JAZZTINE M.

ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Basic principles of political law (e.g., separation of powers, sovereignty, judicial review, fundamental powers of the
State, i.e., police power, eminent domain, and taxation)

SEPARATION OF POWERS ordains that each of the three branches of the government has exclusive cognizance of and is
supreme over matters falling within its constitutionally allocated sphere; each branch cannot invade the domain of the others.
This is to ensure that powers are not concentrated in any one branch, to avoid despotism and tyranny, and to achieve
harmony and efficiency.

Political Question is a question the resolution of which is exclusively vested by the Constitution to the people, or in which,
full discretionary authority has been delegated to another co-equal branch of the government and cannot be decided upon
by Courts.
This is opposed to Judicial Question which is concerned to matters in relation to laws and its interpretation, and not left to
the wisdom of the people.

Application
Belgica vs. Ochoa – The Pork Barrel System is a violation of the doctrine of separation of powers because it is a post-
enactment authority to the implementation of enforcement of the budget, in such a way that (a) the executive power is
encroached upon since each individual legislator is given the authority to identify projects after the General Appropriations
Act is passed; and (2) the identification of projects is required before the budget of the legislator can be tapped as source of
fund which makes it an indispensable act in the entire process of budget execution.

Ocampo vs. Enriquez – President Duterte decided a question of policy based on his wisdom that allowing the internment of
Marcos in at the LNMB shall promote national healing and forgiveness. President Duterte’s decision on that political question
is outside the ambit of judicial review.

SOVEREIGNTY is the uncontrollable and supreme power inherent in the state by which the state is governed.

Kinds of sovereignty:

1. Legal Sovereignty is the authority which has the power to give final commands.
2. Political Sovereignty is the authority, which is behind the legal sovereign, it is the total sum of all influences that
operate upon it.

3. Internal Sovereignty is the power of the state to control its domestic and internal affairs.

4. External Sovereignty is the power of the State to direct its relations to other states, which is also known as
independence.

 Territorial Jurisdiction is the authority of the State to subject all that is within its territorial bounds to its control and
protection.
 Personal Jurisdiction is the authority of the State over its nationals, their persons, properties and acts even outside
its territorial jurisdiction.
 Extraterritorial Jurisdiction is the authority of the State over persons, properties and acts even outside its territorial
limits as it affects the people of the state.

FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF THE STATE

These powers are inherent in a state, inseparable from its sovereignty, can be exercised without being expressly granted in
the Constitution or laws. However, the conditions for their exercise can be regulated or limited.

1. POLICE POWER

Definition. It is the inherent power of the State that allows it to prohibit all that is hurtful against public health, public safety,
public morals and general welfare.

Scope. The State, in order to promote general welfare, may interfere with personal liberty, properties, business and
occupation. People may be subjected to all kinds of restraints and burdens in order to promote general comfort, health and
prosperity, and to this substantial aim of the government, the rights of the individual may be subordinated.

1
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

Limitation. Important constitutional limitations are the due process clause and equal protection clause.

Specific Coverage.

A. Public health
B. Public safety
C. Public morals
D. General welfare

Who May Exercise Police Power. Generally, the Legislature.

Delegated Police Power.

A. President
B. Administrative Bodies
C. Law-making Bodies of LGUs

Limitations on Delegation of Police Power

A. Must be expressly provided by law

B. Within the territorial jurisdiction of the LGUs
C. Must not be contrary to law

Taxation and eminent Domain as Implements to Police Power.

 Taxation may be used as an implement to police power.

 Eminent domain may be used as an implement to the police objective.

Test of Valid Exercise

i. Means Purpose Test

A. Lawful Subject – Interest of the public, as distinguished from a particular class, requires such interference,
and that the subject of the measure must be within the scope of police power.
B. Lawful means – means employed must be reasonably necessary to the accomplishment of the purpose
and not unduly oppressive upon individuals.

ii. Reasonability Test. The limit to police power is the requirement that the means must be reasonably and
directly related to the purpose of the measure.

