Constitutional law coverage 2

8/9/2019 Constitutional law coverage 2

1/17

Const i tu t i ona l Law

Atty. Rovynne Jumao-as

(3RDExam Coverage) Vol. 3 | 1

March 11, 2012Transcribed by: Bruneson & Camille

RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED

Section 14.

No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense withoutdue process of law.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumedinnocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right tobe heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature andcause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial,and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to havecompulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and theproduction of evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment,trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused:

Provided, that he has been duly notified and his failure to appearis unjustifiable.

Section 14 refers to the rights of the accused.

Paragraph 1 No person shall be held to answer for a criminaloffense without due process of law. This phrase sounds familiarto you due process of law. In Section 1 No persons shall be

deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Sowhy is this repeated in Sec. 14? Sec. 14 is more specific for theaccused in criminal proceedings. So this is restricted to criminalcases only and they are procedural requirements. What are theprocedural requirements when a person is held to answer for acriminal offense?

Thats in paragraph 2. In all criminal prosecutions, theaccused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved,and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to beinformed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, tohave a speedy, impartial, and public trial, to meet the witnessesface to face, and to have compulsory process to secure theattendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in hisbehalf. However, after arraignment, trial may proceednotwithstanding the absence of the accused: Provided, that he hasbeen duly notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.

What can you observe? The accused has been affordedthese number of rights under Section 14. In this jurisdiction,compared to an ordinary citizen, the accused has more rightsunder the Constitution. Why is that so? Why did we (because we

are supposed to be the authors of the our Constitution) give theaccused these several number of rights? Its because the accused

is up against the State. Its like the David versus Goliath scenario.The state can use all its resources and power to convict theaccused- so state versus individual. So to ensure that theindividual will be afforded fairness and justice in his prosecution, itis only proper to afford him this number of rights. Yun angsinasabi ko, even compared to an ordinary citizen, the accused hasmore rights. Yan ang hindi naiintindihan ng military, the time whenI was talking about search warrants and warrants of arrest. Theyasked how come this criminal is set free just because of the non-observance of these rights. It has been held that its better to setone criminal free than allow an innocent individual to suffer theadversarial system. Okay na yung maset-free ang criminal than tohave this kind of procedure which is against an innocent individual.

A. CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS

So Section 14 reiterates the due process clause inSection 1. While section 1 is general and refers to both substantiveand procedural due process, Section 14 pertains to criminalproceedings and is restricted to procedural due process. Can yourecall what procedural due process requires in judicialproceedings? There must be:

1. The accused must be heard before animpartial, competent court

What do you mean by competent court? The court hasjurisdiction. It has the authority to hear these cases because evenif all these rights afforded to the accused and the guilt of theaccused is proved beyond reasonable doubt, but it turns out thatthe court has no authority or jurisdiction, what happens to theproceedings? These are null and void.

So in the case of

OLAGUER VS. MILITARY COMMISSION

150 SCRA 144 (1987)

You have a civilian who allegedly committed an offenseduring martial law. Thus a military tribunal tried him. He wasconvicted there. The SC said the military tribunal has no

jurisdiction over civilians even if the offenses have been allegedlycommitted during martial law, as long as the civilian courts areopen. Military courts/tribunals are for military men and they areusually for violations of the rules of war. So the SC nullified theconviction of all of them, being a civilian tried in a military tribunal.

Now impartial court means that the judge must not onlybe impartial, but must appear to be impartial. Now in a courtproceeding, if it happens that a judge is laughing at a joke from alawyer for this party, the lawyer of the other party might have theimpression that the judge is in favor or favoring this other party.Now what we have here is a situation where even if the judge isimpartial, he doesnt appear to be impartial. He will give thislawyer an opportunity to further delay the proceedings if he movesfor the inhibition of the judge just because he believes that the

judge is showing some expressions of favouring the other party.That is why if you happen to appear in a court where the judgewears shades or sunglasses, there is no objection against that.Why? The judge may be just complying with his mandate that hemust not only be impartial but also appear impartial.

So if the judge cannot perform that pokerface thing,____ nalang kayo ng iba because the judge has to be pokerface.So if he wears the sunglasses or shades, there is no objection tothat. He must not only be impartial but also appear impartial sothat the litigants particularly the accused will have faith in thefairness of the proceedings.

2. Now due process also requires that theremust be a hearing.

Procedural process means that he must be heard beforehe is convicted. Right to be heard.

ALONTE VS. SAVELLANO

287 SCRA 245 (1998)

The accused here was charged of rape. Now in onehearing, the rape victim, filed his affidavit of desistance, meaningthe rape victim desisted from further testifying against theaccused. So she was presented before the court, the court has theopportunity to test the veracity or truthfulness of her desistance.Now she said shes no longer interested in prosecuting theaccused. Because of that statement, the lawyer for the accused nolonger cross-examined the witness. Because of her testimony,whats the choice of the prosecution? The prosecution would be

constrained to move for the dismissal of the case. Why? Theprosecution can no longer prove the guilt of the accused beyondreasonable doubt especially in rape cases where usually the onlywitness is the victim herself. It is one offense that committed

clandestinely. Usually, you have no other witness there. Sobecause of the desistance, the prosecution moved for the dismissalof the accused. However, 2 months after, the judge issued thedecision, which was for the conviction of the accused. So the SCsaid here, the accused was denied due process because theconviction was made without a hearing. In this case, the SC didnot nullify the proceedings to the point that double jeopardy willnow take place, but the SC remanded the case back to trial courtfor further proceedings.

PEOPLE VS. MACARANG

424 SCRA 18 (2005)


2/17




The accused here was tried for the crime of qualifiedrape. It was supposedly the turn of the accused to present theirdefense evidence. Maybe they had no defense, or maybe there isa ____ proceeding because the accused here and the lawyermoved several times for the postponement of the hearing becausethe counsel is not around, or the accused is not ready to testify.

After several postponements, gikapoy na nag prosecution, nagalitna ang judge, the prosecution moved that the accused be deemedto have waived his right to present evidence in his behalf. And thecourt made a relief that because of these postponements, theaccused is now deemed to have waived his right to presentevidence, and the case is now deemed submitted for the decisionof the case. It was qualified rape, so he was convicted and thepenalty was death. The SC said there was denial of due process.SO here there was no waiver to present evidence especially in thiscase when the imposable penalty is death. What do we knowabout waiver? It must be freely and intelligently be made, itcannot be implied or presumed. Especially in this case where thewaiver is deemed to have come from the accused. So the accusedhere was denied of due process.

Compare Section 14 with Section 12- Right ofperson under custodial investigation. So this [12] means before acharge is filed against you and he is arrested or under custody oflaw. So section 12 is applicable. But once the accused has beenformally charged in court and there was already an arraignment,hes now called an accused. Prior to that anong tawag sa kanya?Respondent. So thats the difference. Under Section 14, this onlyattaches when, because it speaks of criminal proceedings, theremust already be a criminal case. Section 14 applies only from thetime of arraignment up to the termination of the case.

B. RIGHTS

So what are THE RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED?

1. Presumption of Innocence2. Right to be heard by himself and counsel3. To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation4. To have a speedy, impartial, public trial5. Right to confrontation6. To have compulsory processes to secure the attendance of

witnesses

What about trial in absentia? Is it part of the right ofthe accused? The right means that the prosecution may proceedeven in the absence of the accused. Is it a right of the accused?Its more of a right of the state to proceed notwithstanding the

absence of the accused.

RIGHT TO BE PRESUMED INNOCENT

Youve heard of this before when we discussed about bail. We saidthat the right to bail flows from the right to be presumed innocent.SO under Section 14, all persons charged criminally are presumedinnocent unless proven otherwise. By what degree of proof? Proofbeyond reasonable doubt. Now this presumption of innocenceremains even if the accused presents the weakest of the weakdefenses.

What are the WEAKdefenses?

1. Alibi- I was not there. That was the defense of Webb.Thats a weak defense, he did not attack directly the

accusation.2. Denial- I did not do it.3. I was framed up.

Notwithstanding these weak defenses, he is still presumedinnocent. Accusation in itself or the charge in itself is notsynonymous with guilt. Because of this presumption, in this

jurisdiction, it is the responsibility of the prosecution to establishguilt beyond reasonable doubt. Otherwise, the accused is entitledto an acquittal. The burden, therefore, is with the prosecution toestablish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.Reasonable doubt does not mean absolute certainty, but only

moral certainty on the part of the judge that the accused did it.Only moral certainty is required. But as it is, in this jurisdiction, itis the duty of the prosecution to present proof sufficient, beyondreasonable doubt, to the court that conviction may rest not on theweakness of the defense but on the strength of the prosecution.

