. problems of the urban poor which is well studied, adequately
• She contends that the Presidential Decrees providing for funded, genuinely sincere, and more solidly grounded on
the direct expropriation of the properties in question basic rights and democratic procedures is needed.
violate their constitutional right to due process and equal
protection of the law because by the mere passage of the The due process clause cannot be rendered nugatory
said decrees their properties were automatically everytime a specific decree or law orders the expropriation of
expropriated and they were immediately deprived of the somebody's property and provides its own peculiar manner of
ownership and possession thereof without being given taking the same. Neither should the courts adopt a hands-off
the chance to oppose such expropriation or to contest the policy just because the public use has been ordained as
just compensation to which they are entitled. existing by the decree or the just compensation has been
fixed and determined beforehand by a statute.
• They argue that the government must first have filed a
complaint with the proper court under Rule 67 of the
Although due process does not always necessarily demand
Revised Rules of Court in order to fulfill the requirements
that a proceeding be had before a court of law, it still
of due process. They contend that the determination of
mandates some form of proceeding wherein notice and
just compensation should not have been vested solely
reasonable opportunity to be heard are given to the owner to
with the City Assessor and that a maximum or fixed
protect his property rights. We agree with the public
amount of compensation should not have been imposed
respondents that there are exceptional situations when, in the
by the said decrees. Petitioners likewise state that by
exercise of the power of eminent domain, the requirement of
providing for the maximum amount of just compensation

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 61
due process may not necessarily entail judicial process. But tax documents by the assessor may serve as one of the
where it is alleged that in the taking of a person's property, factors to be considered but they cannot exclude or prevail
his right to due process of law has been violated, the courts over a court determination made after expert commissioners
will have to step in and probe into such an alleged violation. have examined the property and all partinent circumstances
are taken into account and after the parties have had the
There is no showing whatsoever as to why the properties opportunity to fully plead their cases before a competent and
involved were singled out for expropriation through decrees or unbiased tribunal. To enjoin this Court by decree from looking
what necessity impelled the particular choices or selections. into alleged violations of the due process, equal protection,
The Tambunting estate or at least the western half of the and eminent domain clauses of the Constitution is
subdivision fronting Rizal Avenue Extension is valuable impermissible encroachment on its independence and
commercial property. It is located at the junction where three prerogatives.
main city streets Converge-Rizal Avenue from downtown
Manila, Jose Abad Santos Street from Binondo, and Aurora
Boulevard leading to Retiro Street and other points in Quezon Republic v. De Knecht
City. The Libiran Furniture Company, alone, which fronts the FACTS: On February 20, 1979, petitioner filed an action for
entrance to Jose Abad Santos Street is clearly a multi-million expropriation proceeding against the owners of houses
peso enterprise. It is a foregone conclusion that the favored standing along Fernando Rein-del Pan streets, including
squatters allowed to buy these choice lots would lose no time, respondent and 15 other defendants. De Knecht moved to
once it is possible to do so, to either lease out or sell their lots dismiss, alleging lack of jurisdiction, pendency of appeal with
to wealthy merchants even as they seek other places where the President, prematureness and arbitrary and erroneous
they can set up new squatter colonies. The public use and valuation of the properties. In June 1979, petitioner filed for
social justice ends stated in the whereas clauses of P.D. 1669 the issuance of writ of possession after making the required
and P.D. 1670 would not be served thereby. 10% deposit of the amount of compensation, which the lower
court issued on June 14, 1979, authorizing the Republic to
The principle of non-appropriation of private property for take possession. As a consequence, de Knecht filed a petition
private purposes, however, remains. There is no showing how for certiorari and prohibition, praying that respondent
the President arrived at the conclusion that the Sunog-Apog Republic desist from further proceeding in the expropriation
area is a blighted community. The many pictures submitted as case. On September 30, 1980, the Supreme Court granted
exhibits by the petitioners show a well-developed area the petition, and set aside the June 14, 1979 order,
subdivided into residential lots with either middle-income or permanently enjoining the lower court from taking any further
upper class homes. There are no squatters. The provisions of proceeding on the case, except to dismiss the case. On
the decree on the relocation of qualified squatter families and September 2, 1983, petitioner filed a motion to dismiss the
on the re-blocking and re-alignment of existing structures to expropriation case in the lower court, due to the enactment of
allow the introduction of basic facilities and services have no Batas Pambansa Blg. 340 on February 17, 1983, expropriating
basis in fact. The area is well-developed. the same properties for the same purpose. The lower court
accordingly dismissed. De Knecht moved for reconsideration
The decrees, do not by themselves, provide for any form of which the lower court denied. De Knecht appealed to the
hearing or procedure by which the petitioners can question Court of Appeals which it granted, and set aside the order
the propriety of the expropriation of their properties or the appealed from, on the ground that the choice of Fernando
reasonableness of the just compensation. Having failed to Rein-del Pan Streets was arbitrary. De Knecht went back to
provide for a hearing, the Government should have filed an the Supreme Court.
expropriation case under Rule 67 of the Revised Rules of ISSUE: Whether an expropriation proceeding that was
Court but it did not do so. determined by a final judgment of this Court may be the
subject of a subsequent legislation for expropriation.
Another infirmity from which the questioned decrees suffer is HELD: While it is true that the judgment of the Supreme Court
the determination of just compensation. The maximum (de Knecht v. Bautista, G.R. No. L-51078, October 30, 1980) is
amount of compensation was imposed by the decrees and the law of the case, it equally true that the right of the
these amounts were only a little more than the assessed Republic to take private property for public use upon payment
value of the properties in 1978 when, according to the of just compensation is so provided in the Constitution and the
government, it decided to acquire said properties. The 1978 laws. This may be undertaken not only by voluntary
values would deprive the petitioner of the opportunity to negotiation but also by taking appropriate court action or by
prove a higher value because, the actual or symbolic taking of legislation. When B.P. Blg. 340 was passed, it was based on
such properties occurred only in 1980 when the questioned supervening events that occurred after the de Knecht decision
decrees were promulgated. The rule is the determination of in 1980. The social factor which persuaded the Supreme
just compensation is reckoned either at the time of the actual Court to consider the extension of EDSA arbitrary had
taking of the government or at the time of the judgment by disappeared. Only de Knecht remains the solitary obstacle to
the court, whichever came first. the project which will solve the drainage and flood control
problem, and minimize the traffic bottleneck. B.P. Blg. 340
In estimating the market value, all the capabilities of the effectively superseded the final and executor decision in de
property and all the uses to which it may be applied or for Knecht, and the trial court committed no grave abuse of
which it is adapted are to be considered and not merely the discretion in dismissing the pending case on the ground of
condition it is in at the time and the use to which it is then enactment of B.P. Blg. 340. The anterior decision in de
applied by the owner. All the facts as to the condition of the Knecht must yield to subsequent legislative fiat.
property and its surroundings, its improvements and
capabilities may be shown and considered in estimating its Art III, Sec. 10: No law impairing the obligation of contracts
value. shall be passed.
The market value stated by the city assessor alone cannot
substitute for the court's judgment in expropriation NON-IMPAIRMENT CLAUSE
proceedings. It is violative of the due process and the eminent
domain provisions of the Constitution to deny to a property Home Building and Loan Asso. v. Blaisdell
owner the opportunity to prove that the valuation made by a (Appellant v. Appelee)
local assessor is wrong or prejudiced. The statements made in (January 8, 1934)

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 62
for circumventing the contract clause. It depends on the
FACTS: circumstances of each case.)
Appellant contests the validity of Chapter 339 of the
Laws of Minnesota of 1933, called the Minnesota Mortgage
Moratorium Law, as being repugnant to the contract clause. RUTTER VS. ESTEBAN
The Act provides that, during the emergency declared to non-impairment clause
exist, relief may be had through authorized judicial
proceedings with respect to foreclosures of mortgages, and • Rutter was the seller. Esteban was the buyer of the 2
execution sales, of real estate; that sales may be postponed parcels of land. There was still an unpaid balance of
and periods of redemption may be extended (In other words, P4800.
the law authorizes the extension of period of redemption from • To secure payment of the balance, a mortgage was
foreclosure sales depending on the court). The Act is to constituted over the land.
remain in effect until May 1, 1935. • Estaben defaulted. Rutter filed an action to recover the
Invoking the relevant provision of the statute, balance.
appellees applied to the Court of Hennepin County for an
• Esteban invokes RA342, the Moratorium Law. He claims
order extending the period of redemption from a foreclosure
that this obligation was contracted before the War, and
sale. Appellees stated that they owned a lot in Minneapolis
that he is a war sufferer, such that his obligation cannot
which they had mortgaged to petitioners and because of the
be enforced until after the lapse of 8 years from the
economic depression, appellee had been unable to obtain a
settlement of his claim by the Philippine War Damage
new loan or to redeem the lot
Commission.
The court entered its judgment extending the period
of redemption to May 1, 1935, subject to the condition that • Rutter assails the validity of the Moratorium Law, for
the appellees should pay for taxes, insurance, interest, and being violative of the non-impairment clause.
mortgage indebtedness.
Hence this petition. SC:
The moratorium is a postponement of fulfilment of obligations
ISSUE: decreed by the state through the medium of the courts or the
W/N the Minnesota Mortgage Moratorium Law is legislature. Its essence is the application of the sovereign
repugnant to the contract clause of the Constitution. power. Such moratorium laws "were passed by many state
legislatures at the time of the civil war suspending the rights
HELD: of creditors for a definite and reasonable time, whether they
No. The Constitutional prohibition is not an absolute one and suspend the right of action or make dilatory the remedy.
is not to be read with literal exactness like a mathematical
formula. The true test, therefore, of the constitutionality of a
The economic interests of the State may justify the moratorium statute lies in the determination of the period of
exercise of its continuing and dominant protective power suspension of the remedy. It is required that such suspension
notwithstanding interference with contracts. be definite and reasonable, otherwise it would be violative of
The interdiction of statutes impairing the obligation the constitution.
of contracts does not prevent the State from exercising such
powers as are vested in it for the promotion of the common One of the arguments advanced against the validity of the
weal, or are necessary for the general good of the public, moratorium law is the fact that it impairs the obligation of
though contracts previously entered into between individuals contracts which is prohibited by the Constitution. This
may thereby be affected. This power, which in its various argument, howevor, does not now hold water. While this may
ramifications is known as the police power, is an exercise of be conceded, it is however justified as a valid exercise
the sovereign right of the Government to protect the lives, by the State of its police power.
health, morals, comfort and general welfare of the people,
and is paramount to any rights under contracts between (the previous case of Home Builders vs. Blaisdell was
individuals. quoted…see doctrines) This decision elicited several
In this case, the integrity of the mortgage comments.
indebtedness is not impaired; interest continues to run; the
validity of the sale and the right of a mortgagee-purchaser to Laws altering existing contracts constitute an impairment
title or to obtain a deficiency judgment if the mortgagor fails within the meaning of the contract clause only if they are
to redeem within the extended period are maintained, and the unreasonable in the light of the circumstances occasioning
conditions of redemption, if redemption there be, stand as their enactment. Application of this 'rule of reason' was
they were under the prior law. The mortgagor, during the justified on the theory that all contracts are made subject to
extended period, is not ousted from possession, but he must an implied reservation of the protective power of the state,
pay the rental value of the premises as ascertained in judicial and that therefore statutes which validly exercise this
proceedings, and this amount is applied to the carrying of the reserved power, rather than impairing the obligations of an
property and to interest upon the indebtedness. The existing contract, are comprehended within them.
mortgagee-purchaser, during the time that he cannot obtain
possession, thus is not left without compensation for the There are however limitations. It must be noted that the
withholding of possession. application of the reserved power of the State to protect the
Finally, the legislation is temporary in operation. It is integrity of the government and the security of the people
limited to the exigency which called it forth. While the should be limited to its proper bounds and must be addressed
postponement of the period of redemption from the to a legitimate purpose.
foreclosure sale is to May 1, 1935, that period may be
reduced by the order of the court under the statute, in case of One of them is that the impairment should only refer to the
a change in circumstances, and the operation of the statute remedy and not to a substantive right. The State may
itself could not validly outlast the emergency or be so postpone the enforcement of the obligation but cannot
extended as virtually to destroy the contracts. destroy it by making the remedy futile. Another limitation
refers to the propriety of the remedy. The rule requires that
the alteration or change that the new legislation desires to
(Note: Police power (and eminent domain) can be a valid basis write into an existing contract must not be burdened with
restrictions and conditions that would make the remedy

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 63
hardly pursuing. tenancy effective as of the agricultural year of 1961-1962.

The Blaisdell case postulates that the protective power of the Issue
State, the police power, may only be invoked and justified by W/N there was an unconstitutional impairment of the
an emergency, temporary in nature, and can only be obligation of an existing contract? NO
exercised upon reasonable conditions in order that it may not W/N there was a limitation on the freedom of
infringe the constitutional provision against impairment of contract that there is deprivation of property without due
contracts. It is predicated on the ground that the laws altering process of law? NO
existing contracts will constitute an impairment of the
contract clause of the Constitution only if they are RATIO:
unreasonable in the light of the circumstances occasioning Tenancy Legislation was made to address age-old problem to
their enactment. cope with the poverty of majority of our people in accordance
with protection to labor and social justice provisions of the
ISSUE: Constitution. To minimize or to rid of oppressive conditions
Is the period of eight (8) years under RA 342 reasonable under usually associated with agricultural labor. In Central Luzon,
the present circumstances? tenants formed the PKM organization and Hukbalahap and
rose in arms against government because of their pitiful
SC: UNREASONABLE. conditions and inability of gov’t to address their problem.
The purpose of the law is to afford to prewar debtors an
opportunity to rehabilitate themselves by giving them a Obligations of contracts must yield to a proper exercise of the
reasonable time within which to pay their prewar debts so as police power when such power is exercised to preserve the
to prevent them from being victimized by their creditors. security of the State and the means adopted are reasonably
adapted to the accomplishment of that end and are not
BUT, we should not lose sight of the fact that these obligations arbitrary or oppressive.
had been pending since 1945 as a result of the issuance of
Executive Orders Nos. 25 and 32 and at present their Section 14 of Republic Act No. 1199 is a valid exercise of
enforcement is still inhibited because of the enactment of police power, as reinforced by the constitutional provisions
Republic Act No. 342 and would continue to be unenforceable giving protection to labor and social justice.
during the eight-year period granted to prewar debtors to
afford them an opportunity to rehabilitate themselves, which President Magsaysay: He who has less in life should have
in plain language means that the creditors would have to more in law.
observe a vigil of at least twelve (12) years before they could
effect a liquidation of their investment dating as far back as
1941. This period seems to us unreasonable, if not oppressive. Abella v NLRC (Labor)
While the purpose of Congress is plausible, and should be
commended, the relief accorded works injustice to creditors Facts:
who are practically left at the mercy of the debtors. Their Abella rented Hacienda Danao-Ramona for a total of 20 years
hope to effect collection becomes extremely remote, more so (10 initially + 10 renewed contract). During the existence of
if the credits are unsecured. And the injustice is more patent the lease contract she hired Dionele and Quitco. When the
when, under the law, the debtor is not even required to pay leasehold expired she turned over the hacienda to the owners
interest during the operation of the relief. who continued cultivating the land. Dionele and Quitco filed a
complaint in the ministry of labor for illegal dismissal,
Such an exemption, applied in the case of debts owing before overtime pay and reinstatement with backwages.
the exemption was created by the legislature, constitutes an
unwarranted interference with the obligation of contracts in Art 284 of the Labor code provides: Closure of establishment
violation of the constitutional provision", and cannot be and reduction of personnel. - The employer may also
sustained even as emergency legislation, because it contains terminate the employment of any employee due to the
no limitation as to time, amount, circumstances or need. installation of labor-saving devices, redundancy, retrenchment
to prevent losses or the closing or cessation of operation of
RA 342 NULL AND VOID. (Note this case was decided in 1953). the establishment or undertaking unless the closing is for the
purpose of circumventing the provisions of this Title, by
The court also noted that the economic and financial serving a written notice on the workers and the Ministry of
conditions of the country has improved and returned to Labor and Employment at least one (1) month before the
normal. intended date thereof. In case of termination due to the
installation of labor-saving devices or redundancy, the worker
affected thereby shall be entitled to a separation pay
Del Rosario(land-owner) v De Los Santos(tenant) 1968 equivalent to at least his one (1) month pay or to at least one
(1) month pay for every year of service, whichever is higher.
Fernando In case of retrenchment to prevent losses and in cases of
closures or cessation of operations of establishment or
FACTS undertaking not due to serious business losses or financial
Petition to assail the validity of Section 14 of the Agricultural reverses, the separation pay shall be equivalent to one (1)
Tenancy Act of 1955 which empowers a tenant to “to change month pay or at least one-half (1/2) month pay for every year
the tenancy contract from one of share tenancy to the of service, whichever is higher. A fraction of at least six (6)
leasehold tenancy and vice versa and from one crop- months shall be considered one (1) whole year.
sharing arrangement to another of the same tenancy.”
(There were other attempts to assail the validity of the same Abella contends that the aforequoted provision violates the
section but all were unsuccessful, including this one.) constitional guarantee against impairment of contracts
because when she leased the hacienda, neither she or the
Victorino De Los Santos filed before the Court of Agrarian lessor contemplated the reation of the obligation to pay
Relations to take advantage of the statute thus changing their separation pay to workers at the end of the lease.
previous status as tenants. CAR granted the petition and
declared the relationship to be changed into one of leasehold Issue: Does art 284 of labor code violate non-impairment

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 64
clause of consti? NO government, through the Metro Manila Commission, had
reclassified Jupiter St. (this is where the house of the Presley’s
Ratio: are located) as a commercial zone.
To come under the constitutional prohibition the must effect a
change in the rights of the parties with reference to each Issue:
other and not with reference to non-parties. Contract in case W/N the reclassification made by the MMC violated the non-
at bar cannot have the effect of annulling subsequent impairment clause of the Constitution.
legislation for the protection of the workers. Art 284 refers to
employment benefits to farm hands who were not parties to Ruling:
the petitioner’s lease contract with the owner of the hacienda.
That contract cannot have the effect of annulling subsequent No
legislation designed to protect the interest of the working
class. Ratio:
Jupiter St. is a commercial zone considering that there are a
lot of business establishments that sprouted in the area.
Philippine Veterans Bank Employees Union v. Philippine Hence, the reclassification made by the MMC is reasonable.
Veterans Bank BAVA failed to present new zoning reclassification, ordinance,
certification to the effect or jurisprudence which would
Facts: consider the ordinance as unconstitutional. The Deed of
Philippine Veterans Bank (Bank) was created in 1963 with the Restriction is valid between the parties but these contractual
hope that it would ensure the economic future of war veterans stipulations on the use of the land even if said conditions are
who were to be its stockholders. In time, the Bank found itself annotated on the torrens title can be impaired if necessary to
in financial difficulties. In April 10, 1983, it was placed under reconcile with the legitimate exercise of police power.
receivership by the Monetary Board (MB) of the Central Bank
(CB). The MB ordered the Bank’s liquidation after finding that Side note:
it had incurred an outstanding liability of over P540 million. Sangalang v. BAVA – basically, same case with Presley. What
Petitioner opposes this on the argument that the Bank was happened was, when the Presley case was filed, the Samalang
created by a special law and a contractual relationship now case was pending. The SC upheld the constitutionality of the
exists between the Government and the stockholders of the reclassification made by the MMC. Since the respondents
Bank which cannot be disturbed without violating the failed to present evidence that contradicts the findings in the
impairment clause. Samalang case, the ruling in said case is still good law.

Issue:
Whether the Central Bank has the power to liquidate the SISKA DEVT V. OFFICE OF THE PRES
Bank.
Facts:
Held: Yes • Petitioner, Siska, a subdivision owner-developer,
entered into a contract to sell with Guadalupe Sering,
Rationale: involving a lot situated at a Subdivision in Quezon
The mere fact that the Bank was created by special law does City
not confer upon it extraordinary privileges. It is part of the • Guadalupe Sering, with the consent of petitioner,
Banking system which is covered by the power of the CB. transferred all her rights and interests over the lot in
Even if it be conceded that the charter of the Bank constitutes favor of Socorro and Jose Sering. Thereafter, priv
a contract between the Government and the stockholders of respondents assumed the oblig by paying the
the Bank, it would not follow that the relationship cannot be monthly amortizations for the lot
altered without violating the impairment clause. • On several occasions, priv respondents defaulted in
The purpose of this is the preservation of the integrity and the payment of their monthly amortizxations, but
stability of our banking system. Unless adequate and petitioners still accepted the late payments. On the
determined efforts are taken by the government against next default to pay, petitioner sent private
distressed and mismanaged banks, public faith in banking respondents a notice of rescission f the contract to
system is certain to deteriorate to the prejudice of the sell, but then cancelled the said notice after priv
national economy itself. The government cannot simply cross respondents updated their payments. Petitioner
its arms while assets of a bank are being depleted through imposed a condition that the respondents’ account
mismanagement or irregularities. must be kept current and the second rescission
The notion of public interest has made such considerable would be final
inroads into the constitutional guaranty that one could validly • When respondent Sering offered to pay the
say now that it has become the exception rather than the remaining balance of the purchase price, an
rule. The modern understanding is that the contract is employee of petitioner refused to accept the
protected by the guaranty only if it does not affect public payment alleging that the contract had already been
interest, but there is hardly any contract now that does not cancelled. However, said respondent protested that
somehow affect public interest as not to come under the he didn’t receive any notice of rescission
powers of the State. • To compel the execution by petitioner of the final
dead of sale, priv respondent filed an action for
specific performance in the CFI of Surigao, then the
Presley v. Bel-Air Village Assoc. (BAVA) Inc. CFI of QC, then the NHA, then the Office of Appeals
Adjudication and Legal Affairs of the HSRC, and lastly
Facts: elevated the case to the Office of the Pres
BAVA filed a complaint for specific performance and damages • Decision of the office of the Pres: grossly unfair and
with preliminary injunction against the petitioners mainly unjustified for appellee to refuse to accept the last
because the petitioners established a “Hot Pan de Sal Store” payment in order to cancel the contract to sell on the
in their house in Bel-Air. BAVA bases its claim for damages on ground of delay. If such be the case, the contract
the Deed of Restrictions of Bel-Air Subdivision stating that the could have been canceled on several occasions, yet
houses cannot be used for commercial purposes. The appellee continued toleration late payments.

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 65
• Appelle failed to show proof of service of the notice • It appropriated P86,323,438,000 for debt service.
of rescission. There is evident bad faith on the part of Congress added a special provision which provided that
the appellee the amount appropriated shall be used for the payment of
• Petitioner argues that the relationship between the the national debt only and not be used to pay for the
parties is governed solely by the contract to sell bec liabilities of the Central Bank and that any payment in
said contract was entered into long before the excess of the amount appropriated should
passage of the Maceda Law. Petitioner argues that • The appropriated for the DPWH also provided that the
the relationship between the parties is governed maximum anout to be ontracted for the maintenance of
solely by the Contract to sell bec said contract as national roads and bridges shouldn’t exceed 30%
entered into long before the passage of the Maceda • The appropriation for the purchase of medicines by the
Law AFP provided that the AFP required the prior approval of
• Respondent argues that the sending of a notice of congress for the release of funs.
cancellation to the buyer is mandated by RA 6652 • The Pres veoted the foregoing provisions. The veto was
entitled An Act to Provide Protection to Buyers of assailed by several senators.
Real Estate on Installment Payments (Maceda Law) • The case has a lot if mini issues concerning the
president’s vetoes but we’re only really interested in one:
Issue: whether the requirement of notice in the maceda law is In the appropriation for the Armed Forces of the
a violation of the non-impairment clause? No. Philippines (AFP), the President vetoed the special
provision on “Use of Fund," which requires the prior
Ruling: approval of the Congress for the release of the
• When the contract was entered into before th corresponding modernization funds. As reason for the
effectivity of the maceda law, the rescission took veto, the President stated that the said condition and
palce when the said law was in full force and effect. prohibition violate the Constitutional mandate of non-
But even before the effectivity of said law, impairment of contractual obligations, and if allowed,
jurisprudence made necessary a notice of rescission. "shall effectively alter the original intent of the AFP
Jurisprudence requires that a written notice be sent Modernization Fund to cover all military equipment
to the defaulter informing him of the rescission. deemed necessary to modernize the Armed Forces of the
• there is an impairment if a subsequent law changes Philippines" The president vetoed it since they were
the terms of a contract between the parties, imposes already contracted for.
new conditions, dispenses with those agreed upon or
withdraws remedies for the enforcement of the rights ISSUE: Whether the prohibition on the use of the
of the parties. Modernization Fund for payment of the trainer planes and
• The purpose of said clause is to safeguard the armed personnel carries are violative of the contract clause?
integrity of contracts against unwarranted Yes. Was the Presidential Veto valid? Yes
interference by the state. As a rule, contracts should
not be tampered with by subsequent laws that would Ruling:
change or modify the rights and oblig of the parties. No. 3 on the "Specific Prohibition":
Impairment is anything that diminishes the efficacy 3. Specific Prohibition. The said Modernization Fund
of the contract. shall not be used for payment of six (6) additional S-211
• The requirement of notice of the rescission under the Trainer planes, 18 SF-260 Trainer planes and 150 armored
maceda law doesn’t change the time or mode of personnel carriers (GAA of 1994, p. 747).
performance or impose new conditions or dispense As reason for the veto, the President stated that the
with the stipulations regarding the binding effect of said condition and prohibition violate the Constitutional
the contract. Neither does it withdraw the remedy for mandate of non-impairment of contractual obligations, and if
its enforcement. At most, it merely provides for a allowed, "shall effectively alter the original intent of the AFP
procedure in aid of the remedy of rescission. Modernization Fund to cover all military equipment deemed
Therefore, it doesn’t impair the oblig of a contract. necessary to modernize the Armed Forces of the Philippines".
• When petitioner accepted and received delayed Any provision blocking an administrative action in
payments beyond the grace period, it waived its right implementing a law or requiring legislative approval of
to rescind and is not estopped from exercising it. executive acts must be incorporated in a separate and
• Uniltateral cancellation of a contract to sell is not substantive bill. Therefore, being "inappropriate" provisions,
warranted if the breah is slight or casual. Thje breach Special Provisions No. 3 was properly vetoed.
of the contract adverted to by petitioner was so slight
considering tha tpriv respondents had already paid Furthermore, Special Provision No. 3, prohibiting the
P26,601.21 (including interests and penalties) out of use of the modernization Funds for payment of the trainer
the total purchase price of P21,328, and the planes and armored personnel carriers, which have been
remaining balance was only P9,341.23 which priv contracted for by the AFP, is violative of the Constitutional
respondents were willing to pay. prohibition on the passage of laws that impair the obligation
of contracts (Art. III, Sec. 10), more so, contracts entered into
by the Government itself. The veto of said special provision is
therefore valid.
PHILCONSA VS. ENRIQUEZ
A provision cannot prohibit payment, because to do so would
• House Bill No. 10900, the General Appropriation Bill of impair the perfect contracts.
1994 (GAB of 1994), was passed and approved by both
houses of Congress on December 17, 1993. As passed, it
imposed conditions and limitations on certain items of
Miners Association v. Factoran
appropriations in the proposed budget previously
submitted by the President. It also authorized members of
Facts:
Congress to propose and identify projects in the "pork
Remember Consti Art XII, Sec 2: The exploration,
barrels" allotted to them and to realign their respective
development, and utilization of natural resources shall be
operating budgets. be subject to the approval of the Pres
under the full control and supervision of the State. The State
with the concurrence of congress
may directly undertake such activities, or it may enter into co-