Application. The PWD mandatory discount on the purchase of medicine is supported by a valid objective or purpose as
aforementioned. lt has a valid subject considering that the concept of public use is no longer confined to the traditional notion
of use by the public, but held synonymous with public interest, public benefit, public welfare, and public convenience./As in
the case of senior citizens, the discount privilege to which the PWDs are entitled is actually a benefit enjoyed by the general
public to which these citizens belong. The means employed in invoking the active participation of the private sector, in order
to achieve the purpose or objective of the law, is reasonably and directly related. Also, the means employed to provide a fair,
just and quality health care to PWDs are reasonably related to its accomplishment, and are not oppressive, considering that
as a form of reimbursement, the discount extended to PWDs in the purchase of medicine can be claimed by the
establishments as allowable tax deductions pursuant to Section 32 of R.A. No. 9442 as implemented in Section 4 of DOF
Revenue Regulations No. 1-2009. Otherwise stated, the discount reduces taxable income upon which the tax liability of the
establishments is computed.

Exercise of Police Power is subject to Judicial Inquiry – Legislature’s determination as to what is the proper exercise of its
police power is not final or conclusive, but is subject to the supervision of the courts.

However, courts cannot delimit beforehand the extent or scope of the police power, since they cannot foresee the needs and
demands of public interest and welfare. So it is that Constitutions do not define the scope or extent of the police power of the

2
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

State; what they do is to set forth the limitations thereof. The most important of these are the due process clause and the
equal protection clause.

2. EMINENT DOMAIN

Definition. It is the ultimate power of the sovereign to appropriate not only public but also private property of all citizens within
its territorial jurisdiction, for public use, upon payment of just compensation.

It is the inherent power of the State to condemn a private property for public use, upon payment of just compensation.

Scope and Limitations. The exercise of this power is not unlimited, it is limited by the mandatory requirements under the
Constitution which are:

1. That the exercise of the power must be for a particular public purpose; and
2. That there must be payment of just compensation.

Who may Exercise Eminent Domain. Generally, the Legislature.

Delegated (through Charter and law)

a. LGUs
b. Other Government Entities

Requisites for Valid Exercise of Eminent Domain

a. Necessity. There must be a necessity which must be of public character.

Difference as to Exercising Authorities:

i. If the power is exercised by the Congress, the question of necessity is a political question.
ii. If the power is exercised by the delegate, under a general authority, the question is a judicial question.
iii. If the power is exercised by the delegate, under a special authority for a special purpose, the question is a
political question.

b. Private Property
All private properties capable of ownership may be expropriated and may include public utilities and services.

Exceptions:
i. Money
ii. Choses in action. Chose in Action is a personal right not reduced into possession such as debt owed by
another person; it is a right to recover debt, demand or damages from a cause of action ex contractu, or for a
tort or omission of a duty.

c. Public Use
It includes not only use directly available to the public, but also those which redound to their indirect benefit.

As long as the public has a right of use, whether exercised by one or many members of the public, if public benefit
or public advantage accrues, it is sufficient to constitute public use.

d. Taking. There is taking of the property if the following are present:

1. The expropriator must enter a private property;
2. The entrance into the private property must be for more than a momentary period;
3. The entrance must be under the warrant or color of legal authority;
4. The property must be devoted to public use; and
5. The utilization of the property ousts the owner and deprives him of all beneficial enjoyment of the property.

Not an instance of taking. The imposition of restriction upon a private property to protect public health, safety or
moral is not considered taking because it is not devoted to public use.

3
 JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

e. Just Compensation. It is the full and fair equivalent of the property taken from the owner by the expropriator. The
measure of just compensation is not the taker’s gain, but the owner’s loss.

Determination of Just Compensation

General Rule: Computation of just compensation at the time of the filing of complaint for expropriation.

Exception: The taking of the property precedes the filing of the complaint.

Note: Inflation shall not be considered in determining just compensation.