SO whats the role of the accused and his defense lawyers? The

accused can just remain silent, because the duty is with theprosecution. It is a very difficult, and a heavy burden on the partof the prosecution. Trust me, its easier to be a defense lawyerthan to be a prosecutor. Why? As a defense a lawyer, you candestroy the case of the prosecution by creating doubt. You justcreate doubt. You need not destroy evidence by rebuttingevidence by saying that yes and presenting evidence that it is no.

You can just say maybe, it can already destroy the case ofprosecution because of the presumption of innocence because theproof required is beyond reasonable doubt and there is reasonabledoubt that the accused could be acquitted. Mas madali angtrabaho sa defense lawyer.

But once the prosecution has established a prima faciecase against the accused, now presented in evidence, and the

prima facie guilt of the accused has already been established, theburden now shifts to the accused. Sometimes, he should no longerstay silent. This time, his silence may be an inference of non-rebuttable of evidence, not reduction of evidence, and this mightbe harmful to the case of the accused. So if you ask me, if I amrepresenting the accused, pwede bang mag-remain silent nalang?

Yes. But after the presentation of evidence, think it over becausesometimes the prosecution might have already established a primafacie case against the accused. But if the prosecution has alreadyrested its case, and you think that they have not proved guiltbeyond reasonable doubt, you have the opportunity to move fordemurer of evidence. You will just tell the court, your honor wewill no longer present any evidence because the prosecution hasfailed to prove its case against the accused. Thats a demurer ofevidence. Pwede bay un? Yes, because again the burden is withthe prosecution.

However, we have laws which establish prima faciepresumption. Some laws may say if this fact is proven, then it isalready prima facie case against the accused. An example I canthink of is Anti-fencing. Theres a prima facie presumptionprovision there, if the person is found in possession of stolengoods, theres a prima facie presumption that he is guilty of Anti-Fencing.

Thus, in the cases of Dizon vs. People and Hizon vs. CA,involved her is Fisheries Law/Decree.

DIZON VS. PEOPLE234 SCRA 63 (1994)HIZON VS. CA

265 SCRA 516 (1996)

Now under that law, theres a provision there that states that adiscovery of explosives or obnoxious substance in any fishing boatshall constitute a prima facie presumption that owner is fishingwith the use of explosives or poisonous substance. So if a personis found in the possession of explosives, theres a presumption thathes using this for illegal fishing. Now does this provision of lawestablishing prima facie presumption against the accused violatetheir right to be presumed innocent?

The SC said in these cases that it does not violate this

constitutional provision. Why? Prima facie presumption only makesrebuttable presumption. There is no constitutional objection aslong as the facts presumed have a direct relation with the factsproven. It is not arbitrary.

For example, the fact proven is you are in possession ofstolen goods. The natural conclusion would be you are guilty ofanti-fencing law. For example, you are found in possession ofdynamites in your boat, what would the natural and logicalpresumption? Its logical to think that youre using that for illegalfishing. So theres a relation between the facts proven and the


3/17




presumption of guilt. SO theres no violation of this constitutionalprovision.

Prima facie presumption means rebuttablepresumption. What this means is that hindi na magpresent angprosecution ng proof other than that. But the burden now shifts tothe accused, so the accused is now given the opportunity to rebutthat presumption. Even in the case of malversation, a crime

committed by a public official, if he feels to turn over or accountfor the money, and he cannot, there is already a presumption thathe has already misappropriated the money. Thats the natural andlogical consequence of failing to return the money. So what theprosecution would do is only to prove this fact, that upon demand,he fails to return the money. The prosecution need not prove thathe ACTUALLY misappropriated the money, and theres no violation

of his right to innocence because the accused is still given theopportunity to rebut the evidence.

RIGHT TO BE HEARD BY HIMSELF AND BY COUNSEL

Under this right, the accused may appear personally forhimself. Can the accused opt to personally represent himself? Yes,because it is his constitutional right. But can this right bereserved? Yes, it can together with the right to appear by counselbecause even the most intelligent person would not have theknowledge of the intricacies of legal proceedings, rules ofevidence, rules of procedures. So this right to be heard by himselfwould be for ____ given the equal right to be heard by counsel.Thus it is stated in the constitution, provided there, constitutionalright ni siya ang right to counsel, because this (right to be heardby himself) would be useless if the person is not given theconstitutional right to be heard by counsel.

PEOPLE VS. HOLGADO

85 PHIL 753 (1950)

This is a matter to the right to counsel. This was the interchange,which transpired in court before arraignment, Accused, do youhave a lawyer? Or are you going to plead guilty?. So whats theanswer of the accused? I have no lawyer and I will plead guilty.Naloko na. So the court proceeded with arraignment, trial andthen convicted the accused. The SC said Under the circumstances,particularly the qualified plea given by the accused, who wasunaided by counsel, it was not prudent, to say the least, for thetrial court to render such a serious judgment finding the accusedguilty of a capital offense, and imposing upon him such a heavypenalty as ten years and one day of prision mayor to twenty years.

Thats why in this case it was held that the accused has the rightto be heard not only by himself but also by counsel. And under theROC which was already instituted, [Rule 112, Sec. 3] "If the

defendant appears without attorney, he must be informed by thecourt that it is his right to have attorney before being arraigned,and must be asked if he desires the aid of attorney. If he desiresand is unable to employ attorney, the Court must assign attorneyde oficio to defend him. A reasonable time must be allowed forprocuring attorney."Under this provision, when a defendant appears without attorney,the court has four important duties to comply with beforearraignment:

1. It must inform the defendant that it is his right to haveattorney before being arraigned;

2. After giving him such information the court must ask himif he desires the aid of an attorney- why? Kasi mayoption siya to appear by himself.

3.

If he desires and is unable to employ attorney, the courtmust assign attorney de oficio to defend him; and

4. If the accused desires to procure an attorney of his own,and he can afford one, the court must grant him areasonable time therefore.

These are the basic rights under the right of attorney. Againthe right to be heard will be to little avail if it does not include theright to be heard by counsel.

Even the most educated man who has no skill in the study oflaw particularly in the rules of procedure, without counsel, he may

be convicted not to because he is guilty but because he cannotestablish his innocence.

As the counsel de officio what is your role?

It starts upon appointment and continues until thearraignment before court, until trial and appeal. That is why during

hearings in criminal cases the moment that the accused appearswithout counsel, all lawyers become fidgety. If the accused cannotafford his own counsel, all the lawyers will bow down their headsbecause the judge can appoint anyone in the courts. Usually, heappoints the PAO lawyer, but sometimes he can appoint otherspresent in that court.

As counsel de officio your duty starts beforearraignment, before trial, during trial, in and after trial uponappeal. In reality, when the judge appoints one, usually thelawyers will put into record that they will represent the accusedonly for the purpose of such arraignment. Otherwise, youre boundto represent the accused even after arraignment

Limits to the appointment: It is only mandatory for the judgeto appoint the counsel de officio during arraignment. There shall

be no arraignment unless the accused has a lawyer except whenhe voluntary waives that right. So, it is mandatory during the timeof arraignment. It is no longer so when:

say for example when the accused is alreadyrepresented by counsel de parte;and

in some occasions when the counsel is not present.In these two cases, it is no longer mandatory to appoint a counselde officio.

Remember: Mandatory only during arraignment.

PEOPLE VS MANALO

148 SCRA 98 (1987)

The accused here was convicted death penalty for murder, thecase was for automatic review before the SC. He implores the factthat several counsel de officio assisted him during differenthearings of his case. So in day1 he was assisted by CDO (counselde officio) 1, day 2, assisted by CDO 2, and so on and so forth.

Ang dami nyang CDO. And he is now saying that he was deniedthe right to counsel, because even if he was represented byseveral CDO, it was a sham representation kasi iba-iba.

HELD:SC said that it is not so in this case especially when it is notshown that the CDO did not perform their duties to the appellantand to the court. There was no showing that the appellantsuffered from such representations. It was even shown on record

that the CDO performed their duties in assisting the appellant,protecting his interests, making objections in timely manner ,present during the examination of witnesses by the prosecution,etc. So, if that is the scenario, you have different counsels at thedifferent phases of the trial, it does not mean that you are deniedof your right to counsel.

People Vs Santocildes

321 SCRA 310 (1999)

The accused was charged for the crime of rape. During trial hewas represented by a certain Gualberto who turned out to be anon-lawyer. He was convicted of course. On appeal he argues thathis right to counsel was violated so he should be acquitted.

The SC said yes, he was denied his right to counsel. The right tobe represented by A MEMBER OF THE BAR is what iscontemplated in that constitutional right even if the non lawyerturns out to have the abilities of a seasoned lawyer and handledthe case in a professional and skillful manner, the fact that he isnot a member of the bar effectively denied the accused to counsel.

PEOPLE VS TULIN

364 SCRA 10 (2001)


4/17




The Supreme Court said that judgment is set aside but isremanded to the lower court for further proceedings. It did notresult to the acquittal of the accused.