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 66
production, joint venture, or production-sharing agreements PD 771 revoked all existing Jai-Alai franchises issued by the
with Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations at least government. Basically, a franchise is a privilege and not a
sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens. contract. Assuming it is a contract, police power was properly
Such agreements may be for a period not exceeding twenty- imposed. Even if it is not illegal per se, jai-alai is still
five years, renewable for not more than twenty-five years, and detrimental to public morals and safety. The mere betting is
under such terms and conditions as may be provided by law. punished by Articles 195 to 199 of the RPC and against social
and economic development.
Executive Order 211 prescribes interim procedures in the
processing and approval of the applications for the Gambling is thus generally prohibited by law, unless another
exploration, development and utilization of minerals: law is enacted by Congress expressly exempting or excluding
certain forms of gambling from the reach of criminal law.
EO 279: authorizes DENR to negotiate and conclude joint Among these form the reach of criminal law. Among these
venture, co-production or production sharing agreements for forms of gambling allowed by special law are the horse races
the exploration of mineral resources. authorized by Republic Acts Nos. 309 and 983 and gambling
casinos authorized under Presidential Decree No. 1869
DENR Administrative Order 57, Art. 9 (Transitory
provisions) provides that all existing mining leases or
agreements which were granted after the effectivity of the
1987 Consti, except small scale mining leases and those ORTIGAS & CO., LTD. VS FEATI BANK AND TRUST CO. 91
pertaining to sand and gravel an quarry resources shall be SCRA 533
converted into product-sharing agreements within a year from
effectivity of these guidelines. Facts: Ortigas & Co., plaintiff, sold two parcels of land on
installments to Padilla who later on transferred their rights
DENR AO 82 (3) provides that the failure of persons or and interest to Chavez. The agreements of sale contained
entitles required to submit Letters of intent (LOI) and Mineral stipulation, among others that the parcel of land “shall be
Production Sharing Agreements (MPSA) withing 2 years from used by the buyer exclusively for residential purposes…” Such
effectivity of AO 57 or until July 17, 1991, shall cause the stipulation was annotated in the TCTs. The parcels of land
abandonment of mining, quarry and sand and gravel claims. were eventually sold to FEATI Bank, who began constructing
of the commercial building. The latter refused to comply with
Petitioners claim that these AO’s are unconstitutional because the demand, contending that the building was being
they pre-terminates and automatically converts their mining constructed in accordance with the Municipal Resolution No.
leases into product sharing agreements. 27, zoning regulations which declared the area a commercial
and industrial zone. Plaintiff filed complaint seeking for the
Issue: issuance of writ of preliminary injunction praying, among
Do these Administrative orders violate the non-impairment others, that the defendant observe and comply with the
clause rendering these unconstitutional? NO building restrictions annotated in the TCT. Trial court
dismissed the complaint.
Ratio:
Art XII Sec 2 does not apply retroactively to license, Issue: Did the resolution of the Municipal Council of
concession or lease: granted by the government under the Mandaluyong declaring the parcels of land, among others, as
1973 constitution or before the effectivity of the 1987 consti. part of the commercial and industrial zone of the municipality
prevailed over the building restrictions imposed by the
It is clear from art 9 (of AO 57) that AO 57 applies only to all plaintiff on the lots in question? YES
existing mining leases or agreements granted AFTER the
effectivity of the 1987 With regard to the contention that the said resolution cannot
Consti, pursuant to EO 211. Hence the strictures of the non- nullify the contractual obligation assumed by the defendant-
impairment clause do not apply to the mining leases or referring to the restriction incorporated in the deed of sale
agreements granted after the effectivity of the 1987 consti. and later in the corresponding TCT issued to defendant it
They can be amended, modified or altered by a statute should be stressed that, while non-impairment of contracts is
passed by congress to achieve the purposes of Art XII sec 2 of constitutionally guaranteed, the rule is not absolute, since it
1987 consti. has to be reconciled with the legitimate exercise of police
power. Such power is superior to contractual stipulations
between parties on the use of lands sold by subdivisions even
if said conditions are annotated in the Torrens Title.
Lim v Pacquing

Facts: VIRGINIA OCAMPO JUAREZ v. CA and Cetus Dev’t.

Judge Pacquing issued orders directing Mayor Alfredo Lim to
issue the permit/license to operate the jai-alai in favor of Facts: The subject of this controversy is a lot located at 502
Associated Development Corporation (ADC), pursuant to Quezon Boulevard, Manila. It was leased in the early 1900's to
Ordinance No. 7065. Servillano Ocampo, who built a house thereon where he lived
with his parents and his sister Angela. He died on March 17,
Guingona, as Executive Secretary, issued a directive to the 1956. The lease was taken over by Angela Ocampo, who
chairman of the Games and Amusement Board to hold in continued to stay in the house together with her children,
abeyance the grant of authority, or if any had been issued, to including herein petitioner Virginia Ocampo Juarez. In 1976,
withdraw such grant of authority, to ADC to operate the jai- because of her advanced age, Angela moved to her daughter
alai in Manila. Virginia's house in Pasay City. The house on Quezon Boulevard
she leased to Roberto Capuchino, reserving only one room for
Issue: her personal belongings. Meantime, the lot had been sold by
W/N the ADC has a valid and subsisting franchise to maintain the Aranetas to Susanna Realty, Inc., which in turn sold it in
and operate the jai-alai in Manila? NO. 1985 to Cetus Development Corporation, the herein private
respondent.
Held:

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 67
To make it simple: house and lot.
- Aranetas leased lot to Servillano OCAMPO The petitioner's contention that BP 877 is an ex post facto law
- Servillano Ocampo built a house on it . Lived with his must also be rejected. It is not penal in nature and the mere
parents and sister Angela. fact that it contains penal provisions does not make it so. At
- Servillano died. Angela still lived there with daughter any rate, she is not being prosecuted under the said penal
VIRGINIA Juarez. Angela grew old. provisions. She was sued in the municipal court in a civil
- LOLA Angela moved out and leased house to complaint to eject her from the lot on the ground that she had
Capuchino reserving one room for her stuff. unlawfully subleased it.
- Aranetas (original owners) sold lot to Susanna Realty
who sold it to Cetus Development. The petitioner's final contention is that she is not the proper
party defendant in the ejectment case but her mother Angela,
Cetus filed a complaint for ejectment against the petitioner on who inherited the leasehold right from Servillano Ocampo.
the ground that the lessee had subleased the property without That claim is also unacceptable. It is obvious that the
its consent in violation of BP 877 (contract of sublease could petitioner has been acting on behalf of her mother, who is
no longer be considered valid without the written consent of now 92 years of age and living in her care. Angela cannot
the lessor). The case was dismissed. The court held that the administer the subleased lot and house, let alone appear in
statute was inapplicable because the sublease was made prior court to resist her ejectment.
to its effectivity. Petitioner contends that BP 877 should not be
given retroactive application because it would violate the Petitioner can no longer retain the leased lot, not because she
impairment clause and the prohibition against ex post facto does not need it anymore but, worse, because she is making a
laws. She repeats that she is not the proper party defendant profitable business of subleasing it without the written
but her mother Angela, who inherited the leasehold right from consent of the landlord, who is entitled to recover the lot
her brother Servillano, the original lessee of the lot. because of the violation of the lease. The petitioner cannot
claim a denial of social justice because she was not entitled to
ISSUES: Does BP 887 apply in this case? YES. Sublease it in the first place.
contract was renewable every month so although the leasing
started in the 70s, the months after BP 887 was passed (1985)
fall under the law already. First Philippine International Bank v Court of Appeals
Does it violate impairment clause? NO. Regulation of (Jan. 1996)
rentals is public interest and falls under police power.
Who is the proper party, Virginia or Lola Angela? PONENTE: Panganiban
Virginia. Lola Angela is 92, Virginia is obviously her
administrator. FACTS:
Who owns the house and lot: Cetus Development. - Petitioner Bank is a bank placed under
Landlord can claim property again if lessee (Virginia) violates conservatorship by the Central Bank since 1984
lease contract. - Jose Janolo wanted to buy land from the FPIB. He
conducted negotiations with Mercurio Rivera,
Ratio: Manager of the Property Management Department of
As the original contract of lease did not prescribe a fixed the defendant bank through letters.
period and the rentals were paid monthly, the same should be - They had a meeting and had an oral agreement to
considered renewable from month to month, following the the price which is P5,500,000
Civil Code. The same observations are made of the contract of - A new conservator was assigned to the FPIB
sublease in favor of Capuchino, which began in 1976 and has - Janolo tendered payment but the bank refused on the
continued to date. Like the principal contract, the sublease following grounds: The property is still under study
was also terminable at the end of each month because no by a new committee for review by the new
specific period has been prescribed and the rentals were also conservator
payable monthly. - The new conservator in a letter repudiated the
authority of the bank officers and revoked the
When the sublease was renewed in July 1985, it had become contract
invalid under the provisions of BP 877, which had already - Janolo filed for specific performance. While the case
become effective. The law was operating prospectively upon was pending, stockholders of FPIB filed a “derivative
the new, or renewed, contract of sublease which now could no suit” with the RTC of Makati
longer be considered valid without the written consent of the
lessor. ISSUES:
- Was there forum shopping? YES
The petitioner complains that the retroactive application of - Was there a perfected contract? YES
the law would violate the impairment clause. The argument - Is it enforceable under the Statute of Frauds? YES
does not impress. As long as the contract affects the public - Does the Conservator have the power to revoke
welfare one way or another so as to require the interference of contracts of the bank? (RELEVANT ISSUE). YES, but
the State, then must the police power be asserted, and only in defective contracts
prevail, over the impairment clause. Housing is one of the
most serious social problems of the country. The regulation of RATIO:
rentals, especially in the urban areas, has long been the - Forum Shopping requisites:
continuing concern of the government
o That there exist identity of parties or
The subject lease is a case in point. It is not denied that the interests represented, identity of rights or
rental on the lot is only P69.70 per month. On the other hand, causes and identity of reliefs sought.
the petitioner has declared that she charges Capuchino a - Was there a perfected contract?
monthly rental of P400.00 under the sublease contract, or o Object – the land sought to be bought
almost ten times her own rental. While it is true that this o Consent – Doctrine of ostensible authority
covers both the lot and the building, the point is that she is  It is a familiar doctrine, the doctrine
not paying the lessor enough for the use of the lot in light of of ostensible authority, that if a
the total rental she is charging Capuchino for the use of the corporation knowingly permits one

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 68
of its officers, or any other agent, to revoke the contract.
to do acts within the scope of an
apparent authority, and thus holds
him out to the public as possessing
power to do those acts, the CMMA v POEA (taken from EPC digest)
corporation will, as against any one
who has in good faith dealt with the Facts: Executive Order 797 provided for the creation of POEA
corporation through such agent, he (Philippine Overseas Employment Administration)which was
estopped from denying his mandated to protect the rights of overseas Filipino workers to
authority fair and equitable employment practices. This was in line
 Rivera was acting with the with the furtherance of social justice provisions of the 1973.
ostensible authority of the Constitution. Pursuant to the objectives set forth in EO 797,
committee of the Bank. The bank is the Governing Board of POEA issued the assailed Resolution 1
now estopped from questioning his which stipulates:
authority
o Cause – did not discuss 1. In case of death of the seaman during the term
- Is the contract enforceable? of his Contract, the employer shall pay his
o Yes, the letters of negotiation is enough beneficiaries the Philippine Currency equivalent
proof under the Statute of Frauds to the amount of US$50,000 and an additional
- Does the conservator have the power to repudiate amount of US$7,000 to each child under the age
authority and revoke contracts? of twenty-one (21) but not exceeding four
o Section 28-A of the Central Bank Act children at the exchange rate prevailing during
provides: the time of payment.
 Whenever, on the basis of a report Petitioner., an incorporated association of licensed Filipino
submitted by the appropriate manning agencies, which hire and recruit Filipino seamen for
supervising or examining and in behalf of their respective foreign shipowner-principals,
department, the Monetary Board seeks the nullification of the said Resolution on the ground
finds that a bank or a non-bank that it amounts to discrimination against foreign shipowners
financial intermediary performing and principals employing Filipino seamen thereby giving
quasi - banking functions is in a undue advantage to foreign employers whose covered
state of continuing inability or overseas Filipino workers are not seamen. Petitioners also
unwillingness to maintain a state of contest undue delegation of legislative powers and the
liquidity deemed adequate to impairment of contracts.
protect the interest of depositors
and creditors, the Monetary Board Issue: Does the EO 797 and Resolution No. 1 violate the non-
may appoint a conservator to take impairment clause? NO
charge of the assets, liabilities, and
the management of that institution, Ratio:
collect all monies and debts due The constitutional prohibition against impairing contractual
said institution and exercise all obligations is not absolute and is not to be read with literal
powers necessary to preserve exactness. It is restricted to contracts with respect to property
the assets of the institution, or some object of value and which confer rights that maybe
reorganize the management asserted in a court of justice; it has no application to statutes
thereof, and restore its relating to public subjects within the domain of the general
viability. He shall have the legislative powers of the State and involving the public rights
power to overrule or revoke and public welfare of the entire community affected by it. It
the actions of the previous does not prevent a proper exercise by the State of its police
management and board of power by enacting regulations reasonably necessary to secure
directors of the bank or non- the health, safety, morals; comfort, or general welfare of the
bank financial intermediary community, even though contracts may thereby be affected,
performing quasi-banking for such matters cannot be placed by contract beyond the
functions, any provision of law power of the State to regulate and control them.
to the contrary
notwithstanding, and such
other powers as the Monetary
PNB v. Office of the President
Board shall deem necessary.”
Facts:
o Such powers, enormous and extensive as
- Respondents were buyers on installment of
they are, cannot extend to the post-facto
subdivision lots from Marikina Village, Inc.
repudiation of perfected transactions,
- Notwithstanding the land purchase agreements it
otherwise they would infringe against the
executed over said lots, the subdivision developer
non-impairment clause of the Constitution. If
mortgaged the lots in favor of the petitioner,
the legislature itself cannot revoke an
Philippine National Bank.
existing valid contract, how can it delegate
- Unaware of this mortgage, respondents duly
such non-existent powers to the conservator
complied with their obligations as lot buyers and
under Section 28-A of said law?
constructed their houses on the lots in question.
o Therefore Section 28-A merely gives the
- Subsequently, the subdivision developer defaulted
conservator power to revoke contracts that
and PNB foreclosed on the mortgage. As highest
are, under existing law, deemed to be
bidder at the foreclosure sale, the bank became
defective - i.e., void, voidable,
owner of the lots.
unenforceable or rescissible
- Acting on suits brought by private respondents, the
o In the case at bar, there was a valid contract
HLURB Office of Appeals, Adjudication and Legal
therefore the conservator had no authority
Affairs (OAALA) ruled that PNB- without prejudice to

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 69
seeking relief against Marikina Village, Inc. may FACTS:
collect from respondents only the “remaining Private respondent purchased on installment basis from
amortizations, in accordance with the land purchase petitioner two lots in the E & S Delta Village in Quezon City.
agreements they had previously entered into with” Acting on complaints for non-development filed by the Delta
Marikina Village, Inc., and cannot compel Village Homeowners’ Association, Inc., the National Housing
respondents to pay all over again for the lots they Authority rendered a resolution ordering petitioner to cease
had already bought from said subdivision developer. and desist from making further sales of lots in said village or
- The Office of the President, invoking P.D. 957, in any project owned by him.
likewise concurred with the HLURB.
While NHA Cases were still pending, private respondent filed
- PNB contends that the Office of the President erred in with the Office of Appeals, Adjudication and Legal Affairs
applying P.D. 957 because said law was enacted only (OAALA) of the Human Settlements Regulatory Commission
on July 12, 1976, while the subject mortgage was (HSRC), a complaint against petitioner and spouses Rodolfo
executed on December 18, 1975. and Adelina Relevo alleging that, in view of the above NHA
resolution, he suspended payment of his amortizations, but
Issue/Held: that petitioner resold one of the two lots to the said spouses
W/N PD 957 should be applied retroactively? Yes. Relevo, in whose favor title to the said property was
W/N it violates the non-impairment clause? No. registered. Private respondent further alleged that he
suspended his payments because of petitioner’s failure to
Ratio: develop the village. Private respondent prayed for the
1. It is obvious and indubitable that P.D. 957 was intended to annulment of the sale to the Relevo spouses and for
cover even those real estate mortgages executed prior to its reconveyance of the lot to him.
enactment, and such intent (as succinctly captured in the
preamble quoted below) must be given effect if the laudable The Commission Proper of the HSRC, applying P.D. 957,
purpose of protecting innocent purchasers is to be achieved: ordered petitioner to complete the subdivision development
“WHEREAS, it is the policy of the State to afford its inhabitants and to reinstate private respondent’s purchase contract over
the requirements of decent human settlement and to provide one lot, and as to the other lot, “it appearing that Transfer
them with ample opportunities for improving their quality of Certificate of Title has been issued to spouses Rodolfo and
life; Adelina Relevo, petitioner is ordered to immediately refund to
“WHEREAS, numerous reports reveal that many real estate the private respondent all payments made thereon, plus
subdivision owners, developers, operators, and/or sellers have interests.”
reneged on their representations and obligations to provide
and maintain properly subdivision roads, drainage, sewerage, The respondent Executive Secretary, on appeal, affirmed the
water systems, lighting systems, and other similar basic decision of the HSRC.
requirements, thus endangering the health and safety of
home and lot buyers; In his Petition before this Court, petitioner avers that the
“WHEREAS, reports of alarming magnitude also show cases of Executive Secretary erred in applying P.D. 957 and in
swindling and fraudulent manipulations perpetrated by concluding that the non-development of the E & S Delta
unscrupulous subdivision and condominium sellers and Village justified private respondent’s non-payment of his
operators, such as failure to deliver titles to the buyers or amortizations. Petitioner avers that inasmuch as the land
titles free from liens and encumbrances, and to pay real purchase agreements were entered into in 1972, prior to the
estate taxes, and fraudulent sales of the same subdivision lots effectivity of P.D. 957 in 1976, said law cannot govern the
to different innocent purchasers for value;” transaction.
2. The Court cannot allow the injustice that will be wrought by
a strictly prospective application of the law. As the Solicitor ISSUE:
General argues: if P.D. 957 were to exclude from its coverage Did the failure to develop a subdivision constitute legal
the mortgage contract herein, the purpose of PD. 957 will be justification for the non-payment of amortizations by a buyer
translated into a feeble exercise of police power, the iron on installment under land purchase agreements entered into
hand of the State not being able to touch mortgage contracts prior to the enactment of P.D. 957, “The Subdivision and
constituted prior to the enactment of the law. Condominium Buyers’ Protective Decree”?
3. Certain provisions of P.D. 957, which themselves constitute
strong arguments in favor of the retroactivity of PD. 957 as a HELD:
whole. These are Sections 20, 21 and 23, which by their very Respondent Executive Secretary did not abuse his discretion,
terms have retroactive effect and will impact upon even those and that P.D. 957 is to be given retroactive effect so as to
contracts and transactions entered into prior to PD. 957. cover even those contracts executed prior to its enactment in
4. The impairment clause is now no longer inviolate. It was 1976.
quite useful before in protecting the integrity of private
agreements from government meddling- but that was when P.D. 957 did not expressly provide for retroactivity in its
such agreements did not affect the community in general and entirety, but such can be plainly inferred from the
were then purely private agreements. But things are different unmistakable intent of the law. The intent of the law, as culled
now. More and more, the interests of the public have become from its preamble and from the situation, circumstances and
involved in what are supposed to be still private agreements, conditions it sought to remedy, must be enforced.
which have as a result been removed from the protection of
the impairment clause. It goes without saying that, as an instrument of social justice,
5. Agreements have come within the embrace of the police the law must favor the weak and the disadvantaged,
power. As long as the contract affects the public welfare one including, in this instance, small lot buyers and aspiring
way or another so as to require the interference of the State, homeowners. P.D. 957 was enacted with no other end in view
then must the police power be asserted, and prevail, over the than to provide a protective mantle over helpless citizens who
impairment clause. may fall prey to the manipulations and machinations
(swindling, fraud, etc.) of ‘unscrupulous subdivision and
condominium sellers,’
EUGENIO v. DRILON
Moreover, as P.D. 957 is undeniably applicable to the

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 70
contracts in question, it follows that Section 23 thereof had (1) W/N the cancellation of petitioner’s license
been properly invoked by private respondent when he constitutes an impairment of the obligation of
desisted from making further payment to petitioner due to its contract
petitioner’s failure to develop the subdivision project (2) W/N the cancellation of petitioner’s TLA was justified
according to the approved plans and within the time limit for
complying with the same. (Such incomplete development of HELD:
the subdivision and non-performance of specific contractual (1) No. Timber licenses, permits and license
and statutory obligations on the part of the subdivision-owner agreements are mere privileges granted by the
had been established in the findings of the HLURB which in State to qualified entities, and do not vest in the
turn were confirmed by the respondent Executive Secretary in latter a permanent or irrevocable right to the
his assailed Decision.) particular concession area and the forest products
therein. They may be validly amended, modified,
“Sec. 23. Non-Forfeiture of replaced or rescinded by the Chief Executive when
Payments. - No installment national interests so require. Thus, they are not
payment made by a buyer in a deemed contracts within the purview of the due
subdivision or condominium project process of law clause. The licenses are only
for the lot or unit he contracted to instruments by which the State regulates the
buy shall be forfeited in favor of the utilization and disposition of forest resources to the
owner or developer when the end that public welfare is promoted
buyer, after due notice to the
owner or developer, desists from
(2) Yes. The DENR order was based on its finding that
further payment due to the failure
although petitioner’s TLA’ s expiry was June 30, 1997
of the owner or developer to
it had been suspended on June 3, 1983 because of
develop the subdivision or
CMTC's "mediocre performance in reforestation" and
condominium project according to
petitioner's laches in failing to protest the
the approved plans and within the
subsequent award of the same area to FLDC.
time limit for complying with the
NOTE: The order dated June 3, 1983 suspending
same. Such buyer may, at his
petitioner's TLA because of "mediocre performance"
option, be reimbursed the total
in reforestation, letter allegedly written on
amount paid including amortization
September 24, 1984 on behalf of petitioner
interests but excluding delinquency
protesting the award of the concession covered by its
interests, with interest thereon at
TLA to FLDC, so as to show that petitioner did not
the legal rate.”
sleep on its rights, could not be produced.
With respect to the alleged order of June 3,
Likewise, there is no merit in petitioner’s contention that
1983 suspending petitioner's TLA the Court
respondent Secretary exceeded his jurisdiction in ordering the
presumes that there is such an order in
refund of private respondent’s payments on Lot 12 although
accordance with the presumption of
(according to petitioner) only Lot 13 was the subject of the
regularity in the performance of official
complaint. Respondent Secretary duly noted that the
functions inasmuch as such order is cited
supporting documents submitted substantiating the claim of
both in the order of the DENR, declaring as
non-development justified such order inasmuch as such claim
of no force and effect TLA No. 106, and in
was also the basis for non-payment of amortizations on said
the decision of the Office of the President
Lot 12.
affirming the order of the DENR. With
respect to the letter dated September 24,
1984, the existence of such record is
C & M Timber v. Alcala supported by Ofelia Castro Biron (receiving
FACTS: clerk at the Records and Documents Section
Petitioner seeks the nullification of the order of the Office of of the Ministry of Natural Resources), who
the President, nullifying Timber License Agreement (TLA) certified that she was the person who
issued in its favor for forest lands in Dipaculao and Dinalongan received the letter for the DENR. Also, the
in the Province of Aurora Quirino. On July 20, 1984, Filipinas logbook of the Ministry of Natural Resources
Loggers Development Corporation (FLDC) sent a letter o contained entries indicating that the letter
President Marcos, requesting a timber concession over the was received by the Bureau of Forest
same area covered by petitioner's TLA reasoning that the Development from the MNR.
same had been cancelled pursuant to a presidential directive
banning all forms of logging in the area. The request was
granted and FLDC began logging operations in1985
Republic Planters Bank v. Hon. Agana (Judge RTC
On June 26, 1986, then Minister of Natural Resources Ernesto
Pasay)
M. Maceda issued an order cancelling the license of FLDC on
By: Amy (ask me nalang if you don’t understand it could get
the ground that FLDC continued logging operations in
confusing coz we have no background on Corporation law.
violation of forestry rules and regulations. As FLDC sought a
The laws refer to a corporation which is actually in this case
reconsideration of the order, petitioner wrote another letter
the Bank but since the stockholder is also a corporation it gets
dated February 13, 1987, seeking a revalidation of its TLA.
messy. Basta stockholder -> Robes Corporation and the
Secretary Factoran, Jr. of the DENR denied the petition for
corporation is the bank basta when the law refers to a
restoration ruling that petitioner's plea was barred by laches
corporation that’s the bank)
because petitioner did not file its opposition to the issuance of
FACTS: Robes-Francisco Realty and Development Corporation
a TLA to FLDC until February 13, 1987, after FLDC had been
through Adalia F. Robes obtained a loan from petitioner Bank
logging under its license for almost 2 yrs. Office of the
in the amount of 120,000. This amount was given partially
President affirmed the DENR's order.
and cash and partially n the form of stock certificates. The
certificates of Preferred stock bear the ff rights, preferences,
ISSUE:
and limitations
1. Right to receive a quarterly dividend of 1%,
cumulative and participating

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 71
2. Such preferred shares may be redeemed, by the of banking institution and result in adverse
system of drawing lots at any time after 3 years from repercussions not only to its debtors and creditors, but to
the date of issue at the option of the corporation the banking industry as a whole. The directive, in limiting
Private respondents filed a complaint anchored on their the exercise of a right granted by law to a corporate
alleged rights to collect dividends under the preferred shares entity may thus be considered as an exercise of police
in question and under the terms and conditions of the stock power.
certificates. Respondent judge ruled in favor of Robes Respondent judge insists that the directive constitutes an
Corporation allowing them to claim against petitioner bank impairment of the obligations of contracts. The court held
saying that to allow the herein defendant not to redeem said that this Constitutional guaranty could be limited by the
preferred shares of stock and/or pay the interest due thereon exercise of the police power of the state, the reason
despite the clear import of said provisions by the mere being that public welfare is superior to private rights
invocation of alleged Bank Circulars prohibiting the same is
tantamount to an impairment of the obligations of contracts
enshrined in no less than the fundamental law itself. Producers Bank of the Philippines v. NLRC

ISSUE: Facts:
Whether or not the judge erred in Petitioner Bank was placed by the Central Bank (now BSP)
1. Ordering the petitioner to pay 8k as interest on her under a conservator to protect its assets. When private
preferred shares and respondents sought the implementation of their Collective
2. Ordering petitioner to redeem the preferred shares. Bargaining Agreement regarding their retirement plan
pertaining to uniform allowance, the conservator of the bank
HELD: YES expressed her objection, resulting in an impasse between the
petitioner bank and the respondent union. The deadlock
IN RELATION TO Section 10: whether the Central Bank continued for six months. Private Respondent filed a case
Directive prohibiting the redemption of preferred against petitioner for unfair labor practice and for flagrant
shares of stock impairs the obligations and contract violation of the CBA provisions.