Determination of just compensation is a judicial function. The executive or the legislative may make their initial
determination but once a person complains about the violation of Bill of Rights, no statue or executive order can
mandate that its own determination shall prevail over the court’s mandate.

f. Due Process

Two stages of Eminent Domain:

1. Determination of the authority of the expropriator in the exercise of the power of eminent domain and the
propriety of such exercise; and
2. Determination by the court of just compensation.

Difference between Eminent Domain and Regulatory Taking

A. In Eminent Domain, there is payment of just compensation
B. In Regulatory Taking, there is no payment of just compensation since it is the exercise of the State’s Police
Power.

3. POWER OF TAXATION

Definition. It is the power of the State to raise revenue to defray the necessary expenses of the government. It is the
enforced proportional contribution from persons and things, levied by the State by virtue of its sovereignty, to support the
government and all public needs.

Lifeblood Theory and Necessity Theory. Taxation is the lifeblood of the State, without taxes, the government cannot exist nor
endure.

Tax for a Special Purpose. It is treated as a special fund, used for that specified purpose. Once that purpose is achieved, the
balance, if any, is transferred to the general fund of the government.

Requisites

a. Uniform and Equitable

1. Taxation must be uniform; the same rate must be applied to all persons and things belonging to the same
class.
2. Taxation must be equitable; it must be apportioned among all persons according to their ability to pay.

b. Progressive System of Taxation. The tax rate increases as the tax base increases, with social justice as the basis.

c. Delegated Taxing Legislation. The Congress may delegate law-making power when the Constitution expressly
authorizes it.

Scope and Limitation

a. General Limitations
1. Taxation must be for public purpose.
2. Might be justified as for public purpose even though the direct beneficiaries are private individuals.
3. Judicial review of unconscionable and unjust tax measures amounting to confiscation of properties. Tax measures
which amount to confiscation of properties may be invalidated by the Court. However, the Court must exercise
utmost caution when invalidating tax measures, otherwise the State’s power to legislate might be curtailed.

4
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

b. Specific Limitations

1. Uniformity. Basically, geographical uniformity. Taxes should have the same force and effect in every place where
the subject of it is found.

Exception: The law allows for classification provided that it complies with the requisites for a valid classification.
a. Rests on a substantial distinction;
b. It is germane to the purpose of the law;
c. It is not limited to existing conditions; and
d. It applies to all members belonging to the same class.

2. Tax Exemption. No law providing tax exemption shall be passed without concurrence of the majority of the
members of the Congress.

Tax exemption is not a constitutional right. It is a mere statutory privilege, which can be withdrawn anytime by the
granting authority.

Two kinds of tax exemption:

a. Constitutional exemption – provided by the Constitution.
b. Statutory exemption – passed by the Congress.

BILL OF RIGHTS
(Due process, equal protection, freedom of expression, rights during expropriation, searches and seizures)

DUE PROCESS

Constitutional basis. Article II, Section 1 “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law,
nor shall any person be denied equal protection of the laws.”

Due process clause has to do with the reasonableness of the legislature’s exercise of police power. The test or standard is
reason. The police power must always be grounded on public welfare and interest, and there must be reasonable relation
between the purpose and means.

Definition. Due process furnishes a standard to which governmental actions should conform, in order that deprivation of life,
liberty and property, in each appropriate case, be valid. The standard is responsiveness to the supremacy of reason, and
obedience to the dictates of justice. It has been identified as freedom from arbritariness.

Constitutional Due Process vs. Statutory Due Process

Constitutional Due Process Statutory Due Process

Protects the individual from the government and Found in the Labor Code and Implementing Rules,
assures him of his right in criminal, civil and protects employees from being unjustly terminated
administrative proceedings without just cause after notice and hearing.
Lack or deficiency in the constitutional procedural due Lack or deficiency in the statutory procedural due
process voids the decision made by the State. process does not void the decision of the corporation or
company, if the dismissal is found to have been made
with just cause. It would only give rise to claims for
nominal damages.

Scope. Universal in application to all persons without regard to any difference in race, color, or nationality. Artificial persons
are covered but only insofar as their properties are concerned.

Concept of right to life, liberty and property

Right to Life. It includes the right of an individual to his body in his completeness, free from dismemberment, and extends to
the use of God-given faculties which make life enjoyable [MALCOLM].