The accused here was tried for piracy. He was represented byTomas Posadas and he presented seven witnesses for the accusedbut he turned out to be a non lawyer also. Does this happen? But

not everyday. In davao city it rarely happens because the numberof lawyers is small and we know almost everyone here. The judgeswill usually have the counsel to make a courtesy call.

So, in this case, luckily, it was discovered in the course of the trial,so that the accused was able to obtain the service of the reallawyer. During the trial, the lawyer manifested that he is adaptingthe testimony of the witnesses presented by Tomas. The accusedwas convicted.On appeal, the accused said that he was denied of his right tocounsel.

SC:There was already a waiver in this case. You have the right toappear for yourself. Rights can be waived. There was already avalid waiver of right to counsel especially that the adaption of the

witnesses presented and testimonies presented by Tomas wasmanifested and put on record by a lawyer. So, the waiver wasdone in the presence of the counsel.

PEOPLE VS BERMAS

306 SCRA 135 (1999)

The accused here was indigent charged with rape. As indigent hewas represented by CDO, now after the victim was presentedduring the cross-examination. Counsel for the accused manifestedthat he would withdraw as counsel. So, another CDO wasappointed, and he was able to prepare for only ten minutes. Hecross-examined the witness. After the examination, the court alsoallowed him to withdraw. Then, there is another CDO, he also tried

to withdraw, but this time the court said NO. So, he wasconstrained to present the accused as witness. On thepresentation, during the succeeding hearings, the counsel can nolonger found. He failed or refused to appear for no apparentreason. Was he denied from his right to counsel?

Held:Yes. The right to counsel must be more than just presenceof counsel in court, more than asking questions, raising objections.The right means that the counsel must believe in the cause of yourclient. There should be active involvement of the lawyer bearing inmind the rights of the accused. Even if you know that the accusedis guilty, you are there to ensure that his constitutional rights aregiven.

People vs Larranaga

421 SCRA 530 (2004)

The accused here are from prominent families in Cebu,accused of kidnapping. When it was the defenses time to present

their witnesses after the prosecution, their delaying tactics werealready very obvious. There were several motions filed up to thepoint that there was a motion to withdraw by the counsel. Now,because of that motion, they cannot proceed to the hearing ofevidence. The accused asked for time to secure the services of acounsel for 3 days to 1 month. The judge denied the motion andappointed a CDO for the accused. Was he denied the right?

Held: SC said no, the time they asked from the court wasunreasonable, they could have secured the services of the lawyer

at the very moment because they can afford one if they reallydesire to get one. They could have acted at the short period oftime. This does not mean that the accused can avoid trial byrefusing to get a counsel. The proceedings should not depend onthe whims of the accused to the detriment of the hearing of thecase.

PEOPLE VS RIVERA

362 SCRA 153 (2001)

The case was for incestuous rape. Upon presentation of thephysician witness who has incriminating testimony against theaccused, what happened was that the lawyer for the accused didnot appear. So, the accused said that they are moving for thepostponement of the hearing. The judge denied the motion andappointed a CDO. There was in fact no mandatory duty for the

judge to appoint a CDO because it was already during trial and

was already represented by a counsel de parte. But the judge toavoid consti issues appointed a CDO just to hear the testimony ofthe physician bec. He believes that the Dr. was so busy and it isvery difficult to get his appearance again. Was he denied the rightto counsel?

Held: SC said no. The judge has the duty to regulate theproceeding for the speedy disposition of cases. Justice is not onlyfor the accused but also for the state and the victim. In this case,the judge hast the duty to promote speedy and orderlyadministration of justice.

PEOPLE VS LIWANAG363 SCRA 62 (2001)

Accused here was charged with highway robbery with multiplerape. He was initially represented by CDO. Then he had a counselde parte, on appeal he hired another counsel. On appeal, hequestioned the tactics of his own counsel on trial. According tohim, my counsel is inefficient! In other words bugo iyang lawyer.Was he denied the right to counsel?

Held: SC said no. The right to counsel does not mean the right toan intelligent counsel. What is required is only an EFFECTIVEcounsel. It is presumed that when you pass the bar exam, youalready know the rules of court and upholds professionalstandards. He need not be the most intelligent lawyer.

PEOPLE VS SESBRENO

314 SCRA 87 (1999)

He was charged with murder and he represented himself becausehe happened to be a lawyer, despite the suggestion of the courtthat he find another counsel since the IBP can provide him withone, he still insisted to defend himself. He was convicted. Can henow invoke that he was denied such right?

Held: SC said no. he was accorded the right to counsel when hewas allowed to be represented by a competent member of the barnamely himself. You have the choice to get your own counsel.That he who is his own lawyer is a fool for his client.

PEOPLE VS NADERA

324 SCRA 490 (2000)

The accused is charged with rape. So after the rape victimtestified, counsel for the accused said that they are not conductingany cross-examination because he is convinced that the witness istelling the truth. Was the accused denied the right to counsel?

Held: Yes, the counsels failure to cross examine the witness is aclear evidence of his lack of enthusiasm to his clients cause. Todefend a client means to effectively assist accused to ensure thathis constitutional rights are protected. The lawyer in this case hasthe duty to test the credibility of the witness. To scrutinize theprivate complainants testimony.

RIGHT TO BE INFORMED

We have that very important stage in criminal proceedings whatwe call as the arraignment.

ARRAIGNMENT:The stage of reading of the charge where the information is readby the court interpreter for the accused to know what he is beingtried for. The arraignment is an indispensable stage, without whichthe judgment would not be valid.


5/17




PURPOSE: Portion wherein the accused will be informed of thenature and the cause of the accusation against him. Precisely tocomply with the right of the accused to be informed.

PEOPLE VS LABADO98 SCRA 730 (1980)

Supreme court said that the accused should know the nature ofthe charge against him to enable him to make his defense. So hecan prepare.Second is to protect himself for the prosecution of the samecause of action. The basis of double jeopardy should come fromthe information in case he is charged anew. Third is to inform thecourt of the facts alleged whether they are sufficient forconviction. It need not be the exact facts but must include time,place, and circumstances. It must be specific. The discrepancyshould be so grave that there would be no way for the accused tobe convicted based on the information. For example, what wasalleged was that the victim was killed in 2002 but in reality, he waskilled in 1999. Thats why the information is very important.

People vs Crisologo150 SCRA 653 (1987)

The accused here was a deaf mute charged with robbery withhomicide. They cannot have the arraignment bec there was noone to assist him. There was no one there to explain to theaccused the information or the charge, The accused cannotunderstand sign language. The Trial court proceeded andconvicted the accused.

Held:SC said that he was denied his right to be informed of thenature and cause of accusation.

March 12, 2013

Transcribed by: Charity & Lou

Right to have a Speedy, Public & Impartial Trial

Speedy trial

What do you mean by speedy trial?

- Speedy trial would mean one that is free from vicious orcapricious delays. Now whether the delay is oppressive, the delayis capricious, it depends upon the circumstances of the case. Soits still case to case basis.- That is why, if we move for the postponement of lets say a trialor a hearing, we always allege on the last portion that this motionis not for the purpose of delaying the proceedings.- This is in view of the accused right to speedy trial.

What is the objective of this right? To assure the innocent man, free from anxiety (?),

expense of litigation, so that if you can shorten the periodof litigation, it would mean lesser expense on the part ofthe accused and lesser anxiety.

And if otherwise, he is to be found guilty, that guilt bedetermined the soonest time possible. This would be togive consolation for evidence of the defense (?).

This right is more for the accused. Again this is a case tocase basis. Bear in mind the purpose or object of this right

Now under the speedy trial act of 1998, there is a provision whichstates that the arraignment shall be held within 30 days from thedate that the court acquired jurisdiction over the accused. . So

from arrest, for example, an arraignment must be had within 30days. But in the case of Lumanlaw vs Peralta

LUMANLAW VS PERALTA482 SCRA 396 (2006)

From the time the accused was arrested, the arraignment was hadone year 9 months and 4 days after. All in all, there were 14postponements. So almost 2 years before accused was arraigned.Now in determining the violation of this right, the court has to lookinto the reasons of the delay.

SC went over the causes of the delay and saw a lack of earnesteffort on the part of the judge to conduct arraignment as soon asthe court calendar will allow. In other words, napabayaan ng

judge. So there was violation to the right to speedy trial.What is the effect? ACQUITTAL. See, he is acquitted.

TAI LIM VS CA

317 SCRA 521 (1999)

From the time that the arraignment was had, more than a year,one year 3 months has passed before the trial actuallycommenced. Here, there were 11 postponements.

When SC went over the reasons, the reasons vary from absenceon the part of prosecution, absence of the prosecutor and eventhe re-raffling (?) of the case. When we say re-raffling of the case,from one court to another. Na-transfer sya.

SC said that the reasons for postponements were reasonable andnot intended to delay the prosecution of the case. Now theabsences of witnesses have been validated by their excuse. Theexcuse was reasonable. The right of the accused to speedy trialshould not be utilized to give primacy (?) of the reasonable ___ offairly prosecuting criminals.