Yes, but valid exercise of police power. For the welfare The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint but when appealed
of the banking industry to the NLRC, they ruled in their favor.

Preferred shares of stock as to dividend (this was the type Issue: W/N the petitioner bank can be ordered to implement
given to Robes the other type is as to assets) the provisions of the CBA which were disallowed by the
conservator.
1. Shareholder is entitled to receive dividends on share
to the extent agreed upon before any dividends at all Held: Yes
are paid to the holders of common stock. No
guaranty however that the share will receive any Rationale:
dividends. In the Old Corporation Law “no A conservator cannot rescind a valid and existing contract.
corporation shall make or declare any dividend The CBA is the law between the contracting parties. Thus, the
except from the surplus profits arising from its conservator had no authority whatsoever to disallow the
business x x x until after the payment of its debts implementation of the CBA provisions, especially considering
and the termination of its existence by limitation or that the ideals of social justice and protection of labor are
lawful dissolution. Dividends are thus payable only guaranteed not only by the labor code, but more importantly
when there are profits earned by the corporation and by the fundamental law of the land.
as a general rule even if there are existing profits the
board of directors has the discretion to determine Other issues:
whether or not the dividends are to be declared. (so - Petitioner insists that both the Labor Arbiter and the
makakakuha lang sila kung may sobra o kahit may NLRC have no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.
sobra man discretion pa rin nung bank kung Petitioner cannot anymore plead of such procedural flaw
idedeclare nila na may profit) under the principle of estoppel. He only raised the issue after
2. As to the redemption of shares, redeemable shares the decision of the NLRC which was unfavorable to him.
are those, which by their terms are redeemable at a
fixed date or at the option of either the issuing - Petitioner asserts since the employees have retired,
corporation (this case the bank) or the stockholder or as a consequence of which no employer-employee
both at a certain redemption price. While redeemable relationship exists anymore. So private respondent
share may be redeemed regardless of the existence had no personality to file the complaint for them.
of unrestricted retained earnings, this is subject to
the condition that the corporation has, after such The retirement of an employee does not, in itself, affect his
redemption, assets in its books to cover debts and employment status especially when it involves all rights and
liabilities inclusive of capital stock. Redemption benefits due to him, since these must be protected as though
therefore may not be made where the corporation is there had been no interruption of service. When the retired
insolvent or if such redemption will cause insolvency employees were requesting that their retirement benefits be
or inability of the corporation to meet its debts as granted, they were not pleading for generosity but were
they mature. merely demanding that their rights, as embodied by the CBA,
Judge failed to recognize that even if the stock certificate be recognized.
does allow redemption, the option to do so was
clearly vested in the petitioner bank. The use of the
word MAY has no mandatory effect. Redemption of said
shares cannot be allowed as pointed out by petitioner, BLAQUERA V. ALCALA (11 September 1998)
the Central Bank made a finding that said petitioner has Ponente: Purisima
been suffering from chronic reserve deficiency and
that such finding resulted in a directive, which prohibits Facts: (This is a consolidation of 5 cases.)
the redemption of preferred shares. This was meant to G.R. Nos. 109406, 110642, 111494, and 112056 
preserve the status quo and to prevent the financial ruin Petitioners are officials & employees of several government

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 72
departments and agencies who were paid incentive benefits provision.”
for the year 1992, pursuant to E0 292 (Administrative Code of b) Untenable is petitioners’ contention that the herein
1987) and the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of EO 292. respondents be held personally liable for the refund in
On January 19, 1993, then President Ramos issued AO 29 question. Absent a showing of bad faith or malice, public
authorizing the grant of productivity incentive benefits for the officers are not personally liable for damages resulting from
year 1992 in the maximum amount of P1,000.00 & reiterating the performance of official duties.
the prohibition under Sec 7 of AO 268 enjoining the grant of Considering, however, that all the parties here acted in good
productivity incentive benefits without prior approval of the faith, we cannot countenance the refund of subject incentive
President. Sec 4 of AO 29 directed “all departments, offices benefits for the year 1992, which amounts the petitioners
and agencies which authorized payment of CY 1992 have already received. Indeed, no indicia of bad faith can be
Productivity Incentive Bonus in excess of the amount detected under the attendant facts and circumstances. The
authorized under Section 1 hereof are hereby directed to officials and chiefs of offices concerned disbursed such
immediately cause the return/refund of the excess within a incentive benefits in the honest belief that the amounts given
period of 6 months to commence 15 days after the issuance were due to the recipients and the latter accepted the same
of this Order.” In compliance therewith, the heads of the with gratitude, confident that they richly deserve such
departments or agencies of the government concerned, who benefits.
are the herein respondents, caused the deduction from
petitioners’ salaries or allowances of the amounts needed to
cover the alleged overpayments. To prevent the respondents
from making further deductions from their salaries or Manila Electric Company v. Province of Laguna
allowances, the petitioners sought relief in the SC.
Issue: a) W/N THE FORCED REFUND OF INCENTIVE Facts:
PAY IS AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL IMPAIRMENT OF A Certain municipalities of Laguna, by virtue of existing laws
CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION?NO. then, granted franchise in favor of Meralco. On 12 September
b) ASSUMING, FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT ONLY, 1991, RA 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991) was enacted
THAT THE GRANT OF PRODUCTIVITY INCENTIVE enjoining local government units to create their own sources
BENEFITS WAS INVALID, SHOULD THE SAME BE THE of revenue and to levy taxes, subject to limitations, consistent
PERSONAL LIABILITY OF OFFICIALS DIRECTLY with the policy of local autonomy. Laguna then enacted
RESPONSIBLE THEREFOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH Provincial Order No. 01-92 providing that there will be a tax
SECTION 9 OF AO 268?NO. imposed on businesses enjoying a franchise (50% of 1% of
gross annual receipts). Upon demand, Meralco paid the tax of
Ratio: P19, 520,628.42 but under protest. Meralco asked for a refund
a) Anent petitioners’ contention that the forcible claiming the franchise tax it had paid and continued to pay to
refund of incentive benefits is an unconstitutional the National Government pursuant to PD 551 already included
impairment of a contractual obligation, suffice it to the franchise tax imposed by the Provincial Tax Ordinance
state that “not all contracts entered into by the and that it contravened Sec 1 (2% of gross receipts; “in lieu of
government will operate as a waiver of its non- all taxes of whatever nature imposed by any national or local
suability; distinction must be made between its authority”) of PD 551.
sovereign and proprietary acts.” The acts involved in
this case are governmental. Besides, the Court is in Issue:
agreement with the Solicitor General that the • W/N the imposition of a franchise tax under PO 01-
incentive pay or benefit is in the nature of a 92, insofar as petitioner is concerned, is violative of the
bonus which is not a demandable or non-impairment clause - No
enforceable obligation. • W/N RA 7160 repealed, amended, or modified PD 551
It is understood that the Judiciary, CSC, COA, Comelec, and - Yes
Office of the Ombudsman, which enjoy fiscal autonomy, are
not covered by the amount fixed by the President. As Held:
explained in Bengzon vs. Drilon: Petition lacks merit. LGUs do not have the inherent power to
“As envisioned in the Constitution, the fiscal autonomy tax except to the extent that such power might be delegated
enjoyed contemplates a guarantee of full flexibility to to them. Under Article X, a general delegation of that power
allocate and utilize their resources with the wisdom and has been given although Congress may provide statutory
dispatch that their needs require. It recognizes the limitations and guidelines.
power and authority to levy, assess and collect fees, fix
rates of compensation not exceeding the highest rates The 1991 Code explicitly authorizes provincial governments,
authorized by law for compensation and pay plans of the notwithstanding “any exemption granted by any law or other
government and allocate and disburse such sums as special law, xxx to impose a tax on businesses enjoying a
may be provided by law or prescribed by them in the franchise.” The Local Gov’t Code has effectively withdrawn tax
course of the discharge of their functions.” exemptions enjoyed by certain entities. It also contains a
“The Judiciary, the Constitutional Commissions, and the general repealing clause for all laws inconsistent with any of
Ombudsman must have the independence and flexibility the provisions of the code.
needed in the discharge of their constitutional duties.
The imposition of restrictions and constraints on the The Court has held that the phrase “in lieu of all taxes” have
manner the independent constitutional offices allocate to give way to the LGC specifically providing for the
and utilize the funds appropriated for their operations is withdrawal of such exemptions and can no longer be invoked
anathema to fiscal autonomy and violative not only of by Meralco to disclaim liability from local tax.
the express mandate of the Constitution but especially
as regards the Supreme Court, of the independence and While the court has referred to tax exemptions contained in
separation of powers upon which the entire fabric of our special franchises as being in the nature of contracts, these
constitutional system is based. In the interest of comity exemptions are far from being strictly contractual in nature.
and cooperation, the SC, ConComs, and the Ombudsman Contractual tax exemptions, in the real sense of the term and
have so far limited their objections to constant where the non-impairment clause can rightly be revoked, are
reminders. We now agree with the petitioners that this those agreed to by the taxing authority in contracts, such as
grant of autonomy should cease to be a meaningless those contained in government bonds or debentures, lawfully

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 73
entered into by them under the enabling laws in which the The power to tax may be exercised by local
government, acting in its private capacity, sheds its cloak of legislative bodies pursuant to direct authority conferred by
authority and waives it governmental immunity. Truly, tax the Constitution itself (article 10, sec 5 gives local gov’ts the
exemptions of this kind may not be revoked without impairing power to tax). Thus, non-impairment clause cannot be
the obligations of contracts. These contractual tax invoked.
exemptions are not to be confused with tax 2) Reservation clause (IMPORTANT PART.)
exemptions granted under franchises. A franchise The term of the franchise under RA 3648 is 50 yrs starting
partakes the nature of a grant which is beyond the purview of from its approval on 1929. It also provided the condition that
the non-impairment clause. It is explicit that no franchise shall it shall be subject to amendment or repeal by the Congress of
be granted except under the condition that such privilege the US.
shall be subject to amendment, alteration, or repeal by Under the 1935, 1973, and 1987 Constitutions, no
Congress when the common good requires. franchise or right shall be granted except under the
condition that it shall be subject to amendment,
alteration, or repeal when the public interest so
CITY GOV OF SAN PABLO, LAGUNA v MERALCO (Mar requires. (reservation clause). But even w/o the
25,1999) reservation clause, franchises are subject to
alterations through police power and power to tax
Facts (basic summary): (both of which cannot be contracted anyway).
Escudero Company was granted a legislative 3) Omission of “now or in the future”
franchise by Act 3468, which provided a franchise tax. The The original Escudero franchise exempted the franchise
franchise was later transferred to Meralco. The LGC later holder from all taxes levied or collected “now or in the future”.
authorized municipalities to impose a different franchise tax. The phrase was later omitted from its counterpart in PD 551.
San Pablo passed Ordinance 56 imposing new franchise tax That said omission is intended not to foreclose future taxes
and demanded the same from Meralco. Meralco claims may reasonably be deduced by statutory construction.
impairment of its franchise privileges.

Facts (detailed timeline): *Confusing yung case kasi maraming pinass na acts and
statutes… maraming provisions na inexplain. Sorry kung
- Act 3648 granted Escudero Electric Service
malabo… I think #2 (reservation clause) lang yung importante
Company a legislative franchise to maintain and sa ratio.
operate an electric light and power system in San See also pg 120 of primer for a simplified summary.
Pablo and nearby municipalities. Section 10 of the
Act provided that the grantee (Escudero) shall pay
unto the municipal treasury of the municipalities it
Harrison Motors Corporation v. Navarro
covered a franchise tax equal to 2% of the gross
April 27, 2000
earning from electric current sold or supplied. The
term of the franchise was a period of 50 years from
FACTS:
the day of its approval.
Harrison Motors Corporation (HMC), a known
- RA 2340 transferred the franchise to respondent importer, assembler, and manufacturer, assembled two Isuzu
Meralco. Elf trucks to private respondent (Rachel Navarro) using
- PD 551 enacted. Section 1 of the decree also imported component parts. Prior to the sale, Renato Claros,
president of HMC, represented to private respondent that all
provided that the franchise tax be 2% of their gross
the BIR taxes and customs duties for the parts used in the two
receipts but made it payable to the Commissioner of
trucks has been paid for.
Internal Revenue
On September 1987, Bureau of Internal Revenue
- RA 7160, Local Gov Code of 1991 (LGC), took effect. (BIR) and the Land Transportation Office (LTO) entered into a
It authorized the municipality to impose a tax on Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) which provided that prior
businesses enjoying a franchise at a rate not to registration in the LTO of any assembled or re-assembled
exceeding 50% of 1% of the gross annual receipts for motor vehicle which used imported parts, a CERTIFICATE OF
the preceding calendar year. PAYMENT should first be obtained from the BIR to prove
- Ordinance 56 was passed by San Pablo, which payment of all taxes required under existing laws.
provided that the franchise tax be 50% of 1% of the On October 1987, Bureau of Customs (BOC) issued a
gross annual receipts from the preceding calendar Memorandum Order promulgating rules, regulations and
year (basically just copied RA7160) procedures for the voluntary payment of duties and taxes on
- Purusuant to Ordinance 56, municipality demanded imported motor vehicles assembled by non-assemblers.
from Meralco the new franchise tax. Meralco paid On December 1987, BIR also issued a Memorandum
“under protest”. Order which provided the procedure governing the processing
and issuance of the Certificate of Payment.
Issue/Held: W/N the new franchise tax constitutes an On June 1988, BIR, BOC and LTO entered into a
impairment of the contract between the government and tripartite MOA which provided that prior to registration in the
Meralco? NO LTO of any locally assembled motor vehicle using imported
parts, a CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT should first be obtained
Ratio: (I’m not sure if #1 and #3 are important) from the BIR and BOC to prove payment of all taxes and
1) Local government’s power to tax import duties required under existing laws.
LGC was enacted pursuant to the constitutional On December 1988, government agents seized and
policy to ensure autonomy to local governments. The power to detained the two Elf Trucks of respondent after discovering
tax is the most effective instrument to raise needed revenues that there were unpaid BIR taxes and duties.
to finance the local governments’ activities. Private respondent went to Claros to ask for receipts
Nothing can prevent Congress from decreeing that evidencing payment of BIR taxes and custom duties; however,
even instrumentalities or agencies of the Gov’t performing Claros refused to comply.
governmental functions may be subject to tax. Where it is to But wanting to secure the immediate release of the
be done precisely to fulfill a constitutional mandate and thrucks, private respondent paid the assessed BIR taxes and
national policy, no one can doubt its wisdom. duties. Consequentky, she returned to petitioner to ask for

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 74
reimbursement.
RATIO: 1. An expropriation suit does not involve the recovery
ISSUE: of a sum of money. Rather, it deals with the exercise by the
Do the additional taxes and custom duties imposed on the government of its authority and right to take property for
imported component parts by the MOA and Memorandum public use. It is incapable of pecuniary estimation and should
Orders violate the non-impairment clause? be filed with the RTCs.
2. Since the MTC had no jurisdiction over expropriation
RULING: proceedings, res judicata cannot be applied.
No. 3. In expropriation proceedings, the requisites for authorizing
The Memorandum Order of BOC simply provides the immediate entry are: 1) the filing of a complaint for
procedure on how owners/consignees or their purchasers expropriation sufficient in form and substance; and 2) the
could voluntarily initiate payment for any unpaid customs deposit of the amount equivalent to 15% of the fair market
duties on locally assembled vehicles using imported value of the property to be expropriated based on its current
component parts. It does not charge any new tax. tax declaration. The issuance of the Writ of Possession in
The Memorandum Order of BIR merely outlines the favour of respondent was, therefore, proper, since the
procedures which governs the processing and issuance of the respondent has complied with the requisites. The issue of the
Certificate of Payment. necessity of the expropriation is a matter properly addressed
In addition, BIR and LTO executed the MOA to curb to the RTC in the course of the expropriation proceedings. If
the scheme employed by unscrupulous importers who evade Bardillon objects to the necessity of the takeover of her
paying the correct taxes and customs duties on imported property, she should say so in her Answer to the Complaint.
vehicles by importing its parts, assembling them locally, and The RTC has the power to inquire into the legality of the
subsequently selling the finished products to local buyers. exercise of the right of eminent domain and to determine
Clearly, the Memorandum Order and MOAs do not whether there is a genuine necessity for it. (make bola na lang
impose any additional taxes which would unduly impair the about how this impairs obligations of contracts)
contract of sale between petitioner and private respondent.
Instead, these administrative regulations were passed to
enforce payment of existing BIR taxes and custom duties at Philreca v DILG
the time of importation.
Therefore, petitioner is ordered to reimburse private
respondent for the taxes and duties she paid. Republic v. Roos..
DOCTRINE:
Sec. 10, Article 3 of the Constitution prohibits the passage of a
CHAVEZ v COMELEC (Aug 31, 2004)
law which enlarges, abridges, or in any manner changes the
We already discussed this case under police power. See also
intention of the contracting parties.
pg 118 of primer for an easier summary of the case.

Facts:
Bardillon v. Barangay Masili of Calamba, Laguna Francisco Chavez contracted with 3 companies (96° North,
FACTS: Two complaints for eminent domain were filed by Konka International Plastics Manufacturing Corp, and G-Box)
herein respondents for the purpose of expropriating a 144- as a private citizen to endorse their products in 2003.
square meter land, otherwise known as Lot 4381-D situated in Pursuant to these agreements, 3 billboards were set up along
Barangay Masili, Calamba, Laguna and owned by petitioner the Balintawak Interchange of the North Expressway. He later
Bardillon under Transfer Certificate of Title No. 383605 of ran for the Senate in 2004. After filing his certificate of
theRegistry of Deeds of Calamba, Laguna. The said lot was candidacy, the COMELEC informed him that he was in
being expropriated for the purpose of providing Barangay violation of section 32 of Resolution 6520 (premature
Masili a multi-purpose hall for the use and benefit of all its campaigning):
constituents. The first complaint for eminent domain was filed Section 32. All propaganda materials such
before the Municipal Trial Court of Calamba, Laguna (MTC) on as posters, streamers, stickers or paintings on walls
February 23, 1998, following the failure of Barangay Masili to and other materials showing the picture, image, or
reach an agreement with petitioner on the purchase offer of name of a person, and all advertisements on print,
P200,000. The case was dismissed. The second complaint for in radio or on television showing the image or
eminent domain was filed before Branch 37 of the RTC of mentioning the name of a person, who subsequent
Calamba, Laguna. This complaint also sought the to the placement or display thereof becomes a
expropriation of the said lot, also in pursuance of building a candidate for public office shall be immediately
multi-purpose hall. Petitioner, by way of a Motion to Dismiss, removed by said candidate and radio station, print
opposed the complaint by alleging that it violated Section media or television station within 3 days after the
19(f) of rule 16 in that the cause of action is barred by res effectivity of these implementing rules; otherwise,
judicata. he and said radio station, print media or television
In dismissing the petition, the CA held that the RTC of station shall be presumed to have conducted
Calamba, Laguna did not commit grave abuse of discretion in premature campaigning in violation of Section 80 of
issuing the assailed Orders. It ruled that the second complaint the Omnibus Election Code.
was not barred by res judicata. The reason is that the MTC, COMELEC issued a letter ordering him to remover or cause the
which dismissed the first complaint, had no jurisdiction over removal of the billboards, or to cover them from public view.
the action Chavez assailed that the provision was
unconstitutional. One of his reasons was that there was a
ISSUES: gross violation of the non-impairment clause
1. W/N the MTC had jurisdiction over the expropriation
case NO Issue/Held: W/N the Sec 32 violates the non-impairment
2. W/N the dismissal of that case before the MTC clause? NO, Provision is valid.
constituted res judicata NO
3. W/N the CA erred when it ignored the issue of entry Ratio:
upon the premises NO Although Chavez entered into the formal agreements as a
4. W/N respondent is guilty of forum shopping NO private citizen, the billboards featuring his name and image

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 75
assumed partisan political character after he filed his granted. While the DENR was appealing the mandamus
certificate of candidacy. The billboards indirectly promoted his case, certain areas covered by TLA No. 43 were in conflict
candidacy. Comelec was acting well within its powers when it with the ancestral domain of the Manobos according to the
ordered the removal of the billboards to level the playing field National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, and
for the candidates of public office. Proclamation No. 297 was issued by Pres. Gloria Macapagal-
The non-impairment clause of the Constitution Arroyo declaring certain areas also covered by TLA No. 43 as
must yield to the loftier purposes targeted by the mineral reservations. In a separate case, PICOP sought to
Government. Equal opportunity to proffer oneself for nullify said issuances in which a temporary restraining order
public office, without regard to the level of financial was issued. The DENR then sought for an injunction against
resources one may have at his disposal, is indeed of the trial court order to which the Court of Appeals (CA)
vital interest to the public. The State has the duty to granted.
enact and implement rules to safeguard this interest.
Time and again, this Court has said that contracts Upon appeal of the mandamus and injunction cases, the CA
affecting public interest contain an implied reservation affirmed the decision of the RTC of the mandamus case and
of the police power as a postulate of the existing legal lifted the injunction it has previously granted. Both parties
order. This power can be activated at anytime to subsequently sought review by the Supreme Court.
change the provisions of the contract, or even
abrogate it entirely, for the promotion or protection of ISSUES:
the general welfare. Such an act will not militate
against the impairment clause, which is subject to and 1.) Is the Presidential Warranty issued by then President
limited by the paramount police power Marcos a contract under the Constitution’s Non-
Furthermore, the contracts themselves provided that Impairment Clause?
the endorser’s photograph and image shall be utilized in 2.) Did the DENR Secretary commit grave abuse of
whatever form, mode and manner “in keeping with norms of discretion in not converting PICOP’s TLA No. 43 to an
decency, reasonableness, morals and law;” and in whatever IFMA?
form, mode and manner not contrary to law and norms of
decency,” and “in whatever form, mode and manner in RULING: Petition in G.R. No. 162243 granted, judgment
keeping with norms of decency, reasonableness, morals and reversed and set aside; petition in G.R. No. 164516
law.” denied; while petition in G.R. No. 171875 dismissed

1.) No, the Presidential Warranty is not a contract but a mere

Alvarez v. PICOP Resources, Inc. license or privilege.
G.R. No. 162243 (29 November 2006) 2.) No, it is clear that PICOP has failed to comply with
First Division, J. Chico-Nazario administrative and statutory requirements for an IFMA
conversion.
Petitions for review on certiorari of a decision and the
amended decision of the Court of Appeals RATIONALE:

FACTS: The Presidential Warranty is in now way a contract but a mere

license or privilege. It has been consistently held that said
Paper Industries Corporation of the Philippines (PICOP), licenses, especially concerning timber harvest, are neither
through its predecessor, acquired Timber License Agreement property nor property rights and do not create a vested right.
(TLA) No. 43 which was secured under Presidential All licenses may be revoked or rescinded by executive action.
Warranty by Pres. Ferdinand Marcos. Nearing the expiration
of TLA No. 43, PICOP petitioned for its conversion into an It is clear that PICOP has failed to comply with the
Integrated Forest Management Agreement (IFMA) pursuant to administrative and statutory requirements for an IFMA
Administrative Order No. 99-53 issued by the Department of conversion. Also, PICOP failed to submit strong evidence of its
Environment and Natural Resources. alleged payment of overdue forestry charges, interests,
penalties, surcharges, and silvicultural fees. In no means has
After proper evaluation, it was discovered that PICOP there been a conversion of TLA No. 43 into an IFMA by
committed violations of DENR rules and regulations such as interpreting the letter. The letter states that the conversion is
non-submission of a five-year forest protection plan and still pending finality and PICOP still has some dues not
seven-year reforestation plan as well as unpaid and overdue complied with.
forest charges. Because of these violations, the Forest
Management Bureau recommended creating a transition team DOCTRINE:
in lieu of automatic conversion of PICOP’s TLA No. 43 to an
IFMA. Presidential Warranties are not contracts but mere licenses or
privileges.
The DENR instead created a negotiating team to tie up any of
PICOP’s loose ends to pave the way for its IFMA conversion.
Through a letter, the DENR Secretary informed PICOP of the Lepanto Consolidated Mining Co. V. WMC Resources
creation of a Technical Working Committee (TWC) and
requested for its representatives. After several TWC meetings, Facts:
PICOP still failed to comply with DENR rules and regulations The Philippine Government and WMC Philippines, executed a
and failed to settle its liabilities. Despite these developments, Financial and Technical Assistance Agreement, denominated
PICOP insisted that its TLA No. 43 has already been as the Columbio FTAA No. 02-95-XI for the purpose of large
converted into an IFMA based on the letter by the scale exploration, development, and commercial exploration
DENR Secretary. The DENR had no choice but to deny the of possible mineral resources located in the provinces of
IFMA. South Cotabato, Sultan Kudarat, Davao del Sur, and North
Cotabato. The Columbio FTAA is covered in part by mining
Maintaining that TLA. No. 43 has already been converted into claims held under various Mineral Production Sharing
an IFMA, PICOP filed a petition for mandamus with the Quezon Agreements (MPSA) with several mining companies
City Regional Trial Court (RTC) which was subsequently collectively called Tampakan Companies. The Option

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 76
Agreement, among other things, provides for the grant of the
right of first refusal to the Tampakan Companies in case WMC Art II., Sec 13: All persons, except those charged with
Philippines desires to dispose of its rights and interests in the offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence of
mining claims covering the area subject of the agreement. guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by
WMC Resources subsequently divested itself of its sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be
rights and interests in the Columbio FTAA, and executed a provided by law. The right to bail shall not be impaired even
Sale and Purchase Agreement with petitioner Lepanto over its when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended.
entire shareholdings in WMC Philippines, subject to the Excessive bail shall not be required.
exercise of the Tampakan Companies’ exercise of their
right of first refusal to purchase the subject shares. The
RIGHT TO BAIL
Tampakan Companies sought to exercise its right of first
refusal. Thus, petitioner assailed the Tampakan Companies’
exercise of its right of first refusal, alleging that the Tampakan Yap v. CA
Companies failed to match the terms and conditions set forth
in the 12 July 2000 Agreement. Facts:
During the course of the proceedings, contending
that the agreement between petitioner and WMC Philippines Petitioner was accused and convicted of estafa by the RTC.
had expired due to failure to meet the necessary The RTC set the bail amount based on the civil liability of the
preconditions for its validity, WMC Resources and the petitioner which amounted to P5.5 M. Petitioner is contending
Tampakan Companies executed another Sale and Purchase that it is a violation of his right to bail.
Agreement. The DENR Secretary approved the transfer of the
Columbio FTAA. Issue: W/N the P5.5 M bail is excessive. Yes.
Aggrieved by the transfer of the Columbio FTAA in
favor of respondents, petitioner filed a Petition for Review of Ratio:
the Order of the DENR Secretary with the Office of the There is a grim irony in an accused being told that he has a
President. Petitioner assails the validity of the 18 December right to bail but at the same time being required to post such
2001 Order on the ground that it blatantly violates Section an exorbitant sum. The Revised Rules of Criminal Procedures
40 of the Mining Act which states that in transferring advises courts to consider the following factors in the setting
FTAAs, the President’s approval is required. of the amount of bail: (a) Financial ability of the accused to
give bail, (b) nature and circumstance of the offense, (c)
Issue: Whether Section 40 of the Mining Act which requires penalty for the offense charged, (d) character and reputation
the approval of the President in transferring FTAAs is an of the accused, (e) age and health of the accused, (f) weight
impairment of the FTAA contract itself. (FTAA contract was of the evidence against the accused, (g) probability of the
entered into before the enactment of the Mining Act) accused appearing at the trial, (h) forfeiture of other bail, (i)
the fact that the accused was a fugitive from justice when
Holding: Yes arrested and (j) pendency of other cases where the accused is
on bail. The court has wide latitude in fixing the amount of
Rationale: bail. Where it fears that the accused may jump bail, it is
The pivotal issue to be resolved herein involves the certainly not precluded from installing devices to ensure
propriety of the application to the Columbio FTAA, of Republic against the same. Although the accused is a flight risk, as
Act No. 7942 or the Philippine Mining Act of 1995, requiring admitted by the accused himself, the CA has already
the approval of the President of the assignment or transfer of confiscated his passport and issued a hold departure order.
financial or technical assistance agreements. To do so would
clearly contradict the established legal doctrine that statutes The purpose for bail is to guarantee the appearance of the
are to be construed as having only a prospective operation accused at the trial, or whenever so required by the court. The
unless the contrary is expressly stated or necessarily implied amount should be high enough to assure the presence of the
from the language used in the law. In this case, there is an accused when required but no higher than is reasonably
absence of either an express declaration or an implication in calculated to fulfill this purpose. Bail is not intended as a
the Mining Act that the provisions of said law shall be made to punishment, nor a satisfaction of civil liability which should
apply retroactively, therefore, any section of said law must be necessarily await the judgment of the appellate court.
made to apply only prospectively.
Section 40 of the Mining Act requiring the approval of
the President with respect to assignment or transfer of FTAAs, GOV’T. OF HONG KONG V. OLALIA & JUAN MUNOZ
if made applicable retroactively to the Columbio FTAA, would (April 19, 2007)
be tantamount to an impairment of the obligations Ponente: Sandoval-Gutierrez
under said contract as it would effectively restrict the right
of the parties thereto to assign or transfer their interests in Facts: Muñoz was charged before the Hong Kong Court with 3
the said FTAA. By imposing a new condition apart from those counts of the offense of “accepting an advantage as agent,”
already contained in the agreement, before the parties to the in violation of Section 9 (1a) of the Prevention of Bribery
Columbio FTAA may assign or transfer its rights and interest in Ordinance. He also faced 7 counts of the offense of
the said agreement, Section 40 of the Philippine Mining Act conspiracy to defraud, penalized by the common law of Hong
of 1995, if made to apply to the Columbio FTAA, will Kong. On August 23, 1997 and October 25, 1999, warrants of
effectively modify the terms of the original contract and thus arrest were issued against him. If convicted, he faced a jail
impair the obligations of the parties thereto and restrict the term of seven (7) to fourteen (14) years for each charge
exercise of their vested rights under the original agreement.
Such modification to the Columbio FTAA, particularly in the As early as November 22, 1999, petitioner Hong Kong Special
conditions imposed for its valid transfer is equivalent to an Administrative Region filed with the RTC of Manila a petition
impairment of said contract violative of the Constitution. for the extradition of private respondent. For his part, private
respondent filed, in the same case a petition for bail which
was opposed by petitioner. After hearing on October 8, 2001,
Judge Bernardo, Jr. issued an Order denying the petition for
Art III., Sec.11: Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bail, holding that there is no Philippine law granting bail in
bodies and adequate legal assistance shall not be denied to extradition cases and that private respondent is a high “flight
any person by reason of poverty.