It is understood to include quality of life – which is entitlement to a life lived with assurance that the government he
established and consented to will protect the security of person means:

5
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

freedom from fear; guarantee of bodily and psychological integrity, and guarantee of protection of one's rights by the
government [Secretary of National Defense v Manalo, G.R. No. 180906 (2008)].

Right to Liberty. Liberty is the right to exist and the right to be free from arbitrary personal restraint or servitude. It includes
the right of the citizen to be free to use his faculties in all lawful ways. [Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, G.R. No. L-
14078 (1919)]

"Liberty" as understood in democracies, is not license; it is "liberty regulated by law. Implied

in the term is restraint by law for the good of the individual and for the greater good of the peace and order of society and the
general well-being. It cannot be taken away except by due process
of law.

Civil Liberty is that measure of freedom which may be enjoyed in a civilized community, consistently with the peaceful
enjoyment of like freedom in others. [ld.]

The term cannot be dwarfed into mere freedom from physical restraint of the person of the citizen, but is deemed to an race
the right of man to enjoy the faculties with which he has been endowed by his Creator, subject only to such restraints as are
necessary for the common welfare. [ld.]

Chief elements of the guaranty:

1. Right to contract
2. Right to choose one's employment
3. Right to labor
4. Right to locomotion [ld.]

Right to Property. Property is anything the can come under the right of ownership anu re the subject of contract. It
represents more than the things a person owns; it includes a man’s right to secure, use and dispose of them.

Property and property rights can be lost through prescription.

A mere reasonable relation between the means employed by the law and its object or purpose - that the law is neither
arbitrary nor discriminatory nor aggressive – would suffice to validate a law which restricts or impairs property rights.

Aspects of Due Process

Substantive Due Process Procedural Due Process

NATURE
It requires that the law must be just, fair and It refers to the method or manner by which the law is
reasonable. enforced.
ESSENCE
Fairness and justice. Notice and hearing.
WHO SHOULD COMPLY
Lawmakers Adjudicating body or officer.

Substantive Due Process inquires whether the government has sufficient justification in depriving the right to life, liberty or
property of a person. It requires that the law itself, and not merely the procedure by which the law is enforced, must be fair,
reasonable or just. It requires that the law must be intrinsically valid in interfering with life , liberty or property and guarantee
against the exercise of arbitrary power.

Requisites of substantive due process:

1. The law should be in harmony with the legislative power of the government;
2. The law should be reasonable in its operation;
3. The law should be in accordance with the regular methods of procedure prescribed; and
4. The law should be appliable alike to all citizens of the state or to all of a class.

Expanded test of substantive due process:

6
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

1. Is there public interest, public purpose or public welfare involved?

2. Is the act reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the legislature’s purpose?
3. Is it not unreasonable, arbitrary or oppressive?
4. Is there sufficient foundation or reason in connection with the manner involved?
5. Can the aims conceived be achieved by the means used or is it just a mere unjustified interference?

Substantive due process requires that the means employed in depriving persons of property must not be unduly oppressive.

 Lawful subject – the interest of the public as opposed to that of a particular class, requires intervention of the
State.
 Lawful means – the means employed are reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose and not
unduly oppressive on individuals.

Substantive due process must be a guarantee against the exercise of arbitrary powers even when the power is exercised
according to proper forms or procedure.

Publication of laws – Before a person may be bound by laws, he must be officially and specifically informed of its content.
For publication requirement, laws refer to all statutes, including those of local application and private laws. This does not
cover internal regulations issued by government agencies which are governed by the Local Government Code. Publication
must be full, or there is none at all.

Procedural Due Process refers to the procedures that the government must follow before it deprives a person of his life,
liberty or property. It concerns itself with government actions adhering to the established processes when it makes an
intrusion into the private sphere.

Procedural due process is that aspect of due process which serves as a restriction on actions of judicial or quasi-judicial
agencies of the government. It refers to the method or manner by which the law is enforced.