In practice, invoking the right to speedy trial under the rules, wecan go with the 3-day rule. If the prosecution has been postponingthe hearing for 3 consecutive days, we can invoke the right tospeedy trial. 3 days lang. meaning, you can get an acquittal foryour client.

DE ZURUARREGUI VS ROSETE

382 SCRA 1 (2002)

From the arraignment, there was no trial for 2 years. This is due to15 postponements. The postponements are either on motions on

both parties or agreements on both parties.

SC said that the reasons there are reasonable, justified. Speedytrial means that if one party, soon after indictment filed afterprosecution can with reasonable negligence to prepare for trial.(ANO DAW? Sorry kaayo, I cant keep up with her. Paspas kaayosya. And I think what she is reading is a complex sentence, somany commas! Sorry. But I think what Maam is saying is thatprosecution is allowed a reasonable amount of time to prepare).The court should do more than a mathematical computation onthe number of postponements of scheduled hearing.

What offense derives in a speedy trial are unjustifiedpostponements?

SUMBANG VS GEN COURT337 SCRA 227 (2000)

Sumbang here is a member of the Philippine Constabulary. Therewas a decomposition of the Philippine National Police. Dili na syaPC nagging PNP na sya. Anyway, because of the decomposition ofthe entire unit, it took more than 8 years before his trial wascontinued. Was there violation of the right to speedy trial?

SC said there was no violation because of the operation of lawwhich delayed the proceedings. So dahil na decompose ang PCnagging PNP, they have new rules, new laws, etc.

Public and impartial trial

PUBLIC TRIAL- This is given to the accused to assure the proceedings will not betainted with any irregularities or impropriety. Again, when you saycriminal proceeding, you have a scenario of David vs Goliath.There was an assurance that the rights of David would beobserved or respected. The public has to observe the proceedings.

What will happen when the proceedings would be private? Sobasig kulatahon si David ron. So thats why the constitutionprovided that the trial should be made in public to ensure that theJudge in the proceeding will not do anything irregular and that theaccused will be accorded such protection. If it is done in closed


6/17




door sessions, it will cause the anxiety of the accused, wala syangkakampi. Gusto mo meron kang supporters, kung pwede pa langmay banner ka.

Public trial means that the trial should be done in court rooms.Some court rooms are as big as this, some half lang. now, thats

public trial. If you want to observe public students, you can go

there as law students. Wala naming attendance dun. You dontneed to identify who you are. So punta ka lang dun. Anyway, thecourt requires that you come in decent clothings and shoes. Bawalmag-chinelas or sleeveless.

(Maam shares story of fellow lawyer: arraignment nya tapos naka-tshirt, so pinalabas ng Judge, akala law student.)

GARCIA VS DOMINGO

52 SCRA 143 (1973)

What happened here is that, the trial was held not in the courtroom but in the adjacent room, which is the chamber of the judge.Trial was had inside the chambers. Does this violate the right topublic trial?

SC said that trial is public when anyone interested in observing themanner how the judge conducts the proceeding may do so. Thereis legal bank on such attendance is being __ of no moment andno relationship to the . that is public trial. Meaning, any member ofthe public can observe/witness the proceeding.

In the case at bar, SC said that there was no prohibition on thepart of the public made by the judge. Meaning, anyone who isinterested na makisiksik doon, can do so. SC said, trial inside thechamber qualifies as public trial.

Maam: But the reality is, may aura ung chamber ngjudge. Sa labas pa lang, ayaw mo ng pumasok. Sino

kaya papasok dun?

Are there instances wherein a judge may exclude amember of the family of the accused from witnessing theproceeding but still will not violate the right?

YES. Particularly in cases where maselan ang issue,like if it involves public decency or public morals. Im

talking about rape cases. Particularly when it is theturn of the victim to testify because it cannot beavoided that the victim has to testify as to thedetails of the acts.

Also, another acceptable exception is when it is aminor who will testify. Kahit pa sabihin pa natin na

hindi rape, and the minor cannot testify in thepresence of many people. Pwede din i-excuse yunng judge. Another example would be if the witnessis to be corroborated by another witness. The judgecan exclude that other witness from hearing thetestimony of the first witness. Why? His testimony issupposed to be corroborated with the firsttestimony. So if he hear the testimony, then there isalready coaching. Ay yun pala sasabihin, etc etc.so in this case, the judge can validly exclude andthere is no violation of the right.

PEOPLE VS SANCHEZ

302 SCRA 21 (1999)

If we say that the trial must be public, here, the accused is nowdefrauding (?) the publicity of his trial. Who is familiar here ofMayor Sanchez? Mayor Sanchez here is charged with rape, 7counts of rape with homicide. Now the mayor, being a publicfigure, his case has been attended by widespread media coverage.So this extreme spectrum, he doesnt want pervasive publicity my

the media. According to him, it has violated his right to trialbecause it has affected the impartiality of the judge.

So is the right of an accused to fair trial incompatible to a freepress?

SC said NO. Publicity is not per se prejudicial to the right of theaccused to fair trial. It does not itself prove that the publicity sopermeate the mind of the judge and impaired his impartiality onthe case. The most that you can do is to allege the possibility ofthe tendency of the judge to be unfair. But you have to go morethat, you have to prove that it actually affected the judge by suchpublicity. So more than allege, you have to prove.

Impartial trialImpartial trial, ah I already discussed this to you.The judge must not be impartial. Impartial, publicity,impartial, publicity, are they incompatible?

No. that is also what happened in the Estrada case.

ESTRADA VS. DESIERTO356 SCRA 109 (2001)

There was a finding of probable cause indicting him of plunder.The proceeding was had at and the ombudsman conductedpreliminary investigation. During the conduct of preliminaryinvestigation, there was already a day-to-day coverage of theproceedings in the newspapers. So according to Estrada, it hasalready prejudiced his case. He contends his right to impartial trialwas affected by the prejudicial trial by publicity proceedings beforethe ombudsman. There was also, according to him, a hatecampaign launched by some newspapers so that the prosecutionand the judiciary can no longer assure him of an impartial trial.

Again, thats an allegation.

SC held that more than the allegation, you have to prove thatthere is already impartiality because of this publicity. The merefact that the proceeding was given a wide media coverage doesnot prove that the publicity so far affected the tribunalsimpartiality.

Its just the same as the Sanchez case.We cannot help it, hes thepresident of the Philippines.

In relation to the case..

ESTRADA VS DESIERTO

356 SCRA 109 (2001)

This time ex-pesident who was being charged of plunder afterallegedly resigning from public office. So in this case, Estrada forreconsideration and the decision of the SC wherein the SC ruledthat he has resigned, one of his grounds is that he was denied theright to impartial trial because the impartiality of his trial was

affected/ prejudice by pretrial publicity / proceeding before theombudsman. Even before the case was filed, even before the casewas still in the investigatory stage. It already received mediamileage! Not only locally but internationally pa!!! so, that is hiscontention. The Publicity so permeated the mind of the trial judgeimpaired his impartiality. There must be allegation and proof thatthe judges have been unduly influenced, not simply that theymight be.

the SC was consistent with this ruling in PEOPLE VS SANCHEZ.

RE: REQUEST FOR RADIO TV COVERAGE360 SCRA 248 (2001)

In relation to that case, the KBP, consisting of duly franchisedradio/TV networks petitioned the SC to request that they beallowed live media coverage of the trial of the former Pres.Estrada. The Request was anchored to assure the public of fulltransparency of the proceedings of the public trial. What do wehave here? The issue here is the constitutionality of the freedom ofthe press, and the right to public information and the fundamental

right of the accused the right to fair trial/impartial trial. Where

there is clash between these 2 rights, which right should prevail right to public information, freedom of the press vs right of theaccused. Which right should be preferred?The SC said the rightof the accused must be preferred.


7/17




with the possibility of losing not only the precious liberty but alsothe very life of the accused, it behooves all to make absolutelycertain that an accused receives a verdict solely on the basis of a

just and dispassionate judgment. Why? ---what is the effect ofTelevision coverage? At least in this case that there is recognitionof the SC. Example. I am a potential witness. To ensure that I willnot bother myself before the court. I will make my research and

watch the TV coverage. If I am going to testify in theimpeachment proceedings against the CJ therefore prudencewould dictate that I watched so that my testimony would beconsistent with another witnesses. So more or less there is thatpossible effect.

Another effect it can effect the performance of the judge (di kaartista pero may live coverage) .. just look at the senator judgesand the effect of the live media coverage.. and it can destroy theimage of the accused in the eyes of the public.