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 77
risk.” Muñoz filed an MR questioning the Order denying his
application for bail. This was granted by subsequent If bail can be granted in deportation cases, we see no
respondent Judge Olalia in an Order dated December 20, 2001 justification why it should not also be allowed in extradition
allowing private respondent to post bail (P750K). cases. Likewise, considering that the UDHR applies to
deportation cases, there is no reason why it cannot be
On December 21, 2001, petitioner government filed an urgent invoked in extradition cases. After all, both are
motion to vacate the above Order, but it was denied by administrative proceedings where the innocence or guilt of
respondent judge. the person detained is not in issue.

Issue: Clearly, the right of a prospective extraditee to apply for bail

W/N trial court committed GAD amounting to lack or excess of in this jurisdiction must be viewed in the light of the various
jurisdiction in admitting private respondent to bail for there is treaty obligations of the Philippines concerning respect for the
nothing in the Constitution or statutory law providing that a promotion and protection of human rights. Under these
potential extraditee has a right to bail, the right being limited treaties, the presumption lies in favor of human liberty. Thus,
solely to criminal proceedings? the Philippines should see to it that the right to liberty of
every individual is not impaired.
Ratio:
Private respondent maintained that the right to bail Obviously, an extradition proceeding, while ostensibly
guaranteed under the Bill of Rights extends to a prospective administrative, bears all earmarks of a criminal process. A
extraditee; and that extradition is a harsh process resulting in potential extraditee may be subjected to arrest, to a
a prolonged deprivation of one’s liberty. prolonged restraint of liberty, and forced to transfer to
the demanding state following the proceedings.
The US v. Purganan ruling (bail granted only to crim “Temporary detention” may be a necessary step in the
proceedings) applies squarely to private respondent’s case. process of extradition, but the length of time of the detention
However, the SC cannot ignore the following trends in should be reasonable. Records show that Munoz had been
international law detained for over two (2) years without having been
convicted of any crime. By any standard, such an
The modern trend in public international law is the extended period of detention is a serious deprivation of his
primacy placed on the worth of the individual person fundamental right to liberty. In fact, it was this prolonged
and the sanctity of human rights. Slowly, the recognition deprivation of liberty which prompted the extradition court to
that the individual person may properly be a subject of grant him bail.
international law is now taking root.
While our extradition law does not provide for the grant of bail
On December 10, 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted to an extraditee, however, there is no provision prohibiting
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in which the right him or her from filing a motion for bail, a right to due process
to life, liberty and all the other fundamental rights of every under the Constitution.
person were proclaimed. While not a treaty, the principles
contained in the said Declaration are now recognized The time-honored principle of pacta sunt servanda demands
as customarily binding upon the members of the that the Philippines honor its obligations under the Extradition
international community. Thus, in Mejoff v. Director of Treaty it entered into with the Hong Kong Special
Prisons, the SC, in granting bail to a prospective Administrative Region. Failure to comply with these
deportee, held that under the Constitution, the obligations is a setback in our foreign relations and defeats
principles set forth in that Declaration are part of the the purpose of extradition. However, it does not necessarily
law of the land. In 1966, the UN General Assembly also mean that in keeping with its treaty obligations, the
adopted the International Covenant on Civil and Political Philippines should diminish a potential extraditee’s rights to
Rights which the Philippines signed and ratified. life, liberty, and due process. More so, where these rights are
guaranteed, not only by our Constitution, but also by
The Philippine authorities are under obligation to make international conventions, to which the Philippines is a party.
available to every person under detention such We should not, therefore, deprive an extraditee of his right to
remedies which safeguard their fundamental right to apply for bail, provided that a certain standard for the grant is
liberty. These remedies include the right to be admitted to satisfactorily met.
bail. While this Court in Purganan limited the exercise of the
right to bail to criminal proceedings, however, in light of the In this case, there is no showing that private respondent
various international treaties giving recognition and protection presented evidence to show that he is not a flight risk.
to human rights, particularly the right to life and liberty, a Consequently, this case should be remanded to the trial court
reexamination of this Court’s ruling in Purganan is in order. to determine whether private respondent may be granted bail
on the basis of “clear and convincing evidence.”
First, we note that the exercise of the State’s power to deprive
an individual of his liberty is not necessarily limited to criminal EXCESSIVE BAIL
proceedings. Respondents in administrative
proceedings, such as deportation and quarantine, have DE LA CAMARA V. ENAGE
likewise been detained.
FACTS:
Second, to limit bail to criminal proceedings would be to close Ricardo de la Camara, Mayor of Magsaysay, Misamis Oriental,
our eyes to our jurisprudential history. Philippine was arrested and detained in Agusan, for his alleged
jurisprudence has not limited the exercise of the right to bail participation in the killing of fourteen and the wounding of
to criminal proceedings only. This Court has admitted to bail twelve other laborers of the Tirador Logging Co., at Agusan
persons who are not involved in criminal proceedings. In fact, del Sur. Thereafter, the Provincial Fiscal of Agusan filed a case
bail has been allowed in this jurisdiction to persons in for multiple frustrated murder and another for multiple
detention during the pendency of administrative murder against petitioner, his co-accused Tagunan and Galgo.
proceedings, taking into cognizance the obligation of Then came an application for bail filed by petitioner with the
the Philippines under international conventions to lower court, premised on the assertion that there was no
uphold human rights. evidence to link him with such fatal incident. At the time of

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 78
the filing ofthe petition, the defense had not presented its RIGHT TO BAIL OF MILITARY PERSONNEL
evidence.
COMENDADOR V. DE VILLA
Respondent Judge issued an order granting de la Camara's
application for bail, admitting failure on the part of the FACTS:
prosecution to prove that de la Camara would flee even if he These four cases have been consolidated involving
had the opportunity,but fixed the amount of the bail bond at officers of the Armed Forces of the Philippines facing
the excessive amount of P1,195,200.00 ( P840,000.00 for the prosecution for alleged participation the failed coup d’etat in
multiple murder and P355,200.00 for multiple frustrated December 1989. Charges against petitioners are violations of
murder). Secretary of Justice, Vicente Abad Santos, upon articles of war: mutiny, conduct unbecoming of an officer and
being informed sent a telegram to Judge stating that the bond a gentlemen, various crimes in relation to murder.
required "is excessive" and suggesting that a
P40,000.00bond, either in cash or property, would be Only the thrid case is relevant to our issue on the
reasonable. right to bail
ISSUE: W/N the amount of for bail is reasonable? Ltc. Jacinto Ligot applied for bail bt General Court
Martial No. 14 denied application. Ligot filed with RTC of QC a
HELD: YES. petition for certiorari with privisional liberty. Judge Asuncion
issued an order granting provisional liberty. General De Villa
Before conviction, every person is bailable except if and Aguirre refused to release him pending final resolution of
charged with capital offenses when the evidence of guilt is appeal on the ground that Judge has no jurisdiction over GMC
strong. Such a right flows from the presumption of innocence 14 and no authority to set aside its ruling denying bail.
in favor of every accused unless his guilt be proved beyond
reasonable doubt. Nevertheless,it is not beyond the realm of
probability that a person charged with a crime, especially ISSUE: W/N soldiers under court martial enjoy the right
where his defense is weak, would make himself scarce and to bail? NO
frustrate the hearing of his case. Thus, a bail is a "mode short W/N denial from military of right to bail violates
of confinement which would, with reasonable certainty, insure equal protection clause? NO.
the attendance of the accused" for the subsequent trial.
HELD:
Where the right to bail exists, it should not be rendered A soldier under court martial does not enjoy the right
nugatory by requiring a sum that is excessive. If the to bail because of the disciplinary structure of the military and
Constitution did not prohibit this, the right to bail becomes because soldiers are allowed the fiduciary right to bear arms
meaningless. The sole permissible function of money bail is to and can cause great havoc. Furthermore, tradition has
assure the accused's presence at trial, and declared that bail recognized the non-existence of the right to bail.
set at a higher figure than an amount reasonably calculated to
fulfill thus purpose is "excessive", Guarantee of equal protection requires equal
treatment only of persons or things similarly situated. Officers
Therefore, that fixing the amount of P1,195,200.00 as the bail cannot say that they have been discriminated against
is clearly violative of the Constitution. Under the because they are not allowed the same rights extended to
circumstances, there being only two offenses charged, the civilians. They may only complain if they are denied bail and
amount required as bail could not possibly exceed P50,000.00 other members of the military are not.
for the information for murder and P25,000.00 for the other
information for frustrated murder. Nor should it be ignored in
this case that the Department of Justice did recomend the Art III., Sec. 15: The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
total sum of P40,000.00 for the two offenses. shall not be suspended except in cases of invasion or
rebellion, when the public safety requires it.
Guidelines in the fixing of bail:
(1) ability of the accused to give bail Art III., Sec 16: All persons shall have the right to a speedy
(2) nature of the offense disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or
(3) penalty for the offense charged administrative bodies.
(4) character and reputation of the accused
(5) health of the accused RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIAL
(6) character and strength of the evidence
(7) probability of the accused appearing in trial
Binay
(8) forfeiture of other bonds
(9) whether the accused wasa fugitive from justice when
arrested
(10) if the accused is under bond for appearance at trial in GUIANI V SANDIGANBAYAN DIGEST
other cases
FACTS:
Discretion is with the court to rule upon the question After the creation of the Autonomous Region for Muslim
of bail. We must stress, however, that where conditions Mindanao (ARMM), the regional Department of Public Works
imposed upon a defendant seeking bail would amount to a and Highways (DPWH-ARMM) began the implementation of
refusal and render nugatory the constitutional right to bail, SC regional, provincial and district impact projects. Commission
will not hesitate to exercise our supervisory powers to provide on Audit-Special Audit Office (COA-SAO) conducted a physical
the required remedy. There is grim irony in an accused being inspection of the impact projects and found several
told that he has a right to bail but at the same time being irregularities therein. This is what they found:
required to post such an exorbitant sum. • In Cotabato-Lanao Road, the contractors bloated the
accomplishment reports, resulting in an overpayment
However, because petitoner escaped from jail, no by the government of P4,164,000.00, and concealed
ruling can be had on his plea to nullify the Judges order. the negative slippage incurred by said contractors
• mobilizations fees advanced to contractors

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 79
amounting to P15,798,675.00 remained unrecouped, when otherwise expressly so provided by law, may be
when these were supposed to be deducted from waived
contractors’ progress billings
• the government made an advance payment of Art. III, Sec. 17: No person shall be compelled to be a
P13,520,000.00 and P880,000.00 in the form of witness against himself.
prepayment of aggregate sub-base course, which
was not among the items allowed under a pre-
payment scheme RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION
• Awang Nuro Road, the COA-SAO found that the
surveys and designs for the project were prepared U.S. v. Navarro
and submitted seven months after the bidding, in
violation of Presidential Decree No. 1594 which Facts: Navarro, de Leon, Feliciano (a.k.a. BULAG) were
requires that no bidding or award shall be conducted charged with the crime of illegal detention. In November 1902
unless the detailed engineering surveys and designs they went to the house of FELIX PUNSALAN in Bulacan and
have been made kidnapped him with force and violence with revolvers and
• an engineering survey contract for the centerline daggers. They have not given any information as to his
relocation and profiling of the Cotabato-Lanao Road, whereabouts and if they set him at liberty. They pleaded not
which cost P200,000.00, was unnecessary because it guilty. 3 witnesses of prosecution:
was entered into seven months after the notices to
proceed were issued to the contractors. 1. Teodoro Pangan – servant of Punsalan who was
On December 8, 1992, Office of the President asked the awakened by the barking of dogs that night. Some people
Ombudsman to conduct a preliminary investigation. Regional were outside and asked Punsalan to go outside and after
officials of Cotabato City and DPWH-ARMM were charged for Punsalan did, he never returned inside and had not seen him
violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices. since.
After a few years….
Petitioners come back on certiorari (their motion to quash was 2. Gregorio Mendoza – he was kidnapped also by 7
denied), along with this issue: men. He, Punsalan, and others were hung to a tree and asked
to surrender their weapons. They freed Mendoza but kept
ISSUE: w/n the delay of almost six (6) years to resolve the Punsalan and Mendoza had not seen Punsalan since that
preliminary investigation violated the accused’s rights to due night.
process and to a speedy disposition of the cases filed against
them.
3. Flaviano Punsalan – brother of Felix Punsalan. He
HELD: NO heard Navarro tell the superintendent that he (Navarro) did
kidnap Punsalan. He said Punsalan died after a week since he
RATIO: was kidnapped because of the ill treatment he received.
Because of the complexity of the transactions complained of
which were contained in a two-page report from the COA, the Lower court sentenced them to life imprisonment because
Graft Investigation Officer (GIO) sought further substantiation Article 481 of the Penal Code (not yet “revised” penal code
of the allegations therein and requested for the complete cos this was 1904) says that whoever illegal detains another
report of the COA Special Audit Office. The authenticated SAO will be punished with prision mayor. BUT second paragraph of
Report No. 93-04 was received by the GIO on November 16, Art. 483 says that if he doesn’t say his whereabouts or prove
1994. It was only then that the GIO required all forty-one that he set the person illegally detained free, he will be
respondents to file their counter-affidavits. sentenced to LIFE IMPRISONMENT. (Note: Art. 481-483 were
Most of the respondents, including some of petitioners herein, about illegal detention and the penalties)
moved for extensions of time. All the counter-affidavits were
received in August 1995, owing to the number of Issue: Does Article 483 violate the constitutional provision by
respondents. Thereafter, the COA filed reply-affidavits on causing a defendant to be a witness against himself?
February 24, 1996 and May 29, 1996. It was only after the
submission of the last pleading, i.e., the reply-affidavits, that Held: YES. They were still held guilty of illegal detention but
the preliminary investigation can be said to have been sentence was 18 years.
concluded.
Ratio:
In the application of the constitutional guaranty of the right to
speedy disposition of cases, particular regard must be taken The burden is put on the defendant to give evidence on the
of the facts and circumstances peculiar to each case. Well- whereabouts of the victim or proof that he was set free in
settled is the rule that the right to a speedy disposition of case he wants to lower his penalty. This amounts to a
cases, like the right to a speedy trial, is deemed violated only confession that the defendant unlawfully detained the person.
when the proceeding is attended by vexatious, capricious, and
oppressive delay. In the determination of whether or not that The constitutional proscription was established on broad
right has been violated, the factors that may be considered grounds of public policy and humanity; of policy because it
and balanced are: would place the witness against the strongest temptation to
commit perjury, and of humanity because it would be to extort
• the length of delay,
a confession of truth by a kind of duress every species and
• the reasons for such delay,
degree of which the law abhors.
• the assertion or failure to assert such right by the
accused,
• and the prejudice caused by the delay
United States v Tan Teng
Also, petitioners raised their objections to the perceived delay
PONENTE: Johnson
in the resolution of the complaints against them only on
September 27, 1999, when they filed their Omnibus Motion
FACTS:
with the Sandiganbayan. The right to a speedy trial as well as
- On September 15, 1910, tan Teng forced himself
other rights conferred by the Constitution or statute, except

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 80
upon Oliva Pacomio, a girl 7 years of age guaranty, that no person shall be compelled in any criminal
- A week later, Olivia’ case to be a witness against himself, is limited to a prohibition
- While in jail, a certain substance was taken from the against compulsory testimonial self-incrimination. The
body of the accused. It was examined and found that he had corollary to the proposition is that, an ocular inspection of the
gonorrhea. This evidence was presented in Court. body of the accused is permissible. The proviso is that torture
of force shall be avoided. Whether facts fall within or without
ISSUE: the rule with its corollary and proviso must, of course, be
- W/N admitting such evidence violates the provision decided as cases arise.
against self-incrimination 2. It is a reasonable presumption that in an examination by
reputable and disinterested physicians due care will be taken
HELD: not to use violence and not to embarass the patient any more
- No, it is not a violation of the Constitutional provision than is absolutely necessary. Indeed, no objection to the
against self-incrimination physical examination being made by the family doctor of the
accused or by doctor of the same sex can be seen.
RATIO: 3. Although the order of the trial judge, acceding to the
- The accused was not compelled to make any request of the assistant fiscal for an examination of the
admissions or answer any questions, and the mere fact that person of the defendant by physicians was phrased in
an object found on his person was examined, seems no more absolute terms, it should, nevertheless, be understood as
to infringe the rule invoked, than would the introduction in subject to the limitations herein mentioned, and therefore
evidence of stolen property taken from the person of a thief. legal.
- The prohibition of compelling a man in a criminal
court to be a witness against himself, is a prohibition of the
use of physical or moral compulsion, to extort BELTRAN v. SAMSON and JOSE
communications from him, not an exclusion of his body as FACTS:
evidence, when it may be material. This is a petition for a writ of prohibition, wherein the
- The prohibition contained in the Constitution (then petitioner complains that the respondent judge ordered him to
Section 5 of the Philippine Bill) is simply a prohibition against appear before the provincial fiscal to take dictation in his own
legal process to extract from the defendant’s own lips. Against handwriting from the latter.
his will, an admission of his own guilt. The order was given upon petition of said fiscal for the
purpose of comparing the petitioner's handwriting and
determining whether or not it is he who wrote certain
US v. Ong Siu Hong documents supposed to be falsified.
The fiscal under section 1687 of the Administrative Code, and
Minimal Facts: (it’s a half page case) the proper judge, upon motion of the fiscal, may compel
witnesses to be present at the investigation of any crime or
Issue: misdemeanor. But this power must be exercised without
Was the accused compelled to be a witness against himself prejudice to the constitutional rights of persons cited to
when he was forced to discharge the morphine from his appear.
mouth? NO The petitioner, in refusing to perform what the fiscal
demanded, seeks refuge in the constitutional provision
Doctrine: contained in the Jones Law and incorporated in General
The main purpose of the constitutional provision agaisnt Orders, No. 58.
compelling a peson in any criminal case to be a witness As to the extent of the privilege, it should be noted first of all,
against himself is to probit testimonial compulsion by oral that the English text of the Jones Law, which is the original
examination in order to extort uwilling confessions from one, reads as follows: "Nor shall be compelled in any criminal
prisonerd implicating them in the commission of the crime. case to be a witness against himself."
As to its scope, this privilege is not limited precisely to
testimony, but extends to all giving or furnishing of evidence.
Villaflor v. Summers The rights intended to be protected by the constitutional
Facts: provision that no man accused of crime shall be compelled to
- In a criminal case pending before the CFI of Manila, be a witness against himself is so sacred. Hence, there is the
Emeteria Villaflor and Florentino Souingco are well-established doctrine that the constitutional inhibition is
charged with the crime of adultery. directed not merely to giving of oral testimony, but embraces
- Upon the petition of the assistant fiscal, the court as well the furnishing of evidence by other means than by
ordered the defendant Emeteria Villaflor the word of mouth, the divulging, in short, of any fact which the
petitioner herein, to submit her body to the accused has a right to hold secret.
examination of one or two competent doctors to ISSUE:
determine if she was pregnant or not. Can petitioner be compelled to produce a sample of his
- The accused refused to obey the order on the handwriting to be used as evidence in a prosecution against
ground that such examination of her person was a him?
violation of the constitutional provision relating to HELD & RATIO:
self-incrimination. NO.
- Thereupon she was found in contempt of court and A person may not be compelled to furnish a specimen of his
was ordered to be committed to Bilibid Prison until handwriting except when he voluntarily offers to write. The
she should permit the medical examination required privilege not to give self-incriminating evidence, while
by the court. absolute when claimed, may be waived by any one entitled to
Issue/Held: invoke it.
- Whether the compelling of a woman to permit her In the case at bar, the petitioner refuses to do so and has
body to be examined by physicians to determine if even constituted these prohibition proceedings that he may
she is pregnant, violates the self-incrimination not be compelled.
clause? No. Writing is something more than moving the body, or the
Ratio: hands, or the fingers; writing is not a purely mechanical act,
1. Once again we lay down the rule that the constitutional because it requires the application of intelligence and

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 81
attention; and in the case at bar writing means that the Chavez v. Court of Appeals
petitioner herein is to furnish a means to determine whether
or not he is the falsifier, as the petition of the respondent Facts:
fiscal clearly states. Except that it is more serious, we believe Roger Chavez along with 9 other people including actor
the present case is similar to that of producing documents or Romeo Vasquez (Ricardo Sumilang in real Life) and Luis
chattels in one's possession. “baby” Asistio (former Mayor of Caloocan) were accused of
The production of documents or chattels by a person (whether QUALIFIED THEFT for a Thunderbird Car owned by Dy Sun
ordinary witness or party-witness) in response to a subpoena, Hiok y Lim. Romeo Vasquez expressed his interest in buying a
or to a motion to order production, or to other form of process Thunderbird car and so when Chavez saw one Thunderbird car
treating him as a witness ( i.e. as a person appearing before a he approached the driver and asked if it was for sale. The
tribunal to furnish testimony on his moral responsibility for person driving Johnson Lee, who is the cousin of owner Dy Sun
truthtelling), may be refused under the protection of the Hiok y Lim said that it was. Chavez informed Vasquez about
privilege; and this is universally conceded. the car but Vasquez said that he was no interested in a
We say that, for the purposes of the constitutional privilege, Thunderbird and instead he wanted to mortgage his Buick car
there is a similarity between one who is compelled to produce to pay for his indebtedness. This is when they went to Asisitio
a document, and one who is compelled to furnish a specimen who lends money on car mortgages. Asistio however had
of his handwriting, for in both cases, the witness is required to another idea on how they can make money, which involves
furnish evidence against himself. trickery. They were going to present Vasquez as a wealthy
The present case is even more serious than that of compelling actor as the interested buyer and after the deed of sale would
the production of documents or chattels, because here the be signed they would take the car without payment. These 3
witness is compelled to write and create, by means of the act met up at Highway 54 (edsa) with Lee. They were at Eugene’s
of writing, evidence which does not exist, and which may restaurant. When all the papers were signed Vasquez
identify him as the falsifier. received a not from someone that his money was ready for
pick up at Dalisay Theater. Vasquez then requested Lee to
exhibit the deed of sale to the note bearer. Chavez and
Bermudez v. Castillo Vasquez then disappeared from the restaurant and when the
two Chinese went outside they could not find the car
FACTS: anymore. The registration of the car was then transferred to
In the course of the investigation which was being conducted the name of Asistio after he gave Vasquez his share of the
by the office of the Solicitor-General against the respondent, transaction. (OK THE ISSUE IS REALLY NOT HERE HAHA it’s
in connection with this administrative case, said respondent during the trial coz its right against self-incrimination nga.)
filed, 6 letters as Exhibits 32, 34- 37. He contends that the 6 During the trial the Fiscal called Chavez as the prosecution’s
letters are the complainant's, but complainant denied it first witness. Chavez’s lawyer, Atty. Carbon, was surprised
while she was testifying as a witness in rebuttal. She that his client was being called without him being notified.
admitted, however, that the letters marked as Exhibits 38- 40 Atty. Carbon asked if they were making Chavez a stae witness
were in her own handwriting. Believed that the 3 letters but the Fiscal said that they were not and so Atty. Carbon
admitted by the complainant to be hers were insufficient for objected to his client being called as a witness because it will
purposes of comparison with those questioned in this case, he incriminate him. Chavez said that he would not testify after
required her to copy them in her own handwriting in the Carbon explained to him the consequences of his confession
presence of the investigator. The complainant, upon advice of but the Judge said that what Chavez will testify to does not
her attorney, refused to submit to the trial, invoking her right necessarily incriminate him and there is the right of the
not to incriminate herself and alleging that Exhibits 38- 40 and prosecution to ask anybody to act as a witness on the witness
the other letters already in the respondent's possession, were stand including the accused.
more than sufficient for what he proposed to do.
The investigator, upholding the complainant, did not compel Issue: whether or not it was right for the judge to require the
her to submit to the trial required, thereby denying the accused to take the witness-stand taking into account the
respondent's petition. Hence, this proceeding praying that the right of the prosecution to call anybody into the witness stand.
investigator and the Solicitor-General be ordered to require NO
and compel the complainant to furnish new specimens of her Ratio: The right against self-incrimination is mandatory and its
handwriting by Exhibits 32-37. fundamental to the scheme of justice. The court may not
ISSUE: extract from a defendant’s own lips and against his will an
W/N complainant is entitled to the privilege against self- admission of his guilt. It is his right to remain silent unless je
incrimination chooses to take the witness stand. Compulsion does not
HELD: Yes (Same ratio for Beltran vs. Samson) necessarily connote violence. When Chavez was asked to take
It was not the complainant but the respondent who offered the stand he was peremptorily asked to create evidence
the letters (Exhibits 32 to 37) in evidence. The complainant against himself. Chavez, as accused occupies a different tier
was presented in rebuttal and she simply denied having from an ordinary witness. While an ordinary witness may be
written the letters. She should not be made to furnish the compelled to take the witness stand and accused may refuse
other party evidence by which to destroy her own testimony to take the stand and answer all questions. Thus it was
under circumstances which tend to incriminate her. She was undoubtedly erroneous for the judge to placate the petitioner
not even presented by the respondent as his own witness. Trivia: Romeo Vasquez is the father in-law of Albert Martinez
There are already in evidence letters written by the and Luis Asistio is the husband of Nadia Montenegro.
complainant and admitted by her to be genuine. The purpose
then of respondent's counsel can be attained without
extracting from the witness herself evidence which would Cabal v. Kapunan
subject her to punishment for a felony (perjury).
The proper place in which to claim the privilege is in the trial Facts:
court, when the question is propounded. Complainant Col. Jose C. Maristela of the Philippine Army filed a letter-
correctly and opportunely invoked the privilege when it was complaint charging petitioner Manuel F. Cabal, then Chief of
desired to subject her to trial by copying the six letters in Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, with graft, corrupt
question, practices, unexplained wealth, conduct unbecoming of an
officer and gentlemen, dictatorial tendencies, giving false
statements of his assets and liabilities in 1958 and other