 A quasi-judicial agency or body is an organ of government other than a court and other than a legislature, which
affects the rights of private parties through either adjudication or rule-making.
 A “quasi-judicial function” is a term which applies to the action, discretion, etc. of public administrative officers or
bodies, who are required to investigate facts, or ascertain the existence of facts, hold hearings, and draw
conclusions from them, as a basis for their official action and to exercise discretion of a judicial nature.

Minimum Requirement of Procedural Due Process

General Rule: NOTICE and HEARING

Exceptions: However, notice and hearing are not required in every case for there are admitted number of exceptions in view
of the nature of the property involved or the urgency of the need to protect the general welfare from a clear and present
danger.

The conclusive presumption bars the admission of contrary evidence as long as such presumption is based on human
experience or there is a rational connection between the fact proved and the fact ultimately presumed therefrom.

Instances when the need for expeditious action will justify the omission of these requisites:

 Summary abatement of a nuisance per se like a mad dog on the loose, which may be killed on sight, because of
the immediate danger it poses to the safety and lives of the people.
 Pornographic materials, contaminated meats, narcotic drugs are inherently pernicious and may be summarily
destroyed.
 The passport of a person being sought for a criminal offense may be cancelled without hearing to compel his return
to the country he has fled.
 Filthy restaurants may be summarily padlocked to protect public health.
 Bawdy houses may be padlocked to protect public morals.

Due Process in Judicial Proceedings

i. Requisites of Due Process in Civil Proceedings

7
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

a. There must be a court or tribunal clothed with judicial power to hear and determine the matter before it.
b. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant or over the property which is the
subject of the proceeding.
 Service of summons is not only required to give the court jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant but also to afford the latter the opportunity to be heard on the claim made against him.
Thus, compliance with the rules regarding service of summons is as much an issue of due
process as of jurisdiction.
c. The defendant must be given an opportunity to be heard.
d. Judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing.
e. No decision shall be rendered by the court without expressing therein clearly and distinctly the facts and
the law on which it is based. No petition for review or motion for reconsideration shall be denied due
course or denied without stating therein the legal basis therefor.

Note: The SC reiterated that the right to appeal is not a natural right nor a part of due process. It is a mere statutory privilege
may only be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of law.

The allowance or denial of motions for extension rests principally on the sound discretion of the court to which it is
addressed, nut such discretion must be exercised wisely and prudently, with a view to substantial justice. Poverty is
recognized as a substantial ground for extending the existing period for filing.

ii. Requisites of Due Process in Criminal Proceedings

a. Accused is heard by a court of competent jurisdiction

b. Accused is proceeded against under the orderly process of law
c. Against is given notice and opportunity to be heard
d. Judgment is rendered within the authority of a constitutional law

iii. Requisites of Due Process in Administrative Proceedings

 Seven Cardinal Rights in Administrative Proceedings

a. The right to a hearing which includes the right of the party interested or affected persons to
present his own case and submit evidence in support thereof.
b. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented.
c. The decision of the tribunal must be based on evidence.
d. The evidence supporting the finding or conclusion must be substantial.
Substantial evidence – such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate
to support a conclusion. (Quantum of evidence)
e. The decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing, or at least contained in
the record, or disclosed to the parties affected.
f. The body must act on its or his own independent consideration of the law and facts of the
controversy, and not simply accept the views of a subordinate in arriving at a decision.
g. Render its decision in such a manner that the parties can know the various issues involved, and
the reasons for the decisions rendered.
(Ang Tibay case)

Important Note: The constitutional requirement on the judgment being in writing and promulgated is NOT applicable to
administrative decisions.

Essence of Due Process in an Administrative Proceeding. Opportunity to be heard. An actual hearing is not always an
indispensable aspect of due process as long as the party was given an opportunity to defend his interests in due course.

Important Note: The requirements of due process in an administrative proceeding depends on whether the decision is
rendered in the exercise of its quasi-judicial or quasi-legislative capacity.

