Scribd
Upload
203 views2 pages

Gun Ban Guidelines Upheld in Chavez v. Romulo

The Supreme Court dismissed Francisco Chavez's petition to enjoin the implementation of guidelines issued by the Philippine National Police (PNP) Chief banning the carrying of firearms outside residences. The Court held that the guidelines were a valid exercise of police power because: (1) they were issued to promote peace and order in response to rising crime rates, which requires exercise of police power; and (2) the means of revoking all permits to carry firearms outside residences and requiring re-application was reasonably necessary and not unduly oppressive to accomplish the goal of curtailing crime by making it difficult for criminals to carry guns in public.

Uploaded by

Carl Vin Pasion
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
203 views2 pages

Gun Ban Guidelines Upheld in Chavez v. Romulo

The Supreme Court dismissed Francisco Chavez's petition to enjoin the implementation of guidelines issued by the Philippine National Police (PNP) Chief banning the carrying of firearms outside residences. The Court held that the guidelines were a valid exercise of police power because: (1) they were issued to promote peace and order in response to rising crime rates, which requires exercise of police power; and (2) the means of revoking all permits to carry firearms outside residences and requiring re-application was reasonably necessary and not unduly oppressive to accomplish the goal of curtailing crime by making it difficult for criminals to carry guns in public.

Uploaded by

Carl Vin Pasion
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Chavez v.

Romulo
June 9, 2004

Petitioner: Francisco I. Chavez


Respondents: Hon. Alberto G. Romulo, in his capacity as Executive Secretary; Director General
Hermogenes E. Ebdane, Jr., in his capacity as the Chief of the PNP; et al.
Ponente: Sandoval-Gutierrez J.

Action: Petition for prohibition and injunction seeking to enjoin the implementation of
the Guidelines in the Implementation of the Ban on the Carrying of Firearms
Outside of Residence (Guidelines) issued on Jan. 31, 2003 by respondent
Hermogenes Ebdane, Jr.
Facts: In Jan. 2003, ex-Pres. GMA delivered a speech before the members of the PNP
stressing the need for a nationwide gun ban in all public places to stop the rising
crime incidents. Thus, she directed then PNP Chief Ebdane Jr. to suspend the
issuance of Permits to Carry Firearms Outside Residence (PTCFOR).
- Acting on PGMAs directive, Ebdane issued the assailed Guidelines.
Issue: W/N the issuance of the assailed Guidelines is a valid exercise of
police power.
**Only issue related to police power is included. Please refer to case for other
issues.**
Held: Assuming that PTCFOR constitutes a property right protected by the
Constitution, the same cannot be considered as absolute as to be placed beyond
the reach of the States police power. All property in the state is held subject
to its general regulations, necessary to the common good and general
welfare.
Test to determine the validity of a police measure:
(1) The interests of the public generally require the exercise of police power;
(2) The means employed are reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of
the purpose and not unduly oppressive upon individuals.
- The test merely reiterates the essence of the constitutional guarantees of
substantive due process, equal protection, and non-impairment of property rights.
It is apparent from the assailed Guidelines that the basis for its issuance was the
need for peace and order in the society. Owing to the proliferation of crimes,
particularly those committed by the New Peoples Army (NPA), President Arroyo
deemed it best to impose a nationwide gun ban. The motivating factor in the
issuance of the assailed Guidelines is the interest of the public in general.
The only question that can then arise is whether the means employed are
appropriate and reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose and are
not unduly oppressive. In the instant case, the assailed Guidelines do not
entirely prohibit possession of firearms. What they proscribe is merely the
carrying of firearms outside of residence. However, those who wish to carry
their firearms outside of their residences may re-apply for a new PTCFOR. This we
believe is a reasonable regulation. If the carrying of firearms is regulated,
necessarily, crime incidents will be curtailed. With the revocation of all PTCFOR,
it would be difficult for criminals to roam around with their guns. On the other hand, it
would be easier for the PNP to apprehend them.

Laws regulating the acquisition or possession of guns have frequently been


upheld as reasonable exercise of the police power. With the promotion of
public peace as its objective and the revocation of all PTCFOR as the means,
the Court is convinced that the issuance of the assailed Guidelines constitutes a
reasonable exercise of police power.
Dispositive: Petition is hereby DISMISSED.

You might also like