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 82
equally reprehensible acts. The President created a proceeding for forfeiture while administrative in character
committee to investigate the charge of said unexplained thus possesses a criminal or penal aspect. In this case, the
wealth and submit its reports and recommendations. The petitioner would be disadvantaged for he would suffer the
committee ordered Cabal to take the witness stand and be revocation of his license as a medical practitioner, for some
sworn to as witness for Maristela, in support of his charge of an even greater deprivation that forfeiture of property.
unexplained wealth. Cabal objected, invoking his
constitutional right against self-incrimination. Board mistakenly assumes that the constitutional provision
guarantee should be limited to allowing a witness to object to
Issue: W/N the proceeding before the aforementioned questions the answers to which could lead to a penal liability
Committee is civil or criminal in character. being subsequently incurred. But the constitutional guarantee
protects as well the right to silence and the right not to take
Held: Criminal the witness stand. It is the right of the defendant to
forego testimony, to remain silent, unless he chooses
Rationale: to take the witness stand – with undiluted, unfettered
The accused in a criminal case may refuse not only to answer exercise of his own free genuine will. While the truth
incriminatory questions, but, also, to take the witness stand. must be revealed, such desirable objectives should not be
The purpose of the charge against petitioner is to apply the accomplished according to means or methods offensive to the
provisions of the Anti-Graft Law, which authorizes the high sense of respect accorded the human personality.
forfeiture to the State of property of a public officer or
employee which is manifestly out of proportion to his salary as
such public officer or employee and his other lawful income Galman v Pamaran
and the income from legitimately acquired property. Such (mother of deceased Galman) v (presiding Justices of
forfeiture has been held to partake of the nature of a penalty. Sandiganbayan)
As a consequence, proceedings for forfeiture of property are
deemed criminal or penal, and hence the exemption of (Ninoy Assasination Case)
defendants in a criminal case from the obligation to be
witnesses against themselves is applicable thereto. FACTS:
No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to PD 1886 was promulgated creating an ad hoc Fact Finding
be a witness against himself. This prohibition against Board (Agrava Board) to investigate the assassination of Sen.
compelling a person to take the stand as a witness against Benigno Aquino. The board conducted hearings, invited
himself applies only to criminal, quasi-criminal, and penal witnesses and admitted evidence presented to it. Among the
proceedings, including a proceeding civil in form for forfeiture witnesses invited were private respondents Gen. Fabian Ver,
of property by reason of the commission of an offense, but not Major Gen. Olivas, Sgt Martinez, Sgt. Fernandez, Sgt Mojica,
a proceeding in which the penalty recoverable is civil or Sgt Torio, Sgt Bona and AIC Acupido. The Chairman of the
remedial in nature. Board, Justice Corazon Agrava submitted to President the
The privilege of a witness not to incriminate himself is not findings of the investigation., which later on was turned over
infringed by merely asking the witness a question which he to the Tanodbayan for appropriate action. TanodBayan filed 2
refuses to answer. The privilege is simply an option of refusal, informations for murder in the Sandiganbayan: one for the
and not a prohibition of inquiry. However, where the position killing of Ninoy and the other for the killing of Rolando Galman
of the witness is virtually that of an accused on trial, it would – who was found dead on the airport tarmac not far from
appear that he may invoke the privilege in support of a Ninoy. Private respondents were charged as accessories,
blanket refusal to answer any and all questions. along with several principals, and one accomplice.

* Right Against Self-Incrimination is available: Tanodbayan offered as part of its evidence the
1) criminal cases testimonies given by private respondents before the Agrava
2) civil cases Board. Private Respondents objected to the admission of
3) administrative cases evidence contending that its admission will be in derogation of
 as long as the penalty is penal in nature. their Constitutional right against self incrimination.
Respondent Sandiganbayan admitted all evidence presented
except the testimonies given before the board, hence this
petition for Certiorari.
Pascual, Jr. v. Board of Medical Examiners
ISSUE:
Facts: W/N the testimonies given by the 8 respondents
At the initial hearing of Arsenio Pascual, Jr.’s administrative before the Agrava board is admissible in evidence before the
case for alleged immorality, counsel for complainants SandiganBayan? NO
announced that his first witness would be Pascual, who was W/N the right to remain silent is available only to a
the respondent in such malpractice charge. Petitioner person undergoing custodial interrogation? NO
objected, relying on the constitutional right to be exempt from
being a witness against himself. RATIO:
The Agrava Board came into existence in response to
Issue: public clamor for an impartial and independent body instead
• W/N the Board of Examiners was guilty of grave of ordinary police agency. In the course of receiving
abuse of discretion for failure to respect the evidence, persons summoned would not only include
constitutional right against self-incrimination witnesses but also suspects. Sec. 5 of P.D. 1886 denies
them the right to remain silent. They were compelled
Held: to testify against themselves. They have to take the
Respondent Board is prohibited from compelling Pascual to witness stand under pain of contempt if they refuse.
act and testify as a witness for the complainant without his Jurisprudence provides that a person detained for the
consent and against himself. The self-incrimination clause commission of an offense undergoing an investigation has a
must be given a liberal and broad interpretation favorable to right to be informed of his right to remain silent, to counsel,
the person invoking it. It also extends to administrative and to an admonition that any and all statements to be given
proceedings which possess a criminal or penal aspect. The by him may be used against him. Covers “confessions” and

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 83
“admissions” Right to remain silent and right against self- of the immunity granted by P.D. 1886 cannot be made to
incrimination is not only limited in favor of an accused in a depend on a claim of the privilege against self-incrimination
criminal case but also applies to other cases as well. which the same law practically strips away from the witness.
Since the immunity is assumed it follows that their
In light of the awesome contempt power of the testimony cannot be used against them.
Agrava Board and Section 5 of P.D. 1886, the Court is not
persuaded that the private respondents voluntarily waived
their constitutional rights not to be compelled to witness Sabio v. Gordon
against themselves much less their right to remain silent.
FACTS:
2 kinds of immunity President Corazon Aquino issued E.O.1 creating the
1.) use immunity – prohibits use of witness’ compelled Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG).
testimony and its fruit in any Section 4(b) of E.O. 1 provides that: “No member or staff of
manner in connection with the criminal the Commission shall be required to testify, or produce
prosecution of the witness evidence in any judicial, legislative or administrative
proceeding concerning matters within its official cognizance.”
2.) transactional immunity – grants immunity to the witness Senator Miriam Defense Santiago directed an inquiry
from prosecution for an in aid of legislation on the anomalous losses incurred by the
offense to which his compelled testimony relates POTC, PHILCOMSAT, and PHC.
Senator Richard Gordon invited PCGG Chairman
P.D 1886 falls under the first immunity. It grants merely Camilo Sabio to be one of the resource persons in the public
immunity from use of any statement given before the Board, meeting jointly conducted by the Committee on Government
but not immunity from prosecution by reason or on the basis Corporations and Public Enterprises (CGCPE) and Committee
thereof. Merely testifying and/or producing evidence do not on Public Services (CPS).
render the witness immuned from prosecution Chairman Sabio declined the invitation.
notwithstanding his invocation of the right against self- Senator Gordon issued a Subpoena Ad Testificandum
incrimination. He is merely saved from the use against him of requiring Commissioner Sabio to appear in the public hearing.
such statement and nothing more. Stated otherwise ... he still Chairman Sabio refused to appear.
runs the risk of being prosecuted even if he sets up his right Another notice requiring Chairman Sabio to appear
against self- incrimination. and testify on the same subject matter. Chairman Sabio did
not comply with the notice and sent a letter.
SEC. 5. No person shall be excused from attending and Unconvinced, CGCPE and CPS directed the Senate
testifying or from producing books, records, correspondence, Segeant-At-Arms to place Chairman Sabio and his
documents, or other evidence in obedience to a subpoena Commissioners under arrest for contempt of the Senate. The
issued by the Board on the ground that his testimony or the Order bears the approval of Senate President Villar and the
evidence required of him may tend to incriminate him or majority of the Committee’s members.
subject him to penalty or forfeiture; but his testimony or any Chairman Sabio was arrested in his office in
evidence produced by him shall not be used against him in Mandaluyong City and was brought to the Senate premises
connection with any transaction, matter or thing concerning where he was detained.
which he is compelled, after having invoked his privilege
against self-incrimination, to testify or produce evidence, ISSUE:
except that such individual so testifying shall not be exempt Whether the Senate violated the right against self-
from prosecution and punishment for perjury committed in so incrimination?
testifying, nor shall he be exempt from demotion or removal
from office. RULING:
The right against self-incrimination may be invoked
SEC. 4. The Board may hold any person in direct or indirect by the said directors and officer of PHILCOMSAT only when the
contempt, and impose appropriate penalties therefor. A incriminating question is being asked, since they have no way
person guilty of .... including ... refusal to be sworn or to of knowing in advance the nature or effect of the questions to
answer as a witness or to subscribe to an affidavit or be asked of them.
deposition when lawfully required to do so may be summarily In addition, the Senate Committees have sufficient
adjudged in direct contempt by the Board. ... Rules to guide them when the right against self-incrimination
is invoked.
the strong testimonial compulsion imposed by Section 5 of The constitutional rights of witnesses will be
P.D. 1886 viewed in the light of the sanctions provided in respected by the Senate Committees, it is their duty to
Section 4,infringes upon the witness' right against self- cooperate with them in their efforts to obtain the facts needed
incrimination. As a rule, such infringement of the for intelligent legislative action. The unremitting obligation of
constitutional right renders inoperative the testimonial every citizen is to respond to subpoenae, to respect the
compulsion, meaning, the witness cannot be compelled to dignity of the congress and its committees, and to testify fully
answer UNLESS a co-extensive protection in the form of with respect to matters within the realm of proper
IMMUNITY is offered. Hence, under the oppressive compulsion investigation.
of P.D. 1886, immunity must in fact be offered to the witness
before he can be required to answer, so as to safeguard his Art III Sec 18:
sacred constitutional right. But in this case, the compulsion 1) No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political
has already produced its desired results the private beliefs and aspirations.
respondents had all testified without offer of immunity. Their 2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a
constitutional rights are therefore, in jeopardy. The only way punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been
to cure the law of its unconstitutional effects is to construe it duly convicted.
in the manner as if IMMUNITY had in fact been offered. We
hold, therefore, that in view of the potent sanctions imposed
on the refusal to testify or to answer questions under Sec. 4 of Art III Sec 19:
P.D. 1886, the testimonies compelled thereby are deemed 1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading
immunized under Section 5 of the same law. The applicability or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 84
be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous should only be imposed where the crime was murder.
crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death
penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion ISSUE: Is the death penalty cruel and unusual punishment?
perpetua. SC: NO. VALID LAW.
2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading
punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of The penalty is neither cruel, unjust nor excessive. In the US
substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman case of Kemmler, it was held that punishments are cruel when
conditions shall be dealt with by law. they involve torture or a lingering death. It implies there
something inhuman, barbarous, something more than the
extinguishment of life. It is degrading if it involves public
CRUEL, DEGRADING OR INHUMAN PUNISHMENT, ESCESSIVE humiliation. The severity is not sufficient, but must be
FINES disproportionate to the crime committed. Excessiveness is
measured by 1) seriousness of the crime, 2) policy of the
People v Estoista legislative, 3) perversity of the accused.

Facts: The issue in Furman vs. Georgia is not so much the death
Aleberto Estoista took his father’s gun to shoot wild chickens. penalty itself, but the arbitrariness pervading the procedures
They lived in a cogon (some sort of tall grass) plantation. by which the death penalty was imposed by the jury. The
When Alberto fired his gun he accidentally fired at Diragon Furman case did not outlaw death penalty because it was
Dima, a plantation laborer. He was convicted of himicide cruel and unusual per se. It was nullified because the
through reckless imprudence and illegal possession of discretion in which the statute vested in trial judges and
firearms. He was sentenced to one year imprisonment but the sentencing juries was uncontrolled and without any
law requires that the punishment be 5-10 years. parameters, guidelines, or standards. (There was apparently a
discrimination against the accused who was black.)
Issue:
1) Did the court err in lowering the sentence of Alberto, With regard to the case of Coker vs. Georgia, the SC held
believeing that thr punishment provided by law was that this case has no bearing on Philippine experience and
cruel? YES culture. Such a premise is in fact an ennobling of the biblical
2) Is the punishment required by law for Illegal notion of retributive justice of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a
possession of Firearms (5-10 years) cruel or tooth". But, the forfeiture of life simply because life was taken,
excessive? NO never was a defining essence of the death penalty in the
context of our legal history and cultural experience; rather,
Ruling: Recommend to the president to commute his sentence the death penalty is imposed in heinous crimes because the
to 6 months. perpetrators thereof have committed unforgivably execrable
acts that have so deeply dehumanized a person or criminal
Ratio: acts with severely destructive effects, and because they have
5-10 years for illegal possession of firearms is not cruel or so caused irreparable and substantial injury to both their
unusual because of the prevalent conditions which the law victim and the society and a repetition of their acts would
proposes to curb pose actual threat to the safety of individuals and the survival
of government, they must be permanently prevented from
Nevertheless, the court cannot but mpose upon the offender doing so.
the minimum at leas of the penalty provided. In this case,
considering the degree of malice of the defendant, application The court also emphasized that under the Constitution, the
of the law to its full extent would be too harsh, and Congress has the power to reimpose the death penalty for
recommendation to the president was made to reduce his compelling reasons, involving heinous crimes. Congress can
sentece. define or describe what is meant by the word heinous crimes,
and can specify which crimes would qualify as heinous. Thus,
Doctrine: the court should not be the venue for debates regarding the
Prohibition against the inflcition of cruel and unusual morality or propriety of the death sentence because the law
punishment applies both to the form of the penalty and the itself already provided for specific and well defined criminal
duration of imprisonment. acts.

RA 7659 already sufficiently defined what are heinous crimes

PEOPLE VS. ECHEGARAY – crimes punished with death are those that are grievous,
right against cruel and unusual punishment odious, and hateful by reason of inherent viciousness, atrocity
and perversity, those that are repugnant and outrageous to
• Echegaray charged and convicted with raping his 10 year common standards of norms and decency and morality in a
old daughter. He was sentenced to death pursuant to just, civilized and ordered society. They also include crimes
RA7659, which was the law at the time of commission of which are despicable because life is callously taken, or the
crime. victim is treated as an animal or dehumanized.
• In appealing the conviction, it raised the constitutionality
of the Death Penalty Law as being severe and excessive, There is also another concept of the degree of punishment: 
cruel and unusual in violation of the constitution. that you may NOT punish a person for what he is, but punish
only what he has done. (ex. drug addicts)
• He invokes the ruling in Furman vs. Georgia wherein
the US Supreme Court categorically ruled that death
Art III Sec 20: No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-
penalty is cruel and degrading.
payment of a poll tax.
• He also argues that death is an excessive and cruel
punishment for a crime of rape because there is no taking IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT
of life in rape. He invokes the ruling in Coker vs.
Georgia which said that while rape deserves serious
punishment, it should not involve the taking of human LOZANO VS. MARTINEZ
life. In rape, life is not over for the victim. Death penalty non-imprisonment for debt / non-payment of poll tax (cedula)

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 85
ATTATCHMENT OF JEOPARDY
• The petitioners, being charged with BP 22, assail the
statute’s constitutionality. People v. Ylagan
• BP 22 punishes a person "who makes or draws and issues
any check on account or for value, knowing at the time of FACTS:
issue that he does not have sufficient funds in or credit Elisea Ylagan was charged with serious physical injuries. In
with the drawee bank for the payment of said check in full arraignemnt, pleaded not gulty. The case, however, was
upon presentment, The penalty prescribed is dismissed. Counsel for Ylagan though did not inform her. After
imprisonment of not less than 30 days nor more than one 11 days another complaint was filed against her for the same
year or a fine or not less than the amount of the check offense. In arraignement, she entered a plea of double
nor more than double said amount, but in no case to jeopardy.
exceed P200,000.00, or both such fine and imprisonment
at the discretion of the court. ISSUE:
• Petitioners insist that since the offense under BP 22 is Was there double jeopardy? YES
consummated only upon the dishonor or non-payment of
the check when it is presented to the drawee bank, the Doctrine:
statute is really a "bad debt law" rather than a "bad check The follwing conditions must be present when invoking DJ:
law." What it punishes is the non-payment of the check, 1) In a court of competent jurisdiction
not the act of issuing it. The statute, it is claimed, is 2) Upon a valid complaint or information
nothing more than a veiled device to coerce payment of a 3) After he has been arraigned
debt under the threat of penal sanction. 4) After he has been pleased to the information

SC: LAW VALID. TERMINATION OF JEOPARDY

The constitutional prohibition against imprisonment for debt is
a safeguard that evolved gradually during the early part of the
nineteenth century which permitted creditors to cause the Bulaong v. People
incarceration of debtors who could not pay their debts.
Facts:
The gravamen of the offense punished by BP 22 is the act of Bulaong was charged in CFI Laguna of rebellion. He was also
making and issuing a worthless check or a check that is charged in CFI Manila for violating the Anti-subversion act.
dishonored upon its presentation for payment. It is not the The information filed separately in these acts were similar.
non-payment of an obligation which the law punishes. Both claimed that he was a member of the Huks and he
The law is not intended or designed to coerce a debtor to pay wnding has an organizer and leader. CFI Laguna decided in
his debt. The thrust of the law is to prohibit, under pain of the case of rebellion finding him guilty. The CFI Manila case
penal sanctions, the making of worthless checks and putting against him is still pending. He appeals to CA so that he may
them in circulation. Because of its deleterious effects on the use DJ as a defense. CA affirms the decision of CFI Laguna
public interest, the practice is proscribed by the law. The law
punishes the act not as an offense against property, Issue:
but an offense against public order. Can Bulaong use DJ as a defense in view of the CFI Manila
case? NO
It may be unconstitutional for the legislature to penalize a
person for non-payment of a debt ex contractu. But certainly Ratio:
it is within the prerogative of the lawmaking body to proscribe Rules of court section 9 rule 113 states that the defense of DJ
certain acts deemed pernicious and inimical to public welfare. can be availed by the accused only where he was either
BP 22 is a declaration by the legislature that, as a matter of convicted or acquitted or the case was dismissed or otherwise
public policy, the making and issuance of a worthless check is terminated without his consent. Such is not the situation in
deemed a public nuisance to be abated by the imposition of this case in CFI Laguna (Anti-subversion) for he has not been
penal sanctions. (valid exercise of police power) It had been convicted nor acuqitted nor was the case terminated nor
reported that the approximate value of bouncing checks per dimissed. It is the conviction, acquittal of the accused or
day was close to 200 million pesos, and thereafter when dismissal or termination of the case that bars further
overdrafts were banned by the Central Bank, it averaged prosecution for the same offense (in any stage).
between 50 million to 80 million pesos a day. 26
RULE ON SUPERVENING FACTS
Checks have the element of certainty or assurance that the
instrument will be paid upon presentation. For this reason, MELO VS. PEOPLE
checks have become widely accepted as a medium of rule on supervening fact – DJ
payment in trade and commerce. Although not legal tender,
checks have come to be perceived as convenient substitutes 1. Melo was charged with frustrated homicide, for
for currency in commercial and financial transactions. The injuring Obillo with a kitchen knife. The accused
basis or foundation of such perception is confidence. If such suffered serious wounds requiring medical attention
confidence is haken, the usefulness of checks as currency for more than 30 days.
substitutes would be greatly diminished or may become nil. 2. He pleaded not guilty.
Any practice therefore tending to destroy that confidence 3. Subsequently, the victim died from the wounds.
should be deterred, for the proliferation of worthless checks 4. An amended information was filed charging him with
can only create havoc in trade circles and the banking consummated homicide.
community. 5. Melo filed a MTD alleging DJ.

Art III Sec 21: No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of ISSUE: Is the defense of DJ proper?
punishment for the same offense. If an act is punished by a SC: NO.
law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either The amended information should stand. It was proper for the
shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act. court to dismiss the first information and order the filing of a
new one for the reason that the proper offense was not
charged in the first and that the second did not place the

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 86
accused in second jeopardy for the same or identical offense.
Issue:
When a person is charged with an offense and the case is W/N there is a supervening event. No
terminated either by acquittal or conviction, or in any other
matter without the consent of the accused, he cannot again Ratio:
be charged with the same or identical offense. It must be The rule in supervening events is that where after the first
noticd that the protection for this constitutional prohibition is prosecution a new fact supervenes for which the defendant is
against a SECOND JEOPARDY FOR THE SAME OFFENSE, the responsible, which changes the character of the offense and
only exception being, when the act is punished by a law and together with the facts existing at the time, constitutes a new
an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall and distinct offense, the accused cannot be said to be in
constitute a pbar to another prosecution for the SAME ACT. second jeopardy if indicted for the new offense. What merely
The phrase SAME OFFENSE means not only that the second happened in this case is that the first physician who examined
offense is exactly the same as the one alleged in the first the offended party failed to see the fractured bone of the
information, but also that the 2 offenses are identical. There is offended party since he only conducted a superficial
identity between the two offenses when the evidence to examination. To be in double jeopardy, then, the new fact
support a victim for one offense would be sufficient to warrant must not be existing at the time of the prior prosecution, e.g.
a conviction for the other. THIS IS THE SAME-EVIDENCE TEST. physical injuries then the offended party dies.

Under the Rules, there is identity between 2 offense not only Art III Sec 22: No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall
when the second offense is exactly the same as the first, but be enacted.
also when the second offense is an attempt to commit the
first, or frustration thereof, or when it necessarily includes or
People vs Ferrer (Judge)
is necessarily included in the offense charged in the first
Section 22 – Bill of Attainder
information. An offense is said to be necessarily included in
another when some of the essential ingredients of the former
FACTS:
as alleged in the information constitute the latter, and vice
Congress passed the Anti-Subversion Act
versa. Thus, one who has been charged with an offense
cannot again charged with the same or identical offense
The so-called Act works as follows:
through the latter be lesser or greater than the former.
1. it outlaws the Communist Party of the Philippines
and
BUT, this rule of identity DOES NOT APPLY when the second
2. it punishes any person who “knowingly and
offense was not in existence at the time of the first
willfully and by overt acts affiliates himself with,
prosecution. This is because in such case there is no
becomes a member” of the Party or other similar
possibility for the accused, during the first prosecution, to be
“subversive organizations.” (Take note of the words
convicted for an offense that was then inexistent. Thus, where
“knowingly” and “willingly”)
the accused was charged with physical injuries and after
conviction the injured person dies, the charge for homicide
Feliciano Co and Nilo Tayag were charged with violation of the
against the same accused does not put him twice in jeopardy.
Act.
The rule is that "where after the first prosecution a new fact
supervenes for which the defendant is responsible, which
Upon filing of the informations, the two respondents moved to
changes the character of the offense and, together with the
quash, based on these grounds
facts existing at the time, constitutes a new and distinct
1. The act is a bill of attainder
offense" the accused cannot be said to be in second jeopardy
2. It is vague
if indicted for the new offense .
3. It embraces more than one subject not expressed in
the title
Accordingly, an offense may be said to necessarily include or
4. It violates the equal protection clause
to be necessarily included in another offense, for the purpose
of determining the existence of double jeopardy, when both
Judge Ferrer (respondent Judge) struck the statute down as
offenses were in existence during the pendency of the first
unconstitutional for being a bill of attainder and for being
prosecution, for otherwise, if the second offense was then
broad. Ferrer also dismissed the informations.
inexistent, no jeopardy could attach therefor during the first
prosecution, and consequently a subsequent charge for the
same cannot constitute second jeopardy.
ISSUES + HELD:
Note also, when a person who has already suffered his
Was Judge Ferrer correct in striking down the statute as
penalty for an offense, is charged with a new and greater
unconstitutional?
offense under the Diaz doctrine herein reiterated, said penalty
(NO. HE SHOULDN’T HAVE STRUCK IT DOWN)
may be credited to him in case of conviction for the second
offense.
Is the Anti-Subversion act really a bill of attainder?
(NO, IT’S NOT A BILL OF ATTAINDER)
People v. Buling
RATIO:
Facts:
Accused Buenaventura Buling was found guilty of serious WHAT IS A BILL OF ATTAINDER?
physical injuries and was sentenced to imprisonment and A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts punishment
indemnity to the offended party. The accused served his without trial. In effect, it is a legislative (instead of judicial)
sentence. The first examiner only examined the offended determination of guilt.
party “superficially”. A subsequent examination made by a
different physician, with the use of X-ray, found out that the NOT A BILL OF ATTAINDER - IT DOES NOT PRONOUNCE
wounds inflicted would not heal in time, hence accused was GUILT UPON SPECIFIC PERSONS
charged of serious physical injuries and was again sentenced
to jail. The Anti-Subversion act does not specify the Communist Party

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 87
of the Philippines. What it does is simply declare the party to doubtful or argumentative implication; a law shall not be
be an organized conspiracy for the overthrow of the declared invalid unless the conflict with the Constitution is
government of the Philippines. The term “Communist Party” is clear beyond a reasonable doubt.
used solely for definitional purposes.
A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts
If the Anti-Subversion act really were a bill of attainder, then it punishment without judicial trial. Its essence is the
would be unnecessary to charge Communists in court. The substitution of a legislative for a judicial determination of
fact remains that their guilt still has to be judicially guilt.
established.
Nothing in the executive orders can be reasonably construed
The statute specifically requires that the membership must be as a determination or declaration of guilt. On the contrary, the
knowing or active. There must be specific intent to further the executive orders, inclusive of EO Nos. 14, make it perfectly
objectives of the oganization. clear that that any judgment of guilt in the amassing or
acquisition of ill-gotten wealth is to be handed down by a
Mere membership is not punishable – there must be proof of judicial tribunal, in this case the Sandiganbayan, upon
direct participation in the organization’s unlawful activities. complaint filed and prosecuted by the PCGG. No punishment
is inflicted by the executive orders. In no sense, therefore,
And even if the act specifies individuals and not activities, may the executive orders be regarded as a bill of attainder.
such a feature is not enough to render the act a bill of
attainder. Only when a statute applies either to named Equally untenable is the claim that the PCGG Charter is ex
individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in post facto because it alters the legal rules of evidence and
such a way as to inflict punishment without a judicial trial receives less or different testimony than what the law
does it become a bill of attainder. required at the time of the commission of the offense in order
to convict the offender. For both the civil and criminal cases
NOT A BILL OF ATTAINDER - IT IS NOT RETROACTIVE covered by the PCGG Charter, nothing has been altered in
terms of the quantum of proof required for an adverse
It also necessary that the act apply retroactively and reach judgment against the defendants or a judgment of conviction
past conduct in order for it to become a bill of attainder. This against the accused, respectively. The plaintiff’s burden to
is the reason why “ex post facto” and “bill or attainder” were establish a preponderance of evidence in the former and proof
combined into one clause. A bill of attainder is necessarily an beyond reasonable doubt in the latter has not been altered or
ex post facto law. modified.