In order to protect the parties right to due process, to preventthe distraction of the participants in the proceedings and in thelast analysis, to avoid miscarriage of justice, the request wasdenied

IN RE: REQUEST FOR LIVE COVERAGE

365 SCRA 62 (2001)

The Request was made by the KBP diba? It was denied. Whomove for the reconsideration para ma-grant? Its the state via thesecretary of Justiceetc.. anyways,

The motion was filed by the Secretary of Justice, as one of thepetitioners, who argues that there is really no conflict between theright of the people to public information and the freedom of thepress, on one hand, and on the other hand, the right of theaccused to a fair trial; that if there is a clash between theserights, it must be resolved in favor of the right of the people and

the press because the people, as the repository of sovereignty, areentitled to information; and that live media coverage is asafeguard against attempts by any party to use the courts asinstruments for the pursuit of selfish interest.

There will be more damage to the accused than damage to thepublic as repository of democracy. Maxado vague na allegationto whereas the damage to the accused would be concrete. So thiswas also denied. However, because of importance of the trial andpreserving the records, the SC ruled that there should be audio -visual recording of the proceedings. The recording will not be forlive or real broadcast but for documentary purposes. Only later willthey be available for public showing, after the Sandiganbayan shallhave promulgates its decision in every case to which therecordings pertains. The Material Film shall be deposited in the

National Museum and the Records Management and ArchivesOffice for historical preservation and exhibition pursuant to LAW!!!

RIGHT TO CONFRONTATION

This right refers to the right to CROSSEXAMINATION. This rightis very important to criminal prosecution for 2 reasons:

1. It allows the accused to examine the witness totest the credibility, truthfulness and test againstprejudice/bias against the accused.

- If I am the accused the sole purpose is to create the doubtdiba? Because I can only be convicted upon proof beyondreasonable doubt. So to be given that opportunity, I shouldbe allowed to confront the witness to test his credibility, totest his bias against me so that somehow this may prove toshake the veracity of his testimony.

2. And the other reason is for the judge to OBSERVETHE DEMEANOR of the witness.

- DEMEANOR is important because this will help thejudge in appreciating the testimony of the witness. Sometimeswe can see the truthfulness or falsity by just the demeanor ofthe witness. For example, narape din ako, hehehe so that

will give the judge an idea of WON to believe the testimony ofthe accused.- So another TIP! If you are going to be a trial courtlawyer if you find that the demeanor of the witness isrelevant to the credibility of his/her own testimony, you makesure that it is put on record because the transcript /stenographic notes only records the spoken words. It is not

written there kahit hahahah pa yan. The court stenographerwill not write there HAHHAHAHHA! so what will you do? ------

your honor, may we put into record that after the witnesstestified na-rape din ako, she smiled sabi pa nga nila, ifumiyak yan iparecord ang luha! (lol) if the witness is crying,

that will also add to his credibility. So it your witness is a goodactor/actress why not???

Right to have compulsory processes to secure theattendance of the witness

In criminal proceedings, the venue or where the case should befiled is JURISDICTIONAL! What do you mean by that? The placewhere the case should be filed is equivalent to the court which has

jurisdiction over the case.

When you study jurisdiction, the rules would just say for this kindsof offenses MTC, for this kind RTC, SANDIGANBAYAN, ETCregardless where.

In Civil Cases, the option where the case is filed lets say RTC,the option is with the plaintiff, either at the place where theplaintiff resides or where the defense resides at the option of

the plaintiff.

But when it comes to Criminal Cases, this case can only befiled at the place where the crime was committed.

JURISDICTIONALmeans that the case is filed in another RTC notin the RTC of the Place, that another RTC has no jurisdiction ofthat offense.----the presumption is that, if the crime is committed here, thewitness for the accused can also be located in this place. So tomake it easier for the accused, the venue should be in the sameplace where the offense / crime was committed.----Now the accused, should have available witness not matterwhere the witness may be located however, they should be madeavailable to the accused at the expense of the state.

Now, how can the court secure the attendance of the witness?? Bysubpoena

1. Subpoena ad testificandum an order for theperson to appear in court to testify

2. Subpoena duces tecum aka subpoena forproduction of evidence if it as an order for theperson to appear in court and to bring documents. ( isa court summons ordering a named party to appearbefore the court and produce documents or othertangible evidence for use at a hearing or trial

In this similar rules of procedure, we have the 100km radius rulethis is a compulsory process of the court to compel the attendanceof the witness had no effect if the witness resides more than100KM to the place where he is to testify. Meaning that it yourwitness is already in Batanes, he could not be compelled by asubpoena. But that is true in civil cass. But when it comes to

witnesses for the accused, wherever the witness may be, he canbe compelled to appear in court. HOW? If he disobeys thesubpoena, he can be arrested or cited by the court in contempt.That is to favor the accused vis-s-vis the state the accused has noresource to compel the attendance of the witness. So it is now theconstitution that will give now the duty to compel the attendanceof the witness of the case. It will be the state who will prosecuteyou, it will be the state that wll find your witnesses.

TRIAL IN ABSENTIA


8/17




Trial by absentia is no longer a right accorded to the accused. It isa right accorded to the state to continue with the trial in a criminalprosecution despite the absence of the accused. So we call thattrial by absentia. Under the rule, trial by absentia is not allowedbecause if the accused will be denied his right to defend himself,right to counsel, confront witness, etc. but under the newConstitution, trial by absentia is already allowed. Why? So that the

case in the prosecution will not be dependent upon the presenceof the accused and the accused cannot invoke state liability bybeing absent and more importantly, there will be no mockery ofthe criminal justice system.

But there are requisites for Trial in Absentia to be allowed.1. There should be an arraignment. The accused must

first be arraigned.2. The accused must be notified of the schedule trial.3. Despite the notice, the accused failed to appear in

court.

PEOPLE VS SALAS143 SCRA 163 (1986)

The accused here was charged with homicide with no bailrecommended. Trial after arraignment was had, trial commencedfor murer but along the way the granted him bail. Whaen he wasgiven provisional liberty, he juped bail and hence escaped. Thecopurt now refused to continue the trial unless the accused isarrested.If you are the lawyer of the complainant, what would you do if theaccused jumped bail, how can you go on/proceed presenting theevidence?What were your options? The bail will be forfeited in favor of theState; the trial will proceed despite the absence of the accused.

AS LONG AS THE ACCUSED HAS ALREADY BEEN ARRAIGNED,TRIAL SHOULD PROCEED

GIMENEZ VS NAZARENO160 SCRA 1 (1988)

There were 6 accused here. One of them however, escaped. Afterarraignment, all of the 6 were arraigned; the trial proceeded asagainst the 5 accused. But the court refused to consider that he isone of the accused who escaped. So for the mindset of the courtthis will be a trial only against the 5 accused (hindi niya sinali yungisang naka-escaped). According to him, the court has lost

jurisdiction over the person of the accused. What if my custodykana, the accused escapes, to the mind of the trial court the

escape means the court has lost jurisdiction over the accused. Isha correct? NOOO!!! The principle is that once the court acquires

jurisdiction over the person of the accused, JURISDICTION IS

NEVE LOST!!! until the termination of the case. Here, trial inabsentia should proceed even as against the person who escapedso that the rendering of the decision it should include not onlyfindings of evidence but also who escaped.

So what is the rule in ESCAPE??

waiver of notice on the part of the accused. So under the law, isdeemed notified of the hearing. So in actual huh!!! Mag panic ka ifyoure the prosecution lawyer. So the escape is deemed a waiverof his notice. So the escape makes his absence unjustified. And itis deemed waiver of his right to cross examination the witness.What if he appears for the purpose of cross examining thewitness? Can he do that? Yes! He can waive, he cannot waive,thats the right of the accused.

What is the effect of Trial by Absentia vis--vis the right of theaccused to be presumed innocent. Na-imagine mu yung scenariosa court?

- ARRAIGNMENTTHE ACCUSED PLEAS Nowwhat happen? The prosecution will continue topresent his witnesses / documentary evidencewithout the presence of the accused. So whatdo we have? Only that he waived that right byescaping /by not appearing during his term to

present his evidence. It does not affect hispresumption of innocence.

REASON: The court is still mandated to convict/acquit the accusedbased on proof beyond reasonable doubt. Meaning if theprosecution, despite na wala xang kalaban still fails to present the

proof beyond reasonable doubt, the court can always acquit theaccused because the presumption of innocence is still there. Dyanmu ma appreciate the difference ng proof in civil casesthereforethe relief will be granted to that party whereas in criminal cases BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT talaga!!. Presumption of innocencevs proof that was shown by the prosecution and it must be provedbeyond reasonable doubt.

March 13, 2012Transcribed by: Kirsten & Marlie

-----------------------------------------

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

Section 15.The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall notbe suspended except in cases of invasion or rebellion when thepublic safety requires it.

Sounds familiar to you? Under what article?

Section 18.The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of allarmed forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomesnecessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent orsuppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasionor rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he may, for aperiod not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writof habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under

martial law. Within forty-eight hours from the proclamation ofmartial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeascorpus, the President shall submit a report in person or in writingto the Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at leasta majority of all its Members in regular or special session, mayrevoke such proclamation or suspension, which revocation shallnot be set aside by the President. Upon the initiative of thePresident, the Congress may, in the same manner, extend suchproclamation or suspension for a period to be determined by theCongress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safetyrequires it.