General Rule: NOTICE and HEARING are NOT ESSENTIAL to the validity of administrative action where the administrative
body acts in the exercise of EXECUTIVE, ADMINISTRATIVE or LEGISLATIVE functions.

But where a public administrative body acts in a JUDICIAL or QUASI-JUDICIAL matter, and its ACTS are PARTICULAR and
IMMEDIATE rather than general and prospective, the person whose rights or property may be affected by the action is
entitled to NOTICE and HEARING.

8
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

Administrative issuances which implement or enforce existing laws pursuant to a valid delegation of legislative power must
be published to be effective.

PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS IN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

LABOR CASES ACADEMIC DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
Twin requirements which constitute the essential 1. The student must be informed of the nature
elements of due process: and cause of any accusation against them;
2. They shall have the right to answer the
NOTICE charges against them, with the assistance of
The employer must furnish the employee with TWO counsel, if desired;
WRITTEN NOTICES before the termination of 3. They shall be informed of the evidence against
employment can be effected: them;
4. They shall have the right to adduce evidence
The first is to apprise the employee of the particular in their own behalf;
acts or omissions for which the dismissal is sought; and 5. The evidence must be duly considered by the
The second informs the employee of the employer’s investigating committee or official designated
decision to dismiss him. by the school authorities to hear and decide
the case.
HEARING
Due process of law simply means giving opportunity to Notes: The proceedings may be summary.
be heard before judgment is rendered.

This “procedural due process” requirement is not  Cross-examination is not an essential part of the
constitutional but merely statutory hence, a violation of investigation of hearing.
such requirement DOES NOT render the dismissal  The required proof is substantial evidence.
VOID. The employer must be SANCTIONED for non-  What is crucial is that the official action must
compliance with the compliance of, or failure to observe meet minimum standards of fairness to the
due process. individual, which generally encompass the right
of adequate notice and a meaningful
RATIONALE: The Due Process clause of the opportunity to be heard.
Constitution is a limitation on governmental powers. It
does not apply to the exercise of private power, such as
the termination of employment under the Labor Code.

The employer cannot really be expected to be entirely

an impartial judge of his own cause.

LEVELS OF SCRUTINY
Three levels of scrutiny at which the Court reviews the constitutionality of a classification embodied in a law
RATIONAL BASIS TEST INTERMEDIATE STRICT SCRUTINY
SCRUTINY TEST TEST
NATURE The government only need to show The government must The government must
that the challenged classification is show that the challenged show that the challenged
rationally related to serving a law or classification classification serves a
legitimate state interest. serves an important compelling state interest
state interest and that and that the classification
the classification is at is necessary to serve
least substantially that interest.
related to serving that
interest.
REQUISITES 1. Legitimate interest 1. Important 1. The law is
FOR VALIDITY 2. Purpose and means government necessary to
correspondence interest achieve a
2. Availability of compelling state
less restrictive interest
means 2. It is the least
restrictive means

9
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

to protect such
interest.

LEGISLATIVE Must be legitimate Must be substantial or Must be compelling

PURPOSE important
RIGHTS  Economic  Gender  Fundamental
INVOLVED  Property  Illegitimacy rights; or
 Commercial legislation  Suspect classes

Which do not affect fundamental

rights or suspect classes
WHO HAS THE The person who challenges the Government Government
BURDEN OF constitutionality
PROOF

Void for Vagueness Doctrine – A statute or act may be said to be vague when it lack comprehensible standards that men
of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ in its application. It is unconstitutional.

A statute establishing an offense must define the offense with sufficient definiteness that persons of ordinary intelligence can
understand what conduct is prohibited by the statute.

When is a statute vague? A vague statute is repugnant to the Constitution in two aspects:

1. It violates due process by failure to accord persons fair notice of what conduct to avoid; and
2. It leaves law enforcers with unbridled discretion in carrying out its provisions and becomes an arbitrary flexing
of government muscles.

TEST: FACIAL CHALLENGE – a litigant may challenge a statute on its face only if it is vague in all its possible applications.

Overbreadth Doctrine – It decrees that “a governmental purpose may not be achieved by means which sweep
unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the area of protected freedoms.” It is unconstitutional.