NOT A BILL OF ATTAINDER - ITS PENALTIES ARE

ESCAPABLE LACSON V. EXEC SEC

Those who were members of the Party or any other Facts:

subversive organization at the time of the enactment of the
law were given the Opportunity to purge themselves of In the early morning of May 18, 1995, 11 persons believed to
liability by renouncing in writing or under oath any be members of the Kuratong Baleleng (KB) gang, reportedly
membership. an organized crim syndicate which had been involved in a
spate of bank robberies in MM, were slain along
Commonwealth Ave by elements of the Anti-Bank Recovery
Virata vs. Sandiganbayan and Intelligence Task Group (ABRITG) headed by chief
Art. III, Sec. 22 superintendent Canson of the PNP

FACTS: Acting on a media expose of SPO2 Eduardo delos Reyes, a

• The Republic of the Philippines represented by the member of the CIC, that what happened that morning was a
PCGG assisted by the Solicitor General filed a complaint summary execution (rub out) and not a shoot-out between the
with the Sandiganbayan Benjamin (Kokoy) Romualdez, KB gang members and the ABRITG. Ombudsman Desierto
Cesar E. A. Virata and 43 others for the recovery of ill formed a panel of investigators headed by the Deputy
gotten wealth consisting of funds and other property Ombudsman for Military Affairs, Bienvenido Blancaflor, to
which they, in unlawful concert with one another, had investigate the incident
acquired and accumulated in flagrant breach of trust and
of their fiduciary obligations as public officers, with grave On Nov 2, 1995, Lacson was among those charged as
abuse of rights and power and in brazen violation of the principal in 11 information for murder before the
Constitution and laws of the Republic of the Philippines, sandiganbayan’s 2nd division, while intervenors Romeo Acop
thus resulting in their unjust enrichment during Ferdinand and Francisco Zubia were among those charged in the same
Marcos’ 20 year rule. The charges include informations as accessories after-in-the-fact
misappropriation and theft of public funds, plunder of the
nation’s wealth, extortion, blackmail, bribery, On March 5-6, 1996, all the accused filed separate motions
embezzlement and other acts of corruption, betrayal of questioning the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, asserting
public trust and brazen abuse of power. that under the amended informations, the cases fall within the
jurisdiction of the RTC pursuant to sec 2 of RA 7975. They
ISSUE: contend that the said law limited the jurisdiction of the
WON the PCGG Charter violates the equal protection clause, is Sandiganbayan to cases where one or more of the principal
a bill of an attainder or an ex post facto law. ~ No. accused are govt officials with Salary Grade (SG) 27 or higher,
or PNP officials with the rank of Chief Superintendent
RATIO: (Brigadier General) or higher. The highest ranking principal
The PCGG Charter (composed of EO Nos. 1, 2 and 14) does accused in the amended info has the rank of only a Chief
not violate the equal protection clause, and is not a bill of Inspector, and none has the equivalent of at least SG 27.
attainder or an ex post facto law. The constitutionality of the
law is presumed. To justify the nullity of a law, there must be Thereafter in a resolution dated May 8, 1996, the
a clear and unequivocal breach of the Constitution, not a Sandiganybayan admitted the amended info and ordered the

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 88
cases transferred to the QC RTC which has orig and exclusive mode of procedure provided for in the statutory right of
jurisdiction under RA 7975, as none of the principal accused appeal is not included in the prohibition against ex post facto
has the rank of Chief Superintendent or higher. laws. R.A. 8249 pertains only to matters of procedure, and
being merely an amendatory statute it does not partake the
RA 8249 was enacted defining and expanding the jurisdiction nature of an ex post facto law.
of the Sandiganbayan by deleting the word principal from the
phrase principal accused in section 2 of RA 7975. It is due to Art. IV, Sec. 1: The following are citizens of the Philippines:
this deletion of the word principal that the parties herein are
at loggerheads over the jurisdiction of the sandiganbayan (1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of
the adoption of this Constitution;
Petitioner now questions the constitutionality of sec 4 RA (2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the
8249, including sec 7 which provides that the said law shall Philippines;
apply to all cases pending in any court over which trial has not (3) Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino
begun as to the approval hereof. They also contend that the mothers, who elect Philippine Citizenship upon reaching
new law diluted their right to a 2-tiered appeal. the age of majority; and
(4) Those who are naturalized in the accordance with law.
Issue: Does the retroactive application of the RA 8249
constitute an ex post facto law? No.

Ruling: Valles v COMELEC

G.R. No. 137000 (August 9, 2000)
There is nothing ex post facto in RA 8249. In Calder v. Bull, an
ex post facto law is one – PURISMA, J.:

a)which makes an act done criminal before the FACTS:

passing of the law and which was innocent Rosalind Ybasco Lopez was born on May 16, 1934 in
when committed, and punishes such Napier Terrace, Broome, Western Australia, to the spouses,
action; or Telesforo Ybasco, a Filipino citizen and native of Daet,
(b) which aggravates a crime or makes it Camarines Norte, and Theresa Marquez, an Australian. In
greater that when it was committed; or 1949, at the age of fifteen, she left Australia and came to
(c) which changes the punishment and inflicts a settle in the Philippines.
greater punishment than the law annexed She was married to Leopoldo Lopez, a Filipino citizen,
to the crime when it was committed, at the Malate Catholic Church in Manila. Since then, she has
(d) which alters the legal rules of evidence and continuously participated in the electoral process not only as
receives less or different testimony than a voter but as a candidate, as well. She served as Provincial
the law required at the time of the Board Member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Davao
commission of the offense in order to Oriental. In 1992 and, she ran for and was elected governor
convict the defendant. of Davao Oriental. Her election was contested by her
(e) Every law which, in relation to the offense or opponents, Gil Taojo Francisco Rabat, respectively, Jr.,
its consequences, alters the situation of a alleging as ground therefor her alleged Australian citizenship.
person to his disadvantage. However, finding no sufficient proof that respondent had
This Court added two more to the list, namely: renounced her Philippine citizenship, the Commission on
(f) that which assumes to regulate civil rights Elections en banc dismissed both petitions.
and remedies only but in effect imposes a The citizenship of private respondent was once again
penalty or deprivation of a right which raised as an issue when she ran for re-election as governor of
when done was lawful; Davao Oriental in the May 11, 1998 elections. Her candidacy
(g) deprives a person accused of crime of some lawful was questioned by the herein petitioner, Cirilo Valles. The
protection to which he has become entitled, such as the COMELEC’s First Division came out with a Resolution
protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or a dismissing the petition.
proclamation of amnesty.
ISSUE:
Ex post facto law, generally, prohibits retrospectivity of penal W/N Lopez should be disqualified as Governor of
laws. R.A. 8249 is not a penal law. It is a substantive law on Davao Oriental since his citizenship was being questioned.
jurisdiction which is not penal in character. Penal laws are
those acts of the Legislature which prohibit certain acts and HELD:
establish penalties for their violations; or those that define No. The Philippine law on citizenship adheres to the
crimes, treat of their nature, and provide for their punishment. principle of jus sanguinis. Thereunder, a child follows the
R.A. 7975, which amended P.D. 1606 as regards the nationality or citizenship of the parents regardless of the place
Sandiganbayan’s jurisdiction, its mode of appeal and other of his/her birth, as opposed to the doctrine of jus soli which
procedural matters, has been declared by the Court as not a determines nationality or citizenship on the basis of place of
penal law, but clearly a procedural statute, i.e. one which birth.
prescribes rules of procedure by which courts applying laws of Private respondent Rosalind Ybasco Lopez was born on May
all kinds can properly administer justice. Not being a penal 16, 1934 in Napier Terrace, Broome, Western Australia, to the
law, the retroactive application of R.A. 8249 cannot be spouses, Telesforo Ybasco, a Filipino citizen and native of
challenged as unconstitutional. Daet, Camarines Norte, and Theresa Marquez, an Australian.
Under both organic acts, all inhabitants of the
Philippines who were Spanish subjects on April 11, 1899 and
The contention that their right to a two-tiered appeal which resided therein including their children are deemed to be
they acquired under R.A. 7975 has been diluted by the Philippine citizens. Private respondent’s father, Telesforo
enactment of R.A. 8249, is incorrect. The same contention Ybasco, was born on January 5, 1879 in Daet, Camarines
has already been rejected by the court several times Norte, a fact duly evidenced by a certified true copy of an
considering that the right to appeal is not a natural right entry in the Registry of Births. Thus, under the Philippine Bill
but statutory in nature that can be regulated by law. The of 1902 and the Jones Law, Telesforo Ybasco was deemed to
be a Philippine citizen. By virtue of the same laws, which

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 89
were the laws in force at the time of her birth, Telesforo’s Then, too, it is significant to note that on January
daughter, herein private respondent Rosalind Ybasco Lopez, is 15 1992, private respondent executed a Declaration of
likewise a citizen of the Philippines. Renunciation of Australian Citizenship, duly registered in the
The signing into law of the 1935 Philippine Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs of Australia on
Constitution has established the principle of jus sanguinis as May 12, 1992. And, as a result, on February 11, 1992, the
basis for the acquisition of Philippine citizenship, to wit: Australian passport of private respondent was cancelled, as
(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippine Islands at the time certified to by Second Secretary Richard F. Munro of the
of the adoption of this Constitution. Embassy of Australia in Manila. As aptly appreciated by the
(2) Those born in the Philippine Islands of foreign parents who, COMELEC, the aforesaid acts were enough to settle the issue
before the adoption of this Constitution had been elected to of the alleged dual citizenship of Rosalind Ybasco Lopez. Since
public office in the Philippine Islands. her renunciation was effective, petitioner’s claim that private
(3) Those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines. respondent must go through the whole process of repatriation
(4) Those whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines and, holds no water.
upon reaching the age of majority, elect Philippine citizenship.
(5) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.
So also, the principle of jus sanguinis, which confers Ong Chia
citizenship by virtue of blood relationship, was subsequently
retained under the and 1987 Constitutions. Thus, the herein CHILDREN OF FILIPINO FATHERS
private respondent, Rosalind Ybasco Lopez, is a Filipino
citizen, having been born to a Filipino father. The fact of her
being born in Australia is not tantamount to her losing her
Philippine citizenship. If Australia follows the principle of jus Gatchilian
soli, then at most, private respondent can also claim
Australian citizenship resulting to her possession of dual
citizenship. Tecson v COMELEC
Petitioner also contends that even on the assumption
that the private respondent is a Filipino citizen, she has Ponente: Vitug
nonetheless renounced her Philippine citizenship. To buttress
this contention, petitioner cited private respondent’s FACTS:
application for an Alien Certificate of Registration (ACR) and FPJ filed for candidacy for president. His qualifications
Immigrant Certificate of Residence (ICR), on September 19, were being contested by Fornier because as you remember,
1988, and the issuance to her of an Australian passport on according to Article VII only natural-born citizens of the
March 3, 1988. Philippines could become president.
Thus, the mere fact that private respondent Rosalind
Ybasco Lopez was a holder of an Australian passport and had ISSUE:
an alien certificate of registration are not acts constituting an W/N FPJ is a natural-born citizen
effective renunciation of citizenship and do not militate
against her claim of Filipino citizenship. For renunciation to HELD:
effectively result in the loss of citizenship, the same must be Yes
express. As held by this court in the aforecited case of Aznar,
an application for an alien certificate of registration does not RATIO:
amount to an express renunciation or repudiation of one’s - The term "natural-born citizens," is defined to include
citizenship. The application of the herein private respondent "those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth
for an alien certificate of registration, and her holding of an without having to perform any act to acquire or
Australian passport, as in the case of Mercado vs. Manzano, perfect their Philippine citizenship
were mere acts of assertion of her Australian citizenship - From the Documents presented, it was adduced that
before she effectively renounced the same. Thus, at the o The parents of FPJ were Allan F. Poe and
most, private respondent had dual citizenship - she was an Bessie Kelley;
Australian and a Filipino, as well. o FPJ was born to them on 20 August 1939
Moreover, under Commonwealth Act 63, the fact that o Allan F. Poe and Bessie Kelley were married
a child of Filipino parent/s was born in another country has not to each other on 16 September, 1940
been included as a ground for losing one’s Philippine o The father of Allan F. Poe was Lorenzo Poe
citizenship. Since private respondent did not lose or renounce o At the time of his death on 11 September
her Philippine citizenship, petitioner’s claim that respondent 1954, Lorenzo Poe was 84 years old.
must go through the process of repatriation does not hold - FPJ Was born on August 20, 1939, so the 1935
water. Constitution was in effect
Thus, the fact that the private respondent had dual - Art. III Section 1 (3) of the 1935 Constitution
citizenship did not automatically disqualify her from running provides: Those whose fathers are citizens of the
for a public office. Furthermore, it was ruled that for Philippines are also citizens of the Philippines
candidates with dual citizenship, it is enough that they elect - Therefore, in order to ascertain the citizenship of FPJ,
Philippine citizenship upon the filing of their certificate of we must look at the citizenship of his father, Allan
candidacy, to terminate their status as persons with dual Poe, and his grandfather, Lorenzo Pou
citizenship. The filing of a certificate of candidacy sufficed to - With regards to Lorenzo Poe:
renounce foreign citizenship, effectively removing any o There was a mass Filipinization because of
disqualification as a dual citizen. This is so because in the the Philippine Bill of 1902 which declared
certificate of candidacy, one declares that he/she is a Filipino that all inhabitants of the Philipines on April
citizen and that he/she will support and defend the 11, 1899 are Philippine Citizens
Constitution of the Philippines and will maintain true faith and o The death certificate of Lorenzo Pou would
allegiance thereto. Such declaration, which is under oath, indicate that he died on 11 September
operates as an effective renunciation of foreign citizenship. 1954, at the age of 84 years, in San Carlos,
Therefore, when the herein private respondent filed her Pangasinan. It could thus be assumed that
certificate of candidacy in 1992, such fact alone terminated Lorenzo Pou was born sometime in the year
her Australian citizenship. 1870 when the Philippines was still a colony

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 90
of Spain. Petitioner would argue that naturalized. There is nothing
Lorenzo Pou was not in the Philippines there about invidious jus sanguinis
during the crucial period of from 1898 to  Finally, Paa vs. Chan, this case was
1902 considering that there was no existing about the citizenship Quintin Chan
record about such fact in the Records who was the son of Leoncio Chan.
Management and Archives Office. Petitioner, The courts ruled that Leoncio being
however, likewise failed to show that Chinese, his son could not have
Lorenzo Pou was at any other place during acquired Filipino citizenship. The
the same period. In his death certificate, the Court should have stopped there.
residence of Lorenzo Pou was stated to be But instead it followed with an
San Carlos, Pangasinan. In the absence of obiter dictum. The Court said obiter
any evidence to the contrary, it should be that even if Leoncio, Quintin's
sound to conclude, or at least to presume, father, were Filipino, Quintin would
that the place of residence of a person at not be Filipino because Quintin was
the time of his death was also his residence illegitimate. This statement about
before death. Quintin, based on a contrary to fact
o Therefore, Lorenzo Pou was part of the mass assumption, was absolutely
Filipinization unnecessary for the case. x x x It
o Allan Poe being the legitimate son of was obiter dictum, pure and
Lorenzo Pou is also a Filipino Citizen by simple, simply repeating the obiter
virtue of jus sanguinis dictum in Morano vs. Vivo
- Proof of Paternity o Therefore, there being no doctrine
o Fernando Poe, being an illegitimate child established, petitioner’s contention does not
because he was born outside a valid hold merit.
marriage, must prove his paternity. - The 1935 Constitution, as mirrored in the 1987
o Paternity may be proven when the father Constitution clearly states that children of Filipino
makes a statement in the child’s birth fathers are natural-born citizens of the Philippines.
certificate. There was no such statement in - Therefore, FPJ is a natural-born citizen of the
FPJ’s birth certificate Philippines.
o Nevertheless, Rubie Kelly Mangahas, the
sister of Bessie Kelly made a declaration of
Pedigree stating that FPJ really is the child of PARAGRAPH 3
Allan Poe.
- With regards to legitimacy Co
o Petitioner claims that even if FPJ was the
child of Allan Poe, Allan could not have LOSS OF CITIZENSHIP
transmitted his citizenship to FPJ, because
he was an illegitimate child, he cited
jurisprudence Yu v. Defensor-Santiago
o With regards to this issue, Amicus Curiae, Facts:
Fr. Bernas commented that if the issue of Petitioner was initially issued a Portuguese passport in 1971,
legitimacy was the lis mota in these cases, valid for five years and renewable for the same period before
then petitioner’s contention has merit by the proper Portuguese consular officer. Despite his
virtue of stare decisis naturalization as a Philippine citizen in 1978, two years later
petitioner applied for and was issued Portuguese passport by
 First, Morano vs. Vivo. The case
the Consular Section of the Portuguese Embassy in Tokyo.
was not about an illegitimate child
While still a citizen of the Philippines who had renounced upon
of a Filipino father. It was about a
his naturalization, “absolutely and forever allegiance and
stepson of a Filipino, a stepson who
fidelity to any foreign prince, potentante, state or
was the child of a Chinese mother
sovereignty” and “pledge to maintain true faith and allegiance
and a Chinese father. The issue
to the Philippines,” he declared his nationality as Portuguese
was whether the stepson followed
in commercial documents he signed specifically the
the naturalization of the stepfather.
Companies Registry of Tai Shun Estate LTD. Filed in
Nothing about jus sanguinis there.
Hongkong.
The stepson did not have the blood
Issue:
of the naturalized stepfather
Whether petitioner’s act of applying for a Portuguese passport
 Second, Chiongbian vs. de Leon. despite his naturalization as a Philippine citizen, and declaring
This case was not about the his nationality as Portuguese in commercial documents
illegitimate son of a Filipino father. constitute an express renunciation of his Philippine citizenship
It was about a legitimate son of a acquired through naturalization? Yes.
father who had become Filipino by
election to public office before the
1935 Constitution pursuant to Ratio:
Article IV, Section 1(2) of the 1935 The foregoing facts considered together constitute an express
Constitution. No one was renunciation of petitioner’s Philippine citizenship acquired
illegitimate here through naturalization.
 Third, Serra vs. Republic. The case Express renunciation means renunciation that is made known
was not about the illegitimate son distinctly and explicitly and not left to interference or
of a Filipino father. Serra was an implication. Petitioner with full knowledge and legal capacity,
illegitimate child of a Chinese after having renounced citizenship upon naturalization as a
father and a Filipino mother. The Philippine citizen resumed or reacquired his prior status as a
issue was whether one who was Portuguese citizen by applying for a renewal of his Portuguese
already a Filipino because of his passport and representing himself as such in official
mother who still needed to be

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 91
documents even after he had become a naturalized Philippine conclusion would open the floodgates, as it were. It would
citizen – such being grossly inconsistent with the maintenance allow all Filipinos who have renounced this country to claim
of Philippine citizenship. back their abandoned citizenship without formally rejecting
Philippine citizenship is not a commodity or ware to be their adoptedstate and reaffirming their allegiance to the
displayed when required and suppressed when convenient. Philippines.
It does not appear that Frivaldo has taken these categorical
acts. He contends that by simply filing his certificate of
Frivaldo v. Commission on Elections candidacy he had, without more, already effectively recovered
FACTS: Philippine citizenship. But that is hardly the formal declaration
Petitioner Juan G. Frivaldo was proclaimed governor-elect of the law envisions surely, Philippine citizenship previously
the province of Sorsogon on January 22, 1988, and assumed disowned is not that cheaply recovered. If the Special
office in due time. On October 27, 1988, the League of Committee had not yet been convened, what that meant
Municipalities, Sorsogon Chapter, represented by its President, simply was that the petitioner had to wait until this was done,
Salvador Estuye, filed with the Commission on Elections a or seek naturalization by legislative or judicial proceedings.
petition for the annulment of Frivaldo’s election and This Court will not permit the anomaly of a person sitting as
proclamation on the ground that he was not a Filipino citizen, provincial governor in this country while owing exclusive
having been naturalized in the United States on January 20, allegiance to another country. The fact that he was elected by
1983 and that since Frivaldo had not reacquired Philippine the people of Sorsogon does not excuse this patent violation
citizenship, he was therefore not qualified to run and be of the salutary rule limiting public office and employment only
elected for governor. to the citizens of this country. The qualifications prescribed for
Frivaldo admitted that he was naturalized in the United States elective office cannot be erased by the electorate alone. The
as alleged but said that he had sought American citizenship will of the people as expressed through the ballot cannot cure
only to protect himself against President Marcos. His the vice of ineligibility, especially if they mistakenly believed,
naturalization, he said, was "merely forced upon himself as a as in this case, that the candidate was qualified. Obviously,
means of survival against the unrelenting persecution by the this rule requires strict application when the deficiency is lack
Martial Law Dictator's agents abroad." of citizenship. If a person seeks to serve in the Republic of the
He insisted that he was a citizen of the Philippines because his Philippines, he must owe his total loyalty to this country only,
naturalization as an American citizen was not "impressed with abjuring and renouncing all fealty and fidelity to any other
voluntariness." He said he could not have repatriated himself state.
before the 1988 elections because the Special Committee on It is true as the petitioner points out that the status of the
Naturalization created for the purpose by LOI No. 27C had not natural-born citizen is favored by the Constitution and our
yet been organized then. His oath in his certificate of laws, which is all the more reason why it should be treasured
candidacy that he was a natural-born citizen should be a like a pearl of great price. But once it is surrendered and
sufficient act of repatriation. Additionally, his active renounced, the gift is gone and cannot be lightly restored.
participation in the 1987 congressional elections had divested This country of ours, for all its difficulties and limitations, is
him of American citizenship under the laws of the United like a jealous and possessive mother. Once rejected, it is not
States, thus restoring his Philippine citizenship. quick to welcome back with eager arms its prodigal if
ISSUE: repentant children. The returning renegade must show, by an
Whether or not Juan G. Frivaldo was a citizen of the Philippines express and unequivocal act, the renewal of his loyalty and
at the time of his election on January 18, 1988, as provincial love.
governor of Sorsogon.
HELD & RATIO: Frivaldo v. COMELEC
NO. (June 28, 1996) – 2nd case
If he really wanted to disavow his American citizenship and
reacquire Philippine citizenship, the petitioner should have FACTS:
done so in accordance with the laws of our country. Under CA On petitioner’s 3rd attempt on the Governorship of Sorsogon,
No. 63 as amended by CA No. 473 and PD No. 725, Philippine having been disqualified twice for citizenship disqualification,
citizenship may be reacquired by direct act of Congress, by Raul R. Lee, another candidate, filed a disqualification case
naturalization, or by repatriation. and petitioner’s certificate of candidacy was correspondingly
While Frivaldo does not invoke either of the first two methods, cancelled. While petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration
he nevertheless claims he has reacquired Philippine remained unacted upon until after the May 8, 1995 elections,
citizenship by virtue of a valid repatriation. He claims that by his candidacy continued with him garnering the highest votes
during the elections. However, granted the pending
actively participating in the elections in this country, he
disqualification case against him it was still Lee, with the
automatically forfeited American citizenship under the laws of
second highest vote, that was proclaimed governor. On July 6,
the United States. Such laws do not concern us here. The 1995, Frivaldo filed for the annulment of the June 30, 1995
alleged forfeiture is between him and the United States as his proclamation of Lee and for his own proclamation because he
adopted country. It should be obvious that even if he did lose took he took his oath of allegiance as a citizen of the
his naturalized American citizenship, such forfeiture did not Philippines- with his petition for repatriation under P.D. 725,
and could not have the effect of automatically restoring his filed with the Special Committee on Naturalization in
citizenship in the Philippines that he had earlier renounced. At September 1994 already granted- on June 30, 1995, at 2:00 in
best, what might have happened as a result of the loss of his the afternoon. Therefore, at that moment, the oath already
naturalized citizenship was that he became a stateless cured his previous "judicially-declared" alienage. His petition
individual. was granted.
Frivaldo's contention that he could not have repatriated Lee’s objection is based on the following: (1) assuming
himself under LOI 270 because the Special Committee the assailed repatriation is valid, it could only be
effective as of 2:00 p.m. of June 30, 1995, whereas the
provided for therein had not yet been constituted seems to
Local Government Code prescribes that the citizenship
suggest that the lack of that body rendered his repatriation
qualification must exist on the date of his election, if not
unnecessary. That is far-fetched if not specious Such a the date when the certificate of candidacy is filed; (2)