The Congress, if not in session, shall, within twenty-four hoursfollowing such proclamation or suspension, convene in accordancewith its rules without need of a call.

The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding filedby any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of theproclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege ofthe writ of habeas corpus or the extension thereof, and mustpromulgate its decision thereon within thirty days from its filing.

A state of martial law does not suspend the operation ofthe Constitution, nor supplant the functioning of the civil courtsor legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of

jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians wherecivil courts are able to function, nor automatically suspend theprivilege of the writ of habeas corpus.

The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shallapply only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or offenses

inherent in, or directly connected with, invasion.

During the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeascorpus, any person thus arrested or detained shall be judiciallycharged within three days, otherwise he shall be released.

Executive department: powers of the commander in chief,particularly Sec 18. It covers both martial law and the suspensionof the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.


9/17




Now, the second to the last paragraph of Art 7 Sec 18 states that:The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shallapply only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or offensesinherent in, or directly connected with, invasion.

I think you already know the implication of this provision. And then

during the suspension of the privilege, any person arrested ordetained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise heshall be released. So, the usual limit for detention is suspended for3 days but only insofar as those persons judicially charged forrebellion or offenses inherent therein. So as I've said, when yousay the privilege of the writ is suspended, it only affects theseclasses of persons or these classes of offenses or charges.

WHAT IS A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (WHC)?

Writ- orderHabeas corpus- produce the bodyCorpus- body

Under the rules on the ROC:

The WHC is an order directed to the person detaining anothercommanding him to produce the body of the prisoner at adesignated time and place and explain why that person detainedshould not be released.

It has nothing to do with any other issue but only as to the reasonof his detention. In other words, the only objective of the WHC isto inquire into all manner of involuntary restraint and to relieve theperson therefrom if such restraint is illegal.

The only issue on the WHC: Is there a legal basis for thecontinued detention of that person?

FUNCTIONS OF THE WHC:

1) It is the only effective remedy to question any form of

involuntary restraints.

Restraint does not limit itself to imprisonment or custody. It coversany form of involuntary restraints.

Example:

VILLAVICENCIO V LUKBAN

39 Phil 778 (1919)

Women were involuntary sent to a far-flung island. This is thecase of prostitutes in the red light district of Manila where theywere all sent on a ship going to Davao. Davao was still a very,very far island from Manila. Unheard of for most of them. Therewas no imprisonment to talk about, yet they were thereinvoluntarily. What case should you file? File for damages and/orcriminal charges against those persons who sent these women toDavao? But the objective is to release these women and bringthem back to Manila.

The proper petition is the petition for the WHC. It will inquire intothe validity of the involuntary restraint.

MONCUPA VS. ENRILE141 SCRA 233 (1986)

Here the petitioner was detained by the military through theSecretary of Defense, Enrile. After detention, she was releasedwith no charges. The release, however, was with other conditionslike she has to report every now and then to the Secretary ofDefense and she should not give interviews to reporters. So, therewere accompanying conditions to her release.

Although there is no custody, no actual detention to speak of,what we have here is a detention with conditions. How should

she be freed from those conditions? She has to file for a petitionfor the issuance of WHC to inquire into the validity of thoseconditions.

AMPATUAN V MACARAIG622 SCRA 266 (2010)

This involves a police officer from Sultan Kudarat suspected ofkilling the head of the Law Dept. of Comelec. He was placed ininquest. There was an investigation conducted by the prosecutor.During the inquest, however, while there was still no charge, hewas released. But under the PNP rules and regulations, he wascharged for grave misconduct arising from murder. So, there wasan administrative charge. Now, the PNP law allows the PNPDirector General to place him under "restrictive custody". Sonotwithstanding that he was released by the City Prosecutorbecause there was no charge yet, there was an administrativecase filed against him by the PNP and because of that, he wasplaced on "restrictive custody". His movement is being monitoredby the PNP General, kung saan siya and he was not yet allowed togo back to his family. The wife filed for a petition for the issuanceof the WHC.

SC said that here, since the PNP law authorizes "restrictivecustody" as a matter of internal discipline, this constitutes a validargument for his continued detention. In other words, thecontinued detention is lawful. And besides, he is not really inactual detention and is under other nominal restraint which isbeyond the ambit of HC. Under monitioring lang siya ng PNP, so itis not a proper subject for the petition for the issuance of theWHC.

IN RE: AQUINO V ESPERON

531 SCRA 788 (2007)

Major Aquino is the head of the highest officer of the ScoutRangers na nandoon sa Air Force Barracks. They had this petitionof redress against the government but they are members of themilitary, so they cannot do that. He was one of those charged withviolation against the Articles of War. So, he was under the custodyof the military where he is supposed to be under court martial.The wife filed for a petition for the issuance of the WHC because

according to her, he was not placed in his barracks, quarters or

tents as mandated in the articles of war, rather he was placed in a

solitary confinement with maximum security detention cell and the

wife also questions the fact that she was restricted from visitingher husband. What is she questioning?

She is not questioning the legality of the detention because thereis a legal basis for such and that is the fact that he is under courtmartial proceedings for violation of the articles of war.

What she is questioning is actually the conditions of hisconfinement which is not the proper question in the petition forWHC (Bakit sa isang maximum protection detention cell? Bakithindi sa barracks where he can freely roam around?) Again, thequestion should only inquire into the validity of the continueddetention.

Example:

You already filed a bail bond and was approved by the court butyour client was not yet released by the chief of police,

notwithstanding several request, notwithstanding the filing ofillegal detention, arbitrary detention pala. What would you file as alawyer for your client to be immediately released? WHC.Iba yung arbitrary detention kasi liability yun ng officer.

2) It functions as a post-conviction remedy.

Here, the convict is already serving sentence. What happens ifalong the way, there is a new law that, if applied retroactively, willbe advantageous to your client or to the convict? Say, the penalty


10/17




has been reduced, what would you file?

GUMAHON V DIR. OF PRISON37 SCRA 420 (1958)

He was convicted in 1953 for the complex crime of rebellion withmurder. Until now, jurisprudence would say that there is nocomplex crime of rebellion with murder, right? What we have isonly rebellion and the murder is already incorporated in the formercrime. This was because of the ruling in the case of Amado vHernandez that was decided 3 years after he started servingsentence. His original penalty was life imprisonment then, lumabasang Amado v Hernandez where the penalty of rebellion is justprision mayor. Can he appeal his case? No. There is a period ofappeal, which is usually 15 days from the time of judgment. Canhe file a certiorari for grave abuse of discretion? No, it is alreadybeyond the period. Usually it is 60 days.

What can he file in order to question the validity of his continueddetention? WHC.

But when can he file that action? When is his cause of actionaccrue? When he has serve at least prision mayor maximum. Hecan allege that he has already served the penalty as properlyinterpreted by the SC. Because after the conviction, when thedecision is already final and executory, it can no longer bechanged. Here, the decision cannot be changed but the continueddetention can be questioned via the petition of a WHC.

Another example is the case of

LAMEN V DIRECTOR OF PRISON

241 SCRA 537 (1995)

The accused here is convicted for violation of RA 6245. At that

time, the law provided for a penalty of life imprisonment thencame the case of Pp v Simon. In this case, the SC interpreted forthe first time the penalty range for the crime of possessing orselling regulated drugs. The law says the penalty ranges fromprision correccional to death. So SC divided the penalty in relationto the grams of shabu. Here, he was caught in possession of 13.6grams of shabu. During his conviction, he was sentenced to LI butafter the SC interpreted the penalty range in a later decision, heshould only serve the penalty of prision correccional. So ilangyears yun? Diba, 6 years? So, when he has already served 6 years,the proper petition to question his continued detention is the WHC.

Also, even if the decision is already final and the convict is alreadyserving sentence, if it shown that there is a deprivation of theconstitutional rights of the accused, the court is deemed ousted of

its jurisdiction.

Simple and easily understood example is the case of Olaguer. Hewas a civilian charged and convicted before the military tribunal.There were proceedings but at the end, he was denied of dueprocess because he was tried before the military courts followingmilitary rules of procedure. That's why the SC said that that courthas no jurisdiction over this person. That military court issupposedly ousted of its jurisdiction. What happens to thedecision? How would you question that? Through a petition for theWHC. You would allege that the court has no jurisdiction over yourperson.

ANDAL V PEOPLE

307 SCRA 650

However, there was already judgment, the accused alreadyserved his sentence and then later on, he questioned the decisionthrough a petition of WHC alleging that during the police line-up,he was identified without the assistance of a counsel. Thus, hewas denied of his constitutional right. You know that the argumentis wrong but had it been right, you know that the petition for theWHC is proper.