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 92
the citizenship qualification should be possessed at the Modes which Philippine citizenship may be lost
time the candidate registered as a voter. 1. Naturalization in a foreign country
2. Express renunciation of citizenship
ISSUE: 3. Subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the
W/N Frivaldo’ s subsequent repatriation warranted his Constitution or laws of a foreign country
proclamation as Governor despite previous All of the above applies to petitioner. Although e contends
disqualification for lack of Filipino citizenship that his marriage to the Australian citizen was declared void
for being bigamous, this did not automatically restore his
HELD: Philippine citizenship.
Yes. Section 39 of the Local Government Code requires that Citizenship may be reacquired by repatriation but the
an elective local official be a citizen of the Philippines and a petitioner did not do. The petitioner was therefore not a
registered voter in the barangay, municipality, city, or citizen of the Philippines on the election day and was
province where he intends to be elected. The law does not therefore not qualified to be elected into office. Ramon Labo,
specify any particular date or time when the candidate must Jr. is disqualified from continuing to serve as Mayor of Baguio
possess citizenship. City and is ordered to vacate his office.
Section 253 of the Omnibus Election Code, also provides
another reason why citizenship should be reckoned from Labo, Jr. v. COMELEC
the date of proclamation, not necessarily the date of
election or date of filing of the certificate of candidacy. Facts:
This provision authorizes a remedy on how to contest before Ramon Labo Jr.’s citizenship is being questioned the
the Comelec an incumbent's ineligibility arising from failure to second time around when, believing that he was a Filipino
meet the qualifications enumerated under Sec. 39 of the LGC. citizen, launched his candidacy for mayor of Baguio City in the
Such remedy of Quo Warranto can be availed of "within 10 1992 elections.
days after proclamation" of the winning candidate. Hence, it is His opponent, Roberto Ortega sought to cancel
only at such time that the issue of ineligibility may be taken Labo’s certificate of candidacy on the ground that Labo made
cognizance of by the Commission. And since, at the very a false representation when he stated that he was a “natural
moment of Lee's proclamation (8:30 p.m., June 30, 1995), born” citizen of the Philippines.
Frivaldo was already and indubitably a citizen, having taken
his oath of allegiance earlier in the afternoon of the same day, Issue:
the latter should have been proclaimed Governor. W/N Labo is a natural born citizen of the Philippines.
As to Lee’s 2nd contention, the Court noted that if the law No
intended the citizenship qualification to be possessed prior to W/N Labo can be proclaimed Mayor of Baguio city by
election consistent with the requirement of being a registered virtue of being voted by the electorate. No
voter, it would not have made citizenship a SEPARATE If not, W/N Ortega, receiving the second highest
qualification. The LGC requires an elective official to be a number of votes may be proclaimed the winning candidate for
registered voter. It is registration—not the actual voting— mayor. No
that’s the core of this "qualification." The law's purpose is to
ensure that the prospective official is actually registered in Held:
the area he seeks to govern — and not anywhere else. Ortega presented Labo v. COMELEC (the 1989
decision), declaring Labo not a citizen of the Philippines. Labo
Ramon L. Labo Jr. vs. Comelec relies in the US case of Vance v. Terrazas, wherein it was held
that in proving expatriation, an expatriating act and intent to
FACTS: relinquish citizenship must be proven by preponderance of
Ramon L. Labo, Jr. was proclaimed mayor of Baguio evidence. Petitioner already pleaded this in his motion for
City. His citizenship was in question and the court found 2 reconsideration and having been previously passed upon, the
administrative decisions regarding this, which were rendered Court sees no pressing need to re-examine the same.
by COMELEC and the other by the Commission on Immigration Labo has not submitted any evidence to prove his
and Deportation (CID). COMELEC held that he is a citizen of reacquisition of Philippine citizenship. In the absence of any
the Philippines while CID unanimously found him to be official action or approval by the proper authorities, a mere
otherwise. The CID took into account the official statement of application for repatriation does not, and cannot, amount to
the Australian Government through its consul that the an automatic reacquisition of the applicant’s Philippine
petitioner was still an Australian citizen by reason of his citizenship.
naturalization in 1976. Through his marriage to an Australian Labo cannot be proclaimed Mayor of Baguio City
citizen Labo was granted citizenship by Sydney. Because of because not being a Filipino citizen, Labo lacks the
this he was required to take an oath of allegiance or an fundamental qualification for the contested office. His election
affirmation of allegiance. does not automatically restore his Philippine citizenship, the
Labo does not question the authenticity of the possession of which is an indispensible requirement for
evidence above and neither does he dent that he obtained an holding public office.
Australian Passport which he used in coming back to the The ineligibility of a candidate receiving the majority
Philippines in 1980. He was registered as and Alien but later votes does not entitle the eligible candidate receiving the next
he asked to change his status from immigrant to returning highest number of votes to be declared elected. A minority or
former Philippine citizen and was granted Immigrant defeated candidate cannot be deemed elected to the office. It
certificate. He also declared himself as an Australian citizen in is incorrect to argue that since a candidate has been
a number of sworn statements. disqualified, the votes intended for the disqualified candidate
He alleges that this issue has already been decided should be considered null and void. This would amount to
and that it is therefore banned by the doctrine of Res judicata disenfranchising the electorate in whom sovereignty resides.
but the court held that the doctrine of Res judicata do not
apply in questions of citizenship. Aznar v. Commission on Elections

ISSUE: W/N Labo is an Australian citizen? Facts:

HELD: Yes Jose B. Aznar, as incumbent Provincial Chairman of Cebu PDP-
Laban Provincial Council, filed with the COMELEC a petition for
Rationale: the disqualification of Emilio “Lito” Osmena as candidate for

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 93
Provincial Governor of Cebu on the ground that Osmena is
allegedly not a Filipino citizen, being a US citizen. Ratio:
Dual citizenship is different from dual allegiance.
Issue: Dual citizenship arises when as a result of the concurrent
• W/N Osmena is not a Filipino citizen – NO. application of the different laws of two or more states, a
person is considered a national by said states.
Held: Dual allegiance refers to the situation in which a
Petitioner's contention is not supported by substantial and person simultaneously owes, by some positive act, loyalty to
convincing evidence. Aznar failed to present direct proof that two or more states. Dual citizenship is involuntary whereas
private respondent had lost his Filipino citizenship by any of dual allegiance is the result of one's volition.
the modes provided for under C.A. No. 63. Among others, The filing of his certificate of candidacy sufficed to
these are: (1) by naturalization in a foreign country; (2) by renounced his American citizenship, effectively removing any
express renunciation of citizenship; and (3) by subscribing to disqualification he might have as a dual citizen. Also, he has
an oath of allegiance to support the Constitution or laws of a voted in the previous elections.
foreign country. it is clear that private respondent Osmeña did
not lose his Philippine citizenship by any of the three Tabasa v. CA
mentioned hereinabove or by any other mode of losing G.R. No. 125793 (August 29, 2006)
Philippine citizenship. VELASCO JR., J. :
Because Osmena was issued an alien certificate of
registration, Aznar concluded that Osmena had been FACTS:
naturalized as a US citizen and that Osmena must have taken Joevanie Arellano Tabasa was a natural-born citizen
and sworn to the Oath of Allegiance. Philippine courts are only of the Philippines. In 1968, when petitioner was seven years
allowed to determine who Filipino citizens are and who are old, his father, Rodolfo Tabasa, became a naturalized citizenof
not. Whether or not a person is considered an American under the United States. By derivative naturalization (citizenship
the laws of the United States does not concern Us here. derived from that of another as from a person who holds
By virtue of his being the son of a Filipino father, the citizenship by virtue of naturalization), petitioner also
presumption that private respondent is a Filipino remains. The acquired American citizenship.
cases of Frivaldo and Labo are not applicable here. Osmena Petitioner arrived in the Philippines on August 3,
vehemently denies having taken the oath of allegiance of the 1995, and was admitted as a “balikbayan” for one year.
United States. He is a holder of a valid and subsisting Thereafter, petitioner was arrested and detained by the
Philippine passport and has continuously participated in the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation (BID).
electoral process in this country, both as a voter and as a Petitioner was investigated and on the same day,
candidate. Thus, private respondent remains a Filipino and the Tabasa was accused of violating the 1987 Administrative Code
loss of his Philippine citizenship cannot be presumed. in a charge sheet which alleged: Tabasa is now an
Though Osmeña was both a Filipino and an American, the undocumented and undesirable alien and may be summarily
mere fact that he has a Certificate stating he is an American deported. The U.S. Department of State has revoked his U.S.
does not mean that he is not still a Filipino as he is, of both passport because he is the subject of an outstanding federal
nationalities. There is no express nor implied renunciation warrant of arrest “Unlawful Flight to Avoid Prosecution”. He is
here. When We consider that the renunciation needed to lose also charged with one count of a felon in possession of a
Philippine citizenship must be "express", it stands to reason firearm and one count of sexual battery, in violation of
California Penal Code.
that there can be no such loss of Philippine 'citizenship when
On June 13, 1996, petitioner acquired Filipino
there is no renunciation either "'express" or "implied".
citizenship by repatriation in accordance with Republic Act No.
The statement in the 1987 Constitution that "dual allegiance
8171 (RA 8171), and that because he is now a Filipino citizen,
of citizens is inimical to the national interest and shall be dealt
he cannot be deported or detained by the respondent Bureau.
with by law" has no retroactive effect. Even before, while our
country had already frowned upon the concept of dual
ISSUE:
citizenship or allegiance, the fact is it actually existed. Also,
Whether petitioner has validly reacquired Philippine
the effect of such dual citizenship or allegiance shall be dealt
citizenship under RA 8171?
with by a future law. Said law has not yet been enacted.
Petition dismissed.
HELD:
No.
Mercado vs Manzano (1989) The only persons entitled to repatriation under RA
8171 are the following: a. Filipino women who lost their
FACTS Philippine citizenship by marriage to aliens; b. Natural-born
Petitioner Ernesto Mercado and Edu Manzano were candidates Filipinos including their minor children who lost their Philippine
for vice Mayor of the city of Makati. Edu got the top citizenship on account of political or economic necessity.
votes while Mercado got second but the proclamation of
Edu was suspended in view of a pending disqualification Petitioner does not fall in any of the above
case filed by a certain Ernesto Mamaril who alleged that enumeration. One, petitioner was no longer a minor at the
Edu was not a citizen of the Philippines but of the United time of his “repatriation” on June 13, 1996. The privilege
States. under RA 8171 belongs to children who are of minor age at
(Edu was born in California USA, he acquired US citizenship by the time of the filing of the petition for repatriation. Two, he
operation of the US Constitution, under the principle of jus lost his Philippine citizenship by operation of law and not due
soli. He was also a natural born Filipino citizen by operation of to political or economic exigencies. It was his father who
the 1935 Philippine Constitution, as his father and mother could have been motivated by economic or political reasons in
were Filipinos at the time of his birth.) deciding to apply for naturalization. The decision was his
Comelec en banc ruled that Edu was qualified to be a parent’s and not his. The privilege of repatriation under RA
candidate for the vice-mayor of Makati. 8171 is extended directly to the natural-born Filipinos who
could prove that they acquired citizenship of a foreign country
Issue due to political and economic reasons, and extended
W/N Edu Manzano is disqualified from being a indirectly to the minor children at the time of repatriation.
candidate for vice mayor of Makati? NO

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 94
Even if we concede that petitioner Tabasa can avail allegiance because said law allows natural-born citizens of
of the benefit of RA 8171, still he failed to follow the the Philippines to regain their Philippine citizenship by simply
procedure for reacquisition of Philippine citizenship. He has to taking an oath of allegiance without forfeiting their foreign
file his petition for repatriation with the Special Committee on allegiance. The Constitution, however, is categorical that dual
Naturalization (SCN), which was designated to process allegiance is inimical to the national interest.
petitions for repatriation.
ISSUE:
Therefore, petitioner Tabasa, whose passport was W/N R.A. 9225 is unconstitutional
cancelled after his admission into the country, became an
undocumented alien who can be summarily deported. His HELD:
subsequent “repatriation” cannot bar such deportation R.A. 9225 is constitutional. In resolving the issue in
especially considering that he has no legal and valid this case, resort to the deliberations of Congress is necessary
reacquisition of Philippine citizenship. to determine the intent of the legislative branch in drafting
the assailed law.
DOCTRINE: Rep. Locsin underscored that the measure does not
Repatriation is not a matter of right, but it is a seek to address the constitutional injunction on dual
privilege granted by the State. This is mandated by the 1987 allegiance as inimical to public interest. He said that the
Constitution under Section 3, Article IV, which provides that proposed law aims to facilitate the reacquisition of Philippine
citizenship may be lost or reacquired in the manner provided citizenship by speedy means. However, he said that in one
by law. The State has the power to prescribe by law the sense, it addresses the problem of dual citizenship by
qualifications, procedure, and requirements for repatriation. It requiring the taking of an oath. He explained that the problem
has the power to determine if an applicant for repatriation of dual citizenship is transferred from the Philippines to the
meets the requirements of the law for it is an inherent power foreign country because the latest oath that will be taken by
of the State to choose who will be its citizens, and who can the former Filipino is one of allegiance to the Philippines and
reacquire citizenship once it is lost. If the applicant, like not to the United States, as the case may be. He added that
petitioner Tabasa, fails to comply with said requirements, the this is a matter which the Philippine government will have no
State is justified in rejecting the petition for repatriation. concern and competence over.
Rep. Locsin further pointed out that the problem of
Art IV. Sec. 2: Natural-born citizens are those who are dual allegiance is created wherein a natural-born citizen of the
citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform Philippines takes an oath of allegiance to another country and
any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those in that oath says that he abjures and absolutely renounces all
who elect Philippine citizenship in accordance with paragraph allegiance to his country of origin and swears allegiance to
(3), Section 1 hereof shall be deemed natural-born citizens. that foreign country. The original Bill had left it at this stage,
he explained. In the present measure, he clarified, a person is
Bengson
required to take an oath and the last he utters is one of
allegiance to the country. He then said that the problem of
Art IV. Sec. 3: Philippine citizenship may be lost or dual allegiance is no longer the problem of the Philippines but
reacquired in the manner provided by law. of the other foreign country.

Art IV. Sec. 4: Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens Art V. Sec 1: Suffrage may be exercised by all citizens of the
shall retain their citizenship, unless by their act or omission Philippines, not otherwise disqualified by law, who are at least
they are deemed, under the law to have renounced it. eighteen years of age, and who shall have resided in the
Philippines for at least one year and in the place wherein they
Art IV. Sec 5: Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the propose to vote, for at least six months immediately
national interest and shall be dealt with by law. preceding the election. No literacy, property, or other
substantive requirement shall be imposed on the exercise of
AASJS Member – Hector Gumangan Calilung v. Hon. Simeon suffrage.
Datumanong
(May 11, 2007)
Art V. Sec.2: The Congress shall provide a system for
securing the secrecy and sanctity of the ballot as well as a
FACTS:
system for absentee voting by qualified Filipinos abroad.
Petitioner prays that a writ of prohibition be issued to
stop respondent from implementing Republic Act No. 9225,
The Congress shall also design a procedure for the disabled
entitled “An Act Making the Citizenship of Philippine Citizens
and the illiterates to vote without the assistance of other
Who Acquire Foreign Citizenship Permanent, Amending for the
persons. Until then, they shall be allowed to vote under
Purpose Commonwealth Act No. 63, As Amended, and for
existing laws and such rules as the Commission on Elections
Other Purposes.” Petitioner avers that Rep. Act No. 9225 is
may promulgate to protect the secrecy of the ballot.
unconstitutional as it violates Section 5, Article IV of the 1987
Constitution that states, “Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical
Macalintal v Comelec
to the national interest and shall be dealt with by law.”
Petitioner contends that Rep. Act No. 9225 cheapens
Facts
Philippine citizenship. He avers that Sections 2 and 3 of Rep.
Act No. 9225, together, allow dual allegiance and not dual
Petitioner seeks a declaration that certain provisions of
citizenship. Petitioner maintains that Section 21 allows all
Republic Act No. 9189 (The Overseas Absentee Voting Act of
Filipinos, either natural-born or naturalized, who become
2003) from constitutional infirmity.
foreign citizens, to retain their Philippine citizenship without
losing their foreign citizenship. Section 32 permits dual

1 deemed to have reacquired Philippine citizenship upon taking the following oath of allegiance to the
SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy.– It is hereby declared the policy of the State that all Philippine citizens Republic:
who become citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine citizenship “I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the
under the conditions of this Act. Republic of the Philippines…and I hereby declare that I recognize and accept the
supreme authority of the Philippines and will maintain true faith and allegiance
2 thereto…”
SEC. 3. Retention of Philippine Citizenship.– … natural-born citizens of the Philippines who have lost Natural-born citizens of the Philippines who, after the effectivity of this Act, become citizens of a
their Philippine citizenship by reason of their naturalization as citizens of a foreign country are hereby foreign country shall retain their Philippine citizenship upon taking the aforesaid oath.

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 95
Petitioner posits that Section 5(d) is unconstitutional because remain.
it violates Section 1, Article V of the 1987 Constitution which
requires that the voter must be a resident in the Philippines
for at least one year and in the place where he proposes to Nicolas Lewis
vote for at least six months immediately preceding an
election.
Romualdez v. RTC
Issue
Does Section 5(d) of Rep. Act No. 9189 allowing the FACTS:
registration of voters who are immigrants or permanent The petitioner is Philip Romualdez, a natural born
residents in other countries by their mere act of executing an citizen of the Philippines, the son of the former Governor of
affidavit expressing their intention to return to the Philippines, Leyte, Benjamin "Kokoy" Romualdez, and nephew of the then
violate the residency requirement in Section 1 of Article V of First Lady Imelda Marcos. In 1980, he established his legal
the Constitution? NO residence at Barangay Malbog, Tolosa, Leyte. He voted there
and also became barangay captain.
Ratio After the EDSA revolution, Petitioner Romualdez,
Section 5(d) provides: together with his immediate family, fled the country. Fearing
Sec. 5. Disqualifications. – The following shall be disqualified for their personal safety, they sought "asylum" in the United
from voting under this Act: States.
d) An immigrant or a permanent resident who is recognized as Romualdez returned to the Leyte on December 1991.
such in the host country, unless he/she executes, upon He registered there as a voter for the Synchronized National
registration, an affidavit prepared for the purpose by the and Local Election scheduled for 11 May 1992. Private
Commission declaring that he/she shall resume actual respondent Donato Advincula challenged his qualifications,
physical permanent residence in the Philippines not later than specifically the 1 year residence requirement in the
three (3) years from approval of his/her registration under this Philippines as well as the 6 month requirement in Tolosa.
Act. Such affidavit shall also state that he/she has not applied
for citizenship in another country. Failure to return shall be ISSUE:
cause for the removal of the name of the immigrant or Did Romualdez abandon his residence in Tolosa when he
permanent resident from the National Registry of Absentee sought asylum in the US?
Voters and his/her permanent disqualification to vote in
absentia. RULING: No.
R.A. No. 9189 was enacted in obeisance to the mandate of the
first paragraph of Section 2, Article V of the Constitution that RATIONALE: (Like in Consti 1)
Congress shall provide a system for voting by qualified In election cases, the Court treats domicile and
Filipinos abroad. It must be stressed that Section 2 does not residence as synonymous terms, thus: "the term "residence"
provide for the parameters of the exercise of legislative as used in the election law is synonymous with "domicile",
authority in enacting said law. Hence, in the absence of which imports not only an intention to reside in a fixed place
restrictions, Congress is presumed to have duly exercised its but also personal presence in that place, coupled with conduct
function as defined in Article VI (The Legislative Department) indicative of such intention." "Domicile" denotes a fixed
of the Constitution. permanent residence to which when absent for
The method of absentee voting has been said to be business or pleasure, or for like reasons, one intends
completely separable and distinct from the regular system of to return. That residence, in the case of the petitioner, was
voting, and to be a new and different manner of voting from established during the early 1980's to be at Barangay Malbog,
that previously known, and an exception to the customary and Tolosa, Leyte. Residence thus acquired, however, may be lost
usual manner of voting. The right of absentee and disabled by adopting another choice of domicile. In order, in turn, to
voters to cast their ballots at an election is purely statutory; acquire a new domicile by choice, there must concur
absentee voting was unknown to, and not recognized at, the (1) residence or bodily presence in the new locality, (2)
common law. an intention to remain there, and (3) an intention to
The intent of the Constitutional Commission is to entrust to abandon the old domicile. In other words, there must
Congress the responsibility of devising a system of absentee basically be animus manendi coupled with animus non
voting. The qualifications of voters as stated in Section 1 shall revertendi. The purpose to remain in or at the domicile of
remain except for the residency requirement. They intended choice must be for an indefinite period of time; the change
to enfranchise as much as possible all Filipino citizens abroad of residence must be voluntary; and the residence at the
who have not abandoned their domicile of origin. Section 2 place chosen for the new domicile must be actual.
of Article V of the Constitution is an exception to the The political situation brought about by the "People's Power
residency requirement found in Section 1 of the same Revolution" must have truly caused great apprehension to the
Article. Romualdezes, as well as a serious concern over the safety and
As finally approved into law, Section 5(d) of R.A. No. 9189 welfare of the members of their families. Certainly, their
specifically disqualifies an immigrant or permanent resident sudden departure from the country cannot be described as
who is “recognized as such in the host country” because "voluntary," or as "abandonment of residence" at least in the
immigration or permanent residence in another country context that these terms are used in applying the concept of
implies renunciation of one’s residence in his country of "domicile by choice."
origin. However, same Section allows an immigrant and Petitioner did not abandon his residence in the Philippines and
permanent resident abroad to register as voter for as long as did not establish his domicile elsewhere.
he/she executes an affidavit to show that he/she has not
abandoned his domicile in pursuance of the constitutional
SPECIAL REGISTRATION BEFORE GENERAL ELECTION
intent expressed in Sections 1 and 2 of Article V that “all
citizens of the Philippines not otherwise disqualified by law”
the affidavit is required of immigrants and permanent AKBAYAN-YOUTH v. COMELEC
residents abroad because by their status in their host
countries, they are presumed to have relinquished their intent Facts:
to return to this country; thus, without the affidavit, the
presumption of abandonment of Philippine domicile shall Akbayan-Youth, along with other youth organizations
requested the COMELEC to give possible voters (aged 18-21)

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 96
who weren’t able to register at the end of the registration for work of equal value.
period. The COMELEC formed a commission to study on this If an employer accords employees the same position and
matter. At the end of the deliberation, the Commission rank, the presumption is that these employees perform equal
resolved not to grant the request of the youth organization. work. This presumption is borne by logic and human
experience. If the employer pays one employee less than the
Issue: rest, it is not for that employee to explain why he receives
less or why the others receive more. That would be adding
W/N the possible voters who were not granted special insult to injury. The employer has discriminated against that
registration was deprived of their constitutional right of employee; it is for the employer to explain why the employee
suffrage. is treated unfairly. The employer in this case has failed to
discharge this burden. There is no evidence here that foreign-
Ruling: hires perform 25% more efficiently or effectively than the
local-hires. Both groups have similar functions and
No. The right of suffrage, although accorded a prime niche in responsibilities, which they perform under similar working
the hierarchy of rights embodied in the fundamental law, conditions. Discrimination, particularly in terms of
ought to be exercised within the proper bounds and wages, is frowned upon by the Labor Code.
framework of the Constitution and must properly yield to While the SC recognizes the need of the School to attract
pertinent laws. The right of suffrage is not at all absolute. It is foreign-hires, salaries should not be used as an enticement to
subject to existing substantive and procedural requirements the prejudice of local-hires. The local-hires perform the same
embodied in the constitution and the law. When the COMELEC services as foreign-hires and they ought to be paid the same
denied the request of the youth organizations, in effect they
salaries as the latter. For the same reason, the "dislocation
were implementing RA 8189 (Voter’s Registration Act of
factor" and the foreign-hires' limited tenure also
1996). The said law prohibits registration 120 days before the
elections. The State can regulate the process of registration cannot serve as valid bases for the distinction in salary
under its police power to ensure the honest, orderly and rates. The dislocation factor and limited tenure affecting
peaceful process of the elections. foreign-hires are adequately compensated by certain benefits
accorded them which are not enjoyed by local-hires, such as
Art XIII. Sec 1: The Congress shall give highest priority to housing, transportation, shipping costs, taxes and home leave
the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the travel allowances
right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social,
economic, and political inequalities, and remove cultural ART XIII. Sec. 4: The State shall, by law, undertake an
inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for agrarian reform program founded on the right of farmers and
the common good.
regular farmworkers who are landless, to own directly or
To this end, the State shall regulate the acquisition, collectively the lands they till or, in the case of other
ownership, use, and disposition of property and its farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To
increments. this end, the State shall encourage and undertake the just
distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to such priorities
and reasonable retention limits as the Congress may
POLICY TO REMOVE INEQUITIES
prescribe, taking into account ecological, developmental, or
equity considerations, and subject to the payment of just
International School Alliance of Educators v.
compensation. In determining retention limits, the State shall
Quisumbing
June 1, 2000 respect the right of small landowners. The State shall further
Ponente: Kapunan provide incentives for voluntary land-sharing.

Facts: The International School - Manila grants foreign-hires AGRARIAN REFORM

certain benefits not accorded local-hires. These include
housing, transportation, shipping costs, taxes, and home
leave travel allowance. Foreign-hires are also paid a salary Association of Small Landowners v. Sec. of Agrarian
rate twenty-five percent (25%) more than local-hires. The Reform
School justifies the difference on two "significant economic
disadvantages" foreign-hires have to endure, namely: (a) the Facts:
"dislocation factor" and (b) limited tenure. When negotiations • R.A. No. 3844, otherwise known as the Agricultural
for a new collective bargaining agreement were held on June Land Reform Code, had already been enacted by the
Congress of the Philippines in 1963. This was
1995, petitioner International School Alliance of Educators, "a
superseded by P.D. No. 27, which was promulgated in
legitimate labor union and the collective bargaining
1972, along with martial law, to provide for the
representative of all faculty members" of the School, compulsory acquisition of private lands for
contested the difference in salary rates between foreign and distribution among tenant-farmers and to specify
local-hires. On September 7, 1995, petitioner filed a notice of maximum retention limits for landowners.
strike. The failure of to reach a compromise a compromise • President Corazon C. Aquino issued E.O. No. 228,
prompted DOLE to assume jurisdiction over the dispute. Then declaring full land ownership in favor of the
DOLE Secretary Leonardo A. Quisumbing subsequently denied beneficiaries of P.D. No. 27 and providing for the
petitioner's motion for reconsideration in an Order dated valuation of still unvalued lands covered by the
March 19, 1997. decree as well as the manner of their payment. This
Issue: W/N the salary scheme employed by ISM is a policy was followed on by Presidential Proclamation No. 131
which tolerates inequities? YES. in 1987, instituting a comprehensive agrarian reform
Ratio: Receiving salaries less than their counterparts hired program (CARP), and E.O. No. 229, providing the
abroad, the local-hires of private respondent School, mostly mechanics for its implementation.
Filipinos, cry discrimination. That the local-hires are paid more • Subsequently, with its formal organization, the
than their colleagues in other schools is, of course, beside the revived Congress of the Philippines took over
point. The point is that employees should be given equal pay legislative power from the President and started its

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 97
own deliberations, including extensive public the landowner, the LBP and other
hearings, on the improvement of the interests of interested parties to submit evidence as to
farmers. The result, was the enactment of R.A. No. the just compensation for the land, within
6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the
Agrarian Reform Law of 1988. This law, while notice. After the expiration of the above
considerably changing the earlier mentioned
period, the matter is deemed submitted for
enactments, nevertheless gives them suppletory
decision. The DAR shall decide the case
effect insofar as they are not inconsistent with its
provisions within thirty (30) days after it is submitted
• This case consolidates different cases assailing the for decision. “
constitutionality of the abovementioned laws • Although the proceedings are described as
Note: This is a long and rather complicated case. For your summary, the landowner and other interested
convenience, the the discussion will be divided per issue and parties are nevertheless allowed an opportunity
pertinent provisions of the assailed laws will be cited. to submit evidence on the real value of the
property. But more importantly, the
Issue: Are Proc. No. 121 and E.O No. 229 invalid determination of the just compensation by the
because they do not provide for retention limits as DAR is not by any means final and conclusive
required by Article XIII Section 4 of the Constitution? upon the landowner or any other interested
Held: NO party, for Section 16(f) clearly provides:
Ratio: “Any party who disagrees with the decision
• Cured by R.A. No. 6657 because it provides for such may bring the matter to the court of proper
limits now in Section 6 of the law: jurisdiction for final determination of just
“Retention Limits. — Except as otherwise provided in this compensation. “
Act, no person may own or retain, directly or indirectly, • The determination made by the DAR is only
any public or private agricultural land, the size of which preliminary unless accepted by all parties
shall vary according to factors governing a viable family- concerned. Otherwise, the courts of justice will
sized farm, such as commodity produced, terrain, still have the right to review with finality the said
determination in the exercise of what is
infrastructure, and soil fertility as determined by the
admittedly a judicial function.
Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) created
Issue: W/N the law is invalid for providing for
hereunder, but in no case shall retention by the
compensation other than money
landowner exceed five (5) hectares. Three (3) hectares
Held: NO
may be awarded to each child of the landowner, subject
Ratio:
to the following qualifications: (1) that he is at least
• Section 18 of the CARP law provides that the
fifteen (15) years of age; and (2) that he is actually tilling
balance of the land shall be paid at the option of
the land or directly managing the farm; Provided, That the owner by such things as:
landowners whose lands have been covered by Shares of stock in government-owned or controlled
Presidential Decree No. 27 shall be allowed to keep the corporations, LBP preferred shares, physical assets or other
area originally retained by them thereunder, further, That qualified investments in accordance with guidelines set by the
original homestead grantees or direct compulsory heirs PARC; Tax credits which can be used against any tax liability
who still own the original homestead at the time of the and LBP bonds
approval of this Act shall retain the same areas as long as • The traditional medium for the payment of just
they continue to cultivate said homestead. “ compensation is money and no other. However,
Issue: Police Power or Eminent Domain? we do not deal here with the traditional
Held: Both excercise of the power of eminent domain.
Ratio: • This is a revolutionary kind of expropriation
• To the extent that the measures under challenge which affects all private agricultural lands
merely prescribe retention limits for landowners, whenever found and of whatever kind as long as
there is an exercise of the police power for the they are in excess of the maximum retention
regulation of private property in accordance with the limits allowed their owners. This kind of
Constitution. expropriation is intended for the benefit not only
• But to carry out such regulation, it becomes of a particular community or of a small segment
necessary to deprive such owners of whatever lands of the population but of the entire Filipino nation.
they may own in excess of the maximum area • The cost will be tremendous. Considering the
allowed, there is definitely a taking under the power vast areas of land subject to expropriation we
of eminent domain for which payment of just estimate that hundreds of billions of pesos will
compensation is imperative. be needed far more indeed than the amount of
Issue: Is the determination of just compensation P50 billion initially appropriated. Such amount is
provided for in the law valid? in fact not even fully available at this time.
Held: YES • We assume that the framers of the Constitution
Ratio: were aware of this difficulty when they called for
• The determination of just compensation is a function agrarian reform as a top priority project of the
addressed to the courts of justice and may not be government. that the just compensation would
usurped by any other branch or official of the have to be paid not in the orthodox way but a
government. less conventional if more practical method. We
Section 16(d), which provides that in case of the rejection or may therefore assume that their intention was to
disregard by the owner of the offer of the government to buy allow such manner of payment as is now
his land- provided for by the CARP Law, particularly the
“... the DAR shall conduct summary payment of the balance (if the owner cannot be
administrative proceedings to determine paid fully with money), or indeed of the entire
the compensation for the land by requiring amount of the just compensation, with other
things of value.

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 98
• No special definition of the just compensation for
the lands to be expropriated was reached by the - June 10, 1988, the President of the Phil approved RA
Constitutional Commission. 6657 or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law,
• The proportion of cash payment to the other which included raising of livestock, poultry, and
things of value constituting the total payment, swine in its coverage
as determined on the basis of the areas of the - Jan 2, 1989, the sec of agrarian reform promulgated
lands expropriated, is not unduly oppressive the guidelines and procedure implementing
upon the landowner. It is noted that the smaller production and profit sharing
the land, the bigger the payment in money, - Jan 9, the sec promulgated rules on commercial
primarily because the small landowner will be farms (sec11) under RA 6657. Section 11 defines
needing it more than the big landowners, who commercial farms as private agri lands devoted to
can afford a bigger balance in bonds and other commercial, livestock, poultry and swin raising.
things of value. - Luz Farms is a corp engaged in livestock, poultry and
• The government financial instruments making up together with others is affected by sec 11 of RA 6657
the balance of the payment are "negotiable at - Petitioner contends that the laws, guidelines and
any time." The other modes, which are likewise procedures implementing production and profit
available to the landowner at his option, are also sharing are unconst
not unreasonable because payment is made in
shares of stock, LBP bonds, other properties or ISSUE: The constitutionality of certain sections of RA 6657,
assets, tax credits, and other things of value particularly, whether the raising of livestock, poultry and
equivalent to the amount of just compensation. swine are included in the law and its implementing rules
Issue: Are landowners divested of their property even promulgated by DAR
before actual payment is made to them?
HELD: No.
Held: NO
Ratio:
Luz Farms contends that it doesn’t seek the
• The general rule is that title to the property nullification of RA 6657 in its entirety. It however argued that
expropriated shall pass from the owner to the Congress in enacting the said law has transcended the
expropriator only upon full payment of the just mandate of the consti in including land devoted to the raising
compensation. of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage. Livestock or
• P.D. No. 27 expressly ordered the emancipation of poultry raising nis ont similar to crop or tree farming. Land is
tenant-farmer as October 21, 1972 and declared that not the primary resource in this undertaking and represents
he shall "be deemed the owner" of a portion of land no more than 5% of the total investment of commercial
consisting of a family-sized farm except that "no title livestock and poultry raisers. The use of land is incidental to
to the land owned by him was to be actually issued but not the principal factor or consideration in productivity in
to him unless and until he had become a full-fledged this industry.
member of a duly recognized farmers' cooperative." The question raised is one of consti construction. The
However full payment of the just compensation also transcripts of the deliberations of the consti commission of
had to be made first, conformably to the 1986 on the meaning of the word agricultural clearly show
constitutional requirement. that it was never the intention of the framers of the consti to
• When E.O. No. 228, categorically stated in its Section include livestock and poultry industry in the coverage of the
1 that: consti-mandated agrarian reform program of the govt. It is
All qualified farmer-beneficiaries are now evident from the foregoing discussion that sec 11 or RA 6657
deemed full owners as of October 21, 1972 includes priv agri lands devoted to commercial livestock,
of the land they acquired by virtue of poultry and swine raising, in the term of “commercial farm: is
Presidential Decree No. 27. invalid.
It was obviously referring to lands already validly acquired
under the said decree, after proof of full-fledged membership Art XII. Sec 10: Urban or rural poor dwellers shall not be
in the farmers' cooperatives and full payment of just evicted nor their dwelling demolished, except in accordance
compensation. Hence, it was also perfectly proper for the with law and in a just and humane manner.
Order to also provide in its Section 2 that the "lease rentals
paid to the landowner by the farmer- beneficiary after October No resettlement of urban or rural dwellers shall be undertaken
21, 1972 (pending transfer of ownership after full payment of without adequate consultation with them and the
communities where they are to be relocated.
just compensation), shall be considered as advance payment
for the land."
URBAN LAND REFORM AND HOUSING
• The CARP Law, conditions the transfer of possession
and ownership of the land to the government on
receipt by the landowner of the corresponding People v Leachon
payment or the deposit by the DAR of the G.R. No. 108725-26 (September 25, 1998)
compensation in cash or LBP bonds with an
accessible bank. Until then, title also remains with PURISIMA, J.:
the landowner. 57 No outright change of ownership is
contemplated either. FACTS:
Last Note: On August 7, 1990, pursuant to the Resolution of the
Municipal Trial Court of San Jose, Occidental Mindoro, the
The court emphasized that these enactments are less than
Provincial Prosecutor of Occidental Mindoro filed two separate
perfect; indeed, they should be continuously re-examined and
informations for violation of P. D. 772, otherwise known as the
rehoned, that they may be sharper instruments for the better Anti-Squatting Law, against Noli Hablo, Edmundo Mapindan
protection of the farmer's rights. But we have to start and Diego Escala, docketed as Criminal Case Nos. R-2877 and
somewhere so that agrarian reform may be achieved. R-2828, before the Regional Trial Court of Occidental Mindoro
LUZ FARMS V. SEC OF AGRARIAN REFORM presided over by respondent judge.

FACTS:

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 99
The cases proceeded to trial. After presenting its evidence, rights of small property owners."
the prosecution rested the cases, sending in a written offer of
evidence on November 14, 1991. "Sec. 10. Urban or rural poor dwellers shall not be evicted nor
their dwellings demolished, except in accordance with law and
On August 18, 1992, almost a year after the prosecution had in a just and humane manner.
rested, the respondent Judge issued an Order dismissing the
said cases motu proprio on the ground of "lack of jurisdiction." No resettlement of urban or rural dwellers shall be undertaken
without adequate consultation with them and the
From the aforesaid order of dismissal, petitioners appealed to communities where they are to be relocated."
this Court via a Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition and
Mandamus, which was referred to the Court of Appeals for Presidential Decree No. 772, on the other hand, states:
proper disposition.
"Sec. 1. Any person, with the use of force, intimidation or
On December 24, 1992, the 12th Division of the Court of threat, or taking advantage of the absence or tolerance of the
Appeals came out with a decision reversing the appealed landowner, succeeds in occupying or possessing the property
Order of dismissal, ordering continuation of trial of subject of the latter against his will for residential, commercial or any
criminal cases. other purposes, shall be punished by imprisonment ranging
from six months to one year or a fine not less than one
On January 19, 1993, instead of conducting the trial, as thousand or more than five thousand pesos at the discretion
directed by the Court of Appeals, the respondent judge of the Court, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of
dismissed the cases motu proprio, once more, opining that insolvency.
P.D. 772 is rendered obsolete and deemed repealed by
Sections 9 and 10, Article XIII of the 1987 Constitution, which If the offender is a corporation or association, the maximum
provide that "urban or rural poor dwellers shall not be evicted penalty of five years and the fine of thousand pesos shall be
nor their dwellings demolished except in accordance with law imposed upon the president, director, manager or managing
and in a just and humane manner." partners thereof."

ISSUE: In dismissing subject criminal cases for anti-squatting,

W/N the respondent judge acted with grave abuse of respondent Judge ratiocinated that "if all the accused in these
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in cases were convicted and ordered evicted, it will run counter
dismissing subject criminal cases for violation of the Anti- to the said specific constitutional provisions because the
Squatting Law, and in declaring the said law as repugnant to conviction and eviction will not be in a just and humane
the provisions of the 1987 Constitution. manner as the government has not yet undertaken the
resettlement of urban and rural dwellers (referring to all
HELD: accused in the cases at bar) and neither has the government
To begin with, to every legislative act attaches the consulted all the accused as to where they should be
presumption of constitutionality. (Misolas vs.Panga, 181 SCRA relocated."
648; Alvarez vs. Guingona, Jr., 252 SCRA 695). Unless
otherwise repealed by a subsequent law or adjudged From the aforequoted portion of the questioned disposition
unconstitutional by this Court, a law will always be presumed below, it can be gleaned that the reason of respondent Judge
valid and the first and fundamental duty of the court is to in dismissing subject cases is that the eviction of the accused
apply the law. (Lim vs. Pacquing, 240 SCRA 649; National was not effected in a just and humane manner as the
Federation of Labor vs. Eisma, 127 SCRA 419) government has not yet established a resettlement area for
the accused, and those who would be evicted have not been
Then, too, it is a basic rule of statutory construction that consulted as to the place of their relocation. The import of the
repeals by implication are not favored unless it is manifest Order of dismissal under scrutiny is that- should the eviction
that such is the legislative intent. (Napocor vs. Province of be in a just and humane manner, the same shall be valid and
Lanao del Sur, 264 SCRA 271) This doctrine is premised on the upheld.
rationale that the will of the legislature cannot be overturned
by the judicial function of construction and interpretation. (Ty The Court holds that the respondent judge did not err in so
vs. Trampe, 250 SCRA 500; Frivaldo vs. Comelec, 257 SCRA construing the aforecited constitutional provision. Under the
727; Agujetas vs. Court of Appeals, 261 SCRA 17) Constitution, what makes the eviction and demolition of urban
or rural poor dwellers illegal or unlawful is when the same are
Presidential Decree No. 772, otherwise known as the Anti- not done in accordance with law and in a just and humane
Squatting Law, enjoys this presumption of constitutionality. At manner.
the time the respondent Judge rendered the questioned
Decision and issued the orders of dismissal in 1993, However, respondent Judge erred in predicating the validity or
Presidential Decree No. 772, Anti-Squatting Law, was still legality of eviction on the existence of a resettlement plan
effective. Neither has this Court declared its and area. The constitutional requirement that the eviction and
unconstitutionality, notwithstanding the social justice demolition be in accordance with law and conducted in a just
provision of Article XIII of the 1987 Constitution, specifically on and humane manner does not mean that the validity or
urban land reform and housing. legality of the demolition or eviction is hinged on the
existence of a resettlement area designated or earmarked by
Article XIII of the 1987 Constitution, provides: the government. What is meant by "in accordance with law"
and "just and humane manner" is that the person to be
"Section 9. The State shall, by law, and for the common good, evicted be accorded due process or an opportunity to
undertake, in cooperation with the private sector, a continuing controvert the allegation that his or her occupation or
program of urban land reform and housing which will make possession of the property involved is unlawful or against the
available at affordable cost decent housing and basic services will of the landowner; that should the illegal or unlawful
to underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban centers and occupation be proven, the occupant be sufficiently notified
resettlement areas. It shall also promote adequate before actual eviction or demolition is done; and that there be
employment opportunities to such citizens. In the no loss of lives, physical injuries or unnecessary loss of or
implementation of such program the State shall respect the damage to properties.

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 100
3.Provide appropriate legal measures for the protection of
Precisely, the enactment of an anti-squatting law affords the human rights of all persons within the Philippines, as well as
alleged "squatters" the opportunity to present their case Filipinos residing abroad, and provide for preventive measures
before a competent court where their rights will be amply and legal aid services to the under-privileged whose human
protected and due process strictly observed. By filing the rights have been violated or need protection;
proper informations in court, complainants have complied
with the first requirement of due process, that is, the 4. Exercise visitorial powers over jails, prisons, or detention
opportunity for the accused to be heard and present evidence facilities;
to show that his or her occupation or possession of the 5. Establish a continuing program of research, education,
property is not against the will or without the consent of the and information to enhance respect for the primacy of human
landowner and is not tainted by the use of force, intimidation, rights;
threat or by the taking advantage of the absence of or
tolerance by the landowners. 6. Recommend to Congress effective measures to promote
human rights and to provide for compensation to victims of
Furthermore, what gives impetus to P. D. 772 is the violations of human rights, or their families;
constitutional mandate that - "no person shall be deprived of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Far from 7. Monitor the Philippine Government's compliance with
contravening, P. D. 772 conforms with the 1987 Constitution, international treaty obligations on human rights;
in that it protects the rights of a property owner against
unlawful and illegal intrusion. 8. Grant immunity from prosecution to any person whose
testimony or whose possession of documents or other
In the case at bar, the respondent Judge dismissed subject evidence is necessary or convenient to determine the truth in
cases motu proprio, after the prosecution had rested the any investigation conducted by it or under its authority;
same and without giving the three accused an opportunity to
present their evidence. What is more, there is no showing that 9. Request the assistance of any department, bureau, office,
the issue of constitutionality of P. D. 772 was ever posed by or agency in the performance of its functions;
the accused. Consequently, such an issue cannot be given
due course for the simple reason that it was not raised by the 10. Appoint its officers and employees in accordance with
proper party at the earliest opportunity. law; and

But the foregoing antecedent facts and proceedings 11 Perform such other duties and functions as may be
notwithstanding, the petition cannot now prosper because on provided by law.
October 27, 1997, Republic Act No. 8368, entitled "An Act
Repealing Presidential Decree No. 772 Entitled ‘Penalizing Carino
Squatting and Other Similar Acts’" was enacted. Section 3 of
the said Act provides that "all pending cases under the
provisions of Presidential Decree No. 772 shall be dismissed EPZA v CHR
upon the effectivity of this Act."

ART XIII. Sec 17: Simon v. Commission on Human Rights

G.R. No. 100150 January 5, 1994
1. There is hereby created an independent office called the
Commission on Human Rights. Facts:
Petitioners are members of the United Quezon City Integrated
2. The Commission shall be composed of a Chairman and four Hawkers Management Council under the Office of the Mayor
Members who must be natural-born citizens of the Philippines of Quezon City. They issued a demolition order against private
and a majority of whom shall be members of the Bar. The petitioners situated along the stretch of North EDSA (seems to
term of office and other qualifications and disabilities of the me somewhere in the vicinity of Tri-Noma). The demolition
Members of the Commission shall be provided by law. went through but was contested by the CHR and the private
respondents. Stating that there was a violation of their rights
3. Until this Commission is constituted, the existing respondents complained to CHR and CHR issued a cease and
Presidential Committee on Human Rights shall continue to desist order (also ordered petitioner to pay P200 000 for the
exercise its present functions and powers. purchase of light housing materials for private respondents)
for petitioners to cease demolition. However, demolition had
4.The approved annual appropriations of the Commission shall already been accomplished and they cited petitioners for
be automatically and regularly released contempt. Petitioners on the other hand filed a motion to
dismiss and a supplementary motion to dismiss stating that
CHR has no jurisdiction and that no rights were violated. CHR
BUDGET tried them for violation of human rights.

CHR employees v. CHR Issues:

W/N CHR should desist hearing CHR case against petitioners?
Art XIII. Sec 18: The Commission on Human Rights shall have
the following powers and functions: Held:
Petition granted. CHR should discontinue the hearing.
1. Investigate, on its own or on complaint by any party, all
forms of human rights violations involving civil and political Ratio:
rights; CHR has no jurisdiction over the demolition of the said stalls
and small businesses. The fact of the matter is that the
2. Adopt its operational guidelines and rules of procedure, petitioners were protecting the general welfare of the public
and cite for contempt for violations thereof in accordance with by clearing up the sidewalks along North EDSA. Had these
the Rules of Court; been in place the public would have been adversely affected.
Anent human rights, the actions of petitioners do not violate

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 101
human rights. Human rights are as defined by the Universal oppressive. The three-flunk rule is intended to insulate the
Declaration of Human Rights, what petitioners acted on here medical schools and ultimately the medical profession from
is the privilege of respondents to do business along North the intrusion of those not qualified to be doctors. While every
EDSA. person is entitled to aspire to be a doctor, he does not have a
CHR jurisdiction has been discussed in the Constitutional constitutional right to be a doctor. This is true of any other
Commission: There are actually six areas where this calling in which the public interest is involved.
Commission on Human Rights could act effectively: 1) The right to quality education invoked by the private
protection of rights of political detainees; 2) treatment of respondent is not absolute. The Constitution also provides
prisoners and the prevention of tortures; 3) fair and public that "every citizen has the right to choose a profession or
trials; 4) cases of disappearances; 5) salvagings and course of study, subject to fair, reasonable and equitable
hamletting; and 6) other crimes committed against the admission and academic requirements. The private
religious. respondent must yield to the challenged rule and give way to
CHR is not meant to act as a court of a quasi or judicial those better prepared.
manner. They could investigate and cite contempt but never
try or issue writ of injunctions as public respondent has done Art XIV. Sec 3:
here.
Political rights, on the other hand, are said to refer to the right 1) All educational institutions shall include the study of the
to participate, directly or indirectly, in the establishment or Constitution as part of the curricula.
administration of government, the right of suffrage, the right
to hold public office, the right of petition and, in general, the 2) They shall inculcate patriotism and nationalism, foster love
rights appurtenant to citizenship vis-a-vis the management of of humanity, respect for human rights, appreciation of the role
government. of national heroes in the historical development of the
rights that belong to every citizen of the state or country, or, country, teach the rights and duties of citizenship, strengthen
in wider sense, to all its inhabitants, and are not connected ethical and spiritual values, develop moral character and
with the organization or administration of the government. personal discipline, encourage critical and creative thinking,
They include the rights of property, marriage, equal protection broaden scientific and technological knowledge, and promote
of the laws, freedom of contract, etc. Or, as otherwise defined vocational efficiency.
civil rights are rights appertaining to a person by virtue of his
citizenship in a state or community. Such term may also refer, 3) At the option expressed in writing by the parents or
in its general sense, to rights capable of being enforced or guardians, religion shall be allowed to be taught to their
redressed in a civil action. children or wards in public elementary and high schools within
the regular class hours by instructors designated or approved
by the religious authorities of the religion to which the
Art XIV. Sec 1: The State shall protect and promote the right children or wards belong, without additional cost to the
of all citizens to quality education at all levels, and shall take Government.
appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all.
Miriam College v. CA
DECS v. San Diego
Facts:
Art. XI. Sec 8: This Constitution shall be promulgated in
• San Diego is a graduate of the UE with a degree of Filipino and English and shall be translated into major regional
BS Zoology, he took the NMAT three times and
languages, Arabic, and Spanish.
flunked it as many times. When he applied to take it
again, the petitioner rejected his application on the
basis of the rule that: h) A student shall be allowed ACADEMIC FREEDOM OF INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING
only three (3) chances to take the
• to take the NMAT for the fourth time. Garcia v. Faculty Admission Committee (LOYOLA
• He then went to the RTC to compel his admission to SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY)
the test invoking his constitutional rights to academic
freedom and quality education. FACTS:
• By agreement of the parties, the private respondent
was allowed to take the NMAT scheduled on April 16, In the summer of 1975, respondent admitted petitioner for
1989, subject to the outcome of his petition. studies leading to an M.A. in Theology. On May 30, 1975,
• RTC judge declared the challenged order invalid and when petitioner tried to enroll for the same course for the first
held that the petitioner had been deprived of his semester of SY 1975-76, respondent denied her re-admission
right to pursue a medical education through an in their school. In a letter of Father Lambino, representing
arbitrary exercise of the police power. respondent, the reason provided was that several faculty
Issue: members opposed having her back as they felt that her
Whether the three flunk rule is a proper governmental frequent questions and difficulties were not always pertinent
regulation of access to medical schools? and had the effect of slowing down the progress of the class.
Ratio: Although her intellectual ability was not doubted, the faulty
We believe that the government is entitled to prescribe an felt that it is in petitoner’ best interests to work with a faculty
admission test like the NMAT as a means of achieving its that is more compatible with her orientation. Believing that
stated objective of "upgrading the selection of applicants into her re-admission is a matter of right, petioner brought this
our medical schools" and of "improving the quality of medical mandamus proceeding to compel respondent, to allow her to
education in the country." continue studying in the Loyola School of Theology.
The subject of the challenged regulation is certainly within the NOTE:
ambit of the police power. It is the right and indeed the The Loyola School of Theology, is a religious
responsibility of the State to insure that the medical seminary. In collaboration with the Ateneo de Manila
profession is not infiltrated by incompetents to whom patients University, the Loyola School of Theology allows
may unwarily entrust their lives and health. some lay students to attend its classes and/or take
The method employed by the challenged regulation is not courses in said Loyola School of Theology but the
irrelevant to the purpose of the law nor is it arbitrary or degree, if any, to be obtained from such courses is

IA 2008 Digested Cases

 102
granted by the Ateneo de Manila University and not when it was time for her to graduate she was disqualified
by the Loyola School of Theology. Thus, lay students to graduate with honors because her grades in Architecture
admitted to the Loyola School of Theology to take up were included in the computation of her grades. These marks
courses for credit therein have to be officially clearly disqualified her from graduating with honors. Because
admitted by the Assistant Dean of the Graduate of this she wrote a letter to the Dean requesting that these
grades be disregarded in the computation of her grade
School of the Ateneo de Manila University in order for
average. She wrote the same letter to the Ministry of
them to be considered admitted to a degree program
Education, Culture and Sports. The President of USC replied
in Theology. that it is in their policy that any student obtaining a failing
ISSUE: mark world be disqualified from graduating with honors and to
W/N respondent is justified in disallowing Garia’s deviate from this would mean injustice to students similarly
admission on the basis of academic freedom situated before.
Jeniffer however found a ‘back door’ and had her
HELD: grades changed but these were found to be fraudulent
because she was unable to substantiate it with the class
Yes. The Court held that mandamus is not the correct remedy. records. Even if she had validly obtained this change of grade
Respondent has no duty to so admit the petitioner because it will still be up to the school if she will be awarded with
the Loyola School of Theology is a seminary for the honors.
priesthood. (Duh?! petitioner is a lay person and a woman),
The school has clearly the discretion to turn down even ISSUE: W/N USC can be compelled by a mandamus to confer
qualified applicants due to limitations of space, facilities, upon Jeniffer Lee the degree of Bachelor of Science in
professors and optimum classroom size and component Commerce Major in Accounting Cum Laude?
considerations like personality traits and character orientation
in relation with other students apart from purely academic Held: NO. It is accepted principle that schools of learning are
standards.. Also, as NOTEd above, only the Assistant Dean of given ample discretion to formulate rules and guidelines in
the Ateneo de Manila Graduate School can make admissions the granting of honors for purposes of graduation. This is part
to the degree program. of Academic Freedom. Its discretion on this academic matter
may not be disturbed much less controlled by the courts.
In the discussion of academic freedom one must distinguish
bet. the autonomy of the university, as a corporate body, and
the freedom of the individual university teacher.

• TEAcHER

Right to seek and express the truth as he

personally sees it, both in his academic work
and in his capacity as a private citizen or to
inquire, discover, publish and teach the
truth as they see it in the field of their
competence.

• UNIVERSITY

The internal conditions for academic

freedom in a university are that the
academic staff should have de facto control
of the following functions: (i) the admission
and examination of students; (ii) the
curricula for courses of study; (iii) the
appointment and tenure of office of
academic staff; and (iv) the allocation of
income among the different categories of
expenditure. - President of the Queen's
University in Belfast, Sir Eric Ashby

The “four essential freedoms" of a university

involve the righ to determine for itself on
academic grounds: (1) who may teach; (2)
what may be taught; (3) how it shall be
taught; and (4) who may be admitted to
study. - Justice Frankfurter

University of San Carlos v. Court of Appeals

FACTS:
Jeniffer Lee was initially enrolled as an Architecture
student in the University of San Carlos in Cebu where she
obtained a grade of Incomplete in one subject and 5 or failing
grade in 2 Architecture subjects. She then shifted to
Accounting where she obtained good grades. Nevertheless,

IA 2008 Digested Cases