IN RE: GARCIA

399 SCRA 292 (2000)

The same. Judgment, sentence, wala na silang ma-file, hindi nasila maka-appeal, hindi na sila maka-certiorari. To question his

continued detention, he alleged that his constitutional right wasviolated during trial because the judge failed to appreciate theevidence. The argument is wrong because it is part of the duty of

the judge to appreciate evidence. But had it been right, the courtwould have been ousted of its jursidiction.

FERIA VS. CA

325 SCRA 525 (2000)

the same. He alleged that he was deprived of his constitutionalright and so he filed for a petition of the WHC. He asked for atransfer from his present detention facility to another. Herequested to transfer to Muntinlupa but he can't be transferredbecause allegedly, his conviction papers got lost or nasunog. So,according to him, there is no longer a basis for his conviction.Wala na ang papers, so how will you prove that he was convicted?

Kaya nagfile sya ng WHC.

The SC said that: you read your pleading, read your complaint.You said that you are serving sentence because of conviction. Thefact that the conviction papers were lost does not affect

jurisdiction. Although tama sana ang WHC, the argument is wrong.

WRIT OF AMPARO

Writ of amparo is a very recent rule promulgated by the SC toprotect the constitutional rights of the people under Art. 8.

SEC. OF NATIONAL DEFENSE VS. MANALO

568 SCRA 1 (2008)

The case of Manalo brothers is the first SC decision applying thisrule. So the rule of Amparo took effect on Oct 24, 2007.The case is actually filed sometime in August 2001. There was yetno rule. What they filed was a prohibition or injunction and TRO.When the rule came out, they manifested that it be changed to apetition for a WOA.

What happened to the Manalo brothers?

They were suspected as CCP-NPA supporters. Actually, thebrother, not these two brothers Raymond and Reynand, issuspected to be the leader of NPA in their town. Since sila angnandoon, the two were forcibly abducted. They were tortured andthreatened of death. The family actually filed for a WHC para

irelease sila. Now every time that there is supposed to be ahearing on the WHC, the persons who abducted them would bringthem to their house, ipakita sila sa nanay and threaten the nanaythat she will be killed or her sons will be killed if she appears in thehearing. They were subjected to continuous torture for 18 months.But of course, there were scheduled hearings so somehow alongthe way, they were also subjected to medical treatment paragumaling yung mga sugat then after, torture na naman. Now, theyapplied for the issuance of the petition for the WOA because itseems that the WHC will not be sufficient. In fact, in the WHC, itwas not shown that they were detained by someone.

But here, they were able to identify the persons who abductedthem (members of the CAFGU who were their neighbors) and thepersons who were cohorts of the CAFGUs who were military men.

They actually saw where they were brought (in a military fort). (Iforgot the name of the fort but read this case). When they filedthe WOA, the SC granted and ordered the petitioner(s), thisSecretary of National Defense the following (these are the reliefsgranted to them):

1) To furnish respondents with all official and unofficialreports of the investigation undertaken in connection withtheir case, except those already filed with the court.

Because the military said that in lieu of this petition, they alreadyconducted an investigation but it did not actually happen.


11/17




2) To confirm in writing the present places of officialassignments of respondents w/in 5 days from notice ofthis decision

Their location is necessary in order to avoid them because theseare persons who are continually threatening the liberty andsecurity of the Manalo brothers.

3) To produce to the CA the medical records and chartsbecause as I've mentioned earlier, they were subjected to medicaltreatments. These will verify the allegations in the pleading thatthey were tortured and subjected to treatment.

WHAT IS THE WRIT OF AMPARO?

As provided for in Sec 1 of the Rule is a remedy available toany person whose right to life, liberty, and security isviolated or threatened by a violation or an unlawful act orcommission by a public official or employee or by a privateindividual or entity. This covers extralegal killings and

enforced disappearances or threatsthereof.

This power made its first appearance in the 1987 Constitution toprotect the constitutional rights of the people. Before the 1987Constitution, the court has no power to protect the constitutionalrights of the people. The WOA was taken from Mexico. Amparo isproperly translated as protection. WOA is an order of protection. Itis a protective remedy in providing an initial relief consisting ofappropriate measures and directive crafted by the court. So thecourt can actually craft for measures it sees proper to protect thisconstitutional rights of life, liberty, and security from threat orviolation. This was originally conceived as a response to theextraordinary rise in the number of killings and forceddisappearances.WOA, therefore, is an extraordinary and independentremedy. You can still file a petition for other remedies under theROC allowing alongside the WOA.

TWO MATTERS:

1. EXTRALEGAL KILLINGS

2.

ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES or THREATS

So when you allege EXTRALEGAL KILLING ORENFORCED DISAPPEARANCESand you wanted to be protectedfrom this, either the damage has been done or your properties arethreaten thereof, the proper remedy would be the WRIT OF

AMPARO.

1.

EXTRALEGAL KILLINGS refer to killings committedwithout due process of law, without legal safeguards injudicial proceedings

2. ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES an arrest, detention,abduction of person by ordinary institution or organize groupor private individuals acting indirect or direct appearancewith the government. The refusal of the state to disclose thefate or whereabouts of the persons concern, or the refusal toacknowledge the deprivation of liberty which in a case suchpersons outside the protection of law.

If you cannot cope with copying what is there, actually it is inthe case of the SECRETARY of DEFENSE v MANALO, thedefinition was there. You dont have to memorize this, under the

rules when a WRIT is issued against an official this requires acompliant to RETURN. Now, if you would like to have an idea ofwhat a RETURN could be, because you will be given an idea howavailable a WRIT OF AMPARO is. Because the context of theRETURN is MANDATORY, in fact a mere denial is not sufficient. Soif a WRIT is issued or served of an official what is required isplaced in his RETURN. Of course those are noble defenses, that hedid not violate the right to life, liberty or security of theaggrieved party. But more than that, what course of actions haveyou taken to determine the fate or whereabouts.

Example parent ang nag file na nawawala ang anak niya,nagreport siya sa military, walang aksyon. So the parent filed apetition for WRIT OF AMPARO. The court would order this officernot only to explain his defenses that he did not involve in thatenforced disappearance but he has also taken action, honorableinformation in the possession of the respondent pertaining to thethreat, act or omission against the aggrieved party. Maybe he has

already received reports from petitioners regarding this person,baka subject or target na pala siya ng military, PNP or DDS. If therespondent is a public official or employee the RETURN shallfurther state the actions that had been formerly taken, verified theidentity of the aggrieved party. Recovery and preserved evidencerelated to the death or disappearance of the person, identifyingwitnesses and obtain statements. So maraming nirerequire sapublic officer not only to answer the military involvement (such asthe military or police is not involve), they are required to write intheir RETURN these FACTS, determine the cause, manner, locationand time of death or disappearance as well as other facts thatmay have brought about the disappearance, that might apprehendthe person/s involve in the death or disappearance and to bringthe suspected offenders before a competent court. So if you arethe secretary of defense or you are the chief of the armed forces

and you are issued this WRIT, kung ikaw ang mastermind ngdisappearance, you will be forced to bring all offenses siguro,because you are required to perform all these.

Now, also the WRIT provides for INTERIM RELIEFS.Whileit is still being heard the court will issue TEMPORARY DETENTIONORDER. The petitioner or the aggrieved party, even the membersof immediate family of the aggrieved person are protected by thegovernment agency or accredited person, pwede ring mga madreas long as they are accredited. INSPECTION ORDER, Order in theperson in possession or control of the disputed land, or otherproperty to forbid entry for the purpose of inspecting, surveying,usurping or operation thereof

ROXAS v MACAPAGAL-ARROYO630 SCRA 211 (2010)

Here involved is Roxas who is a US citizen, very young girl,US citizen involve a BAYAN- USA, she enrolled in their program totour around the Philippines. Biruin nyo US citizen na siya pumuntalang siya sa Philippines to look at the barrios. She has a medicalbackground, she brought with her, her stethoscope andsphygmomanometer, and allegedly she was conducting a medicalmission. But one day while resting in a house, around 3 personsabducted them everything was taken from them, she was actuallyunder custody in an unknown place, blindfolded all the time foraround 5 days. Now, one of her prayers is a petition of WRIT OF

AMPARO, because according to her she was brought to a militarycamp. Because according to her even if she was taken blind

folded she can hear planes landing and taking-off, gun fire andconstruction going on. So why not military camp ito?

So the SC based on the estimate the time of travel, they went tothis particular camp, actually the CA denied her prayer for relief ,INSPECTION ORDER, because according to CA concurred by theSC the basic requirement before granting the INSPECTIONORDER, the place to be inspected is at least determinable for theallegation in the court. Now, according to her, she is certain that itis a military camp because of the time travel.

But the SC said that you are not familiar with place, there mightbe mistake, also there is no certainty that it is a military camp justbecause you heard airplanes landing and takeoff, gun fire andconstruction while being blind folded. So it was not granted,

because it has NOT been an INTENTION of SC to make the WRITOF AMPARO AN AVENUE OF FISHING EXPEDITION OF EVIDENCE.So in that case she was denied the prayer.

The court can also issue a PRODUCTION ORDER, an orderto any person in possession, in custody or in control of anydesignated documents, papers, books, accounts, letters,photographs, objects or tangible things or others, in digitize orapplied forms which constitute or contain evidence written in theirpetition for RETURN. To produce and permit their inspection,copy


12/17




In this case of the MANALO BROTHERS there was aPRODUCTION ORDER issued by the court but the NATIONALDEFENSE, the petitioners then, said that the PRODUCTION ORDERmust comply the requisites of SEARCH WARRANT. Ano yun?

Application, personal knowledge, probable cause determined bythe judge in relation to one offense. So is this a correct argument?The SC said NO. This PRODUCTION ORDER is the order to protect

the individual against government intrusion. It is an order issuedagainst the government to protect an individual. Whereas in theissuance of a SEARCH WARRANT the act to be done is thegovernment.

Distinction

PRODUCTION ORDER the applicant is individual as againstthe government.

SEARCH WARRANT the applicant is the state as against theindividual.

The principle applies if there is state intrusion but here there is nostate intrusion because it is for the benefit of the individual.

PRODUCTION ORDER is liken to a civil case, when you filesubpoena in a civil case. PRODUCTION of documents or thingsunder the rules of CIVIL PROCEDURE, subpoena is a civilprocedure it cannot be identified or confused with unreasonablesearches and seizure prohibited by the constitution.

The court can also issue WITNESS PROTECTIONORDER, with the WRIT OF AMPARO, they will be admitted to awitness protection program. Thus, what we have when we sayWRIT OF AMPARO, it is provided with our lacking for judicial relief(wanting judicial relief, so vague on my recording), SUMMARY INNATURE. The object of inquiry is WON there was EXTRA LEGALKILLING or ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE, yun lang. Other mattersare beyond the scope of the WRIT OF AMPARO.

SUMMARY PROCEEDINGrequires at least substantialevidence. Was there EXTRA LEGAL KILLING, was there ENFORCEDDISAPPEARANCE, was there THREAT to EXTRA LEGAL KILLING orTHREAT to ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE, yan lang ang question. Ifthere was, the court can already issue a WRIT provided forprotection order that maybe proper adjudicating the circumstance.What is it now? It is NOT the WRIT to protect ourselves to dulyPROPERTY or COMMERCIAL.

PAGLAS V MONTIL

They file a WRIT OF AMPARO because according to them they lostin an ejectment case. They are supposed to be ejected. Thedecision was already at bar on appeal and their house is about to

be demolished or some of them their houses were already beendemolished. According to them it is a violation of their right ofhouses. The SC it is already beyond the scope of the WRIT OF

AMPARO. This is purelyproperty issue of litigation which is beyondthe scope of a WRIT OF AMPARO. Again the scope is onlyEXTRALEGAL KILLING and ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE. It doesnot include the protection of the right to travel that is the case280(2009)

Father Robert Reyes was among those in Manila Peninsula Siegebecause of that they were caught. There was an inquest, therewas an investigation on WON he will be charge with rebellion. Inthe meantime while the inquest was ongoing, there was holddeparture order against all of them were caught. Actually thecharge was never pursued against Father Robert Reyes but the

hold departure order is still there. So every time that he travels hewill be detained temporarily in the deputation office.

So he filed petition for the WRIT OF AMPARO, according to him itis a violation of his liberty, right to travel. Is he correct?

The SC said No. Focus is the EXTRALEGAL KILLING andENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE lang. It does not fix liabilities fordisappearances, killings or theft thereof, whether criminalliabilities, civil liabilities or administrative liabilities. Again this issummary in nature.

ROXAS v MACAPAGAL-ARROYO

630 SCRA 211 (2010)

In ROXAS v MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, si Roxas ay US citizenna bata, she actually filed impleading the President GloriaMacapagal-Arroyo, because according to her she is responsibleunder the DOCTRINE OF COMMAND RESPONSIBILITY. The SCsaid, other than immunity from suit of the president, theDOCTRINE OF COMMAND RESPONSIBILITY couldnt applybecause it presupposes an indication of an individual liability. Now,for individual liability is more applicable in a full-blown criminal oradministrative case rather in a summary AMPARO PROCEEDINGS.

Again, anAMPARO PROCEEDING is not an action todetermine criminal guilt to prove beyond reasonabledoubt, to determine liability for damages in a civil caserequiring preponderance of evidence or in administrativeproceedings requiring substantial evidence that willrequire lengthy proceedings. Take note this is a SUMMARYPROCEEDINGS, requiring only substantial evidence and only onthe question on whether there was EXTRALEGAL KILLING andENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE and whether appropriate pleasshould be granted.

Now, in the case of ROXAS v MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, when she wasabducted she have with her certain items, her journal, digital camwith memory card, many laptops with external hard disk, iPad,wrist watch, sphygmomanometer, stethoscope, medicines andcash.

Now, among her petition is the return of her items, CA denied andthe SC affirmed the denial, why? An order for the return of personbelongings will be equivalent to conclusive pronouncement ofliabilities.

Again the WRIT OF AMPARO is not the venue for determining

liability. So the return will only be granted once the liability of therespondent was already been fixed where in whole and assumptiveproceeding. But why did the court denied, again the WRIT OFMAPARO is NOT A DETERMINATION OF PROPRIETARY RIGHTS,right to property. Under the general rulings of Property rightswhich is already beyond the scope of the WRIT OF AMPARO. Soagain the scope is SPECIFIC and LIMITED ONLY onEXTRALEGAL KILLING and ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE.

TheTWO FOLD ROLES ofWRIT OF AMPARO:

It is PREVENTIVE and CURATIVE.

PREVENTIVE brings the exculpation of immunity inthe commission of EXTRALEGAL KILLINGS and ENFORCEDDISAPPEARANCES.

CURATIVE as you can see in the RETURN, yungrequired, facilitates subsequent punishment of perpetrators, as ityield it leads to subsequent investigation and action. The publicofficers are actually required or mandated to take action, toconduct investigation, to identify suspects, arrests suspects andthen litigate them.

What is the difference between the WRIT OF AMPARO

& WRIT OF HABEAS DATA?

REVIEW

WRIT OF HABEACORPUS

WRIT OF AMPARO WRIT OFHABEAS DATA

-To bring orproduce the body-The object isunlawfuldetention,

-EXTRALEGAL KILLINGand ENFORCEDDISAPPEARANCE-RIGHT TO LIFE,LIBERTY AND

-To produce thedata or information-More on theRIGHT TOPRIVACY


13/17




continuousdetention

SECURITY

WRIT OF HABEAS DATA

Under this rule a WRIT is readily available to a persons RIGHT TOPRIVACY, LIFE, and LIBERTY AND SECURITY. So privacy in LIFE,privacy in LIBERTY, privacy in SECURITY is violated by a publicofficer or employee or by a private individual particularly thoseengaged or involve in the gathering, collecting or storing of data orinformation regarding the person, family home andcorrespondence of aggrieved party.

The WRIT of HABEAS DATA in general is designed to protect bymeans of judicial complaint the image, privacy, honor, informationand freedom of information of an individual. This is meant toprovide for the right to truth and the informational guarantee thesafeguarding constitutional guarantee to protect against abuse. Toprotect breach of information and to help at least in the form ofWRIT OF HABEAS DATA.

In the case of ROXAS v MACAPAGAL- ARROYO, that US Citizen nana-involve sa BAYANMUNA, because actually she was allegedlyabducted because she was included in the order of AMPARO of theMilitary, so may listahan pala to, there was actually a videofootage and photograph wherein ROXAS to be allegedly amongthose in the photograph involved in a MILITARY EXERCISE by therebels and in those videos, and this was being shown by Esqueron,this come to the public. So in this ROXAS case the petitioner issuppressed any existing governmental files or the linking her tothe communist movement and with the issuance of the WRIT OFHABEAS DATA the respondents were enjoined further distributingor causing the distribution to the public of any records in whateverforms or reports documents of similar papers relative to her allegespies with the CPP-NPA.

So, if you think that you are included in the list of the DDS, andyou have special prove to that, what petition can you file so thatyou will be deleted from that list? WRIT OF HABEAS DATA. Likethe WRIT OF AMPARO it will not issue to protect duly property orcommercial concerns, if the petitions involve are vague ordoubtful.

In fact in the case of DEL ROSARIO, the judgment case again,now according to them they want to get the WRIT OF HABEASDATA for the police report to be released. Police report na theywere threaten na sinusunog yung bahay nila at may threats namay pumupunta sa bahay nila. Allegedly there was a police report,they want

Constitutional law coverage 2

Documents

Transcript of Constitutional law coverage 2