TEST: FACIAL CHALLENGE – it is allowed because of possible chilling effects upon protected speech.

VOID FOR VAGUENESS DOCTRINE OVERBREADTH DOCTRINE

Both are unconstitutional.
A law is unconstitutional because it fails to accord A law is unconstitutional because a government
people fair notice on what conducts to avoid, and it purpose may not be achieved by means that sweep
leaves law enforcers unbridled discretion in carrying out unnecessarily broadly and thereby invades the area of
its provisions. protected freedoms.
A vague law must LACK CLARITY and PRECISION An overbroad law need not.
Basis for void for vagueness is lack of comprehensible Basis for overbroad law is the means that sweep
standards unnecessarily broadly
They are governed by the same principles on the following matters:

1. They are both analytical tools for a “facial challenge” of statutes in FREE SPEECH CASES

2. They are both INAPPLICABLE TO PENAL STATUTES

Rationale: Statutes have a general in terrorem effect, which is to discourage citizens from committing the
prohibited acts.

Exception:
a. The statute is challenged AS APPLIED

10
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

As applied challenge considers only extant facts affecting real litigants.

b. The statute involves FREE SPEECH (may be facially challenged in order to counter the “chilling
effect” of the same.

Facial challenge is an examination of the entire law, pinpointing its flaws and defects, not only on the basis of its
actual operation to the parties, but also on the assumption or prediction that its very existence may cause others
not before the court to refrain from constitutionally protected speech or activities.

c. An accused is denied the right to be informed of that charge against him and to due process where
the statute itself is couched in such language that it is not possible for men of ordinary to determine
therefrom what acts/omissions are punished.

This doctrine can only be invoked against that species of legislation that is UTTERLY VAGUE ON ITS
FACE, i.e., that which cannot be clarified either by a saving clause or by construction.
The test in determining whether a criminal statute is void for uncertainty is whether the language conveys
a sufficiently definite warning as to the proscribed conduct. It must be stressed however, that the
vagueness doctrine merely requires a reasonable degree of certainty for the statute to be upheld – not
absolute precision or mathematical exactitude.

EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAWS

Concept – All persons or things similarly situated shall be equally treated both as to rights conferred and responsibilities
imposed.

It does not require universal application on all persons or things without distinction. What the clause requires is equality
among equals as determined according to a valid classification.

By classification is meant the grouping of persons or things similar to each other in certain particulars and different from all
others in these same particulars.

Scope. NATURAL and JURIDICAL PERSONS (but only insofar as their property is concerned)

a. A corporation as an artificial person is protected under the Bill of Rights against denial of due process, and it enjoys
the equal protection of the law.
b. A corporation is also protected against unreasonable searches and seizures.
c. It can only be proceeded against by due process of law, and is protected against unlawful discrimination.

Requisites for Valid Classification

1. It must rest on substantial distinction;

2. It must be germane to the purpose of the law;
3. It must not be limited to existing conditions; and
4. It must apply equally to all members of the same class.

Presumption of Validity – All classifications made by law are presumed to be valid unless shown otherwise by petitioner.

Rule on Aliens

General Rule: A legislative act may not validly classify the citizens of the State on the basis of their origin, race or parentage.

Exception:

1. In times of great and imminent danger, such as threatened invasion or war, such a classification is permitted by the
Constitution when the facts so warrant.
2. The political rights of alien do not enjoy the same protection as that of citizens.

11
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

3. Statutes may validly limit to citizens exclusively the enjoyment of rights or privileges connected with the public
domain, the public works, or the natural resources of the State. The rights and interests of the state in these things
are not simply political but also proprietary in nature.

Levels of Scrutiny. The level of review used in due process cases may also be used in equal protection challenges:

1. Rational Basis Test – the government is required to show that the classification is rationally related to a legitimate
state interest.

Note: This test is important where there is no plausible difference between the disadvantaged class and those not
disadvantaged, and when the government attaches a morally irrelevant and negative significance to a difference
between the advantaged and the disadvantaged.

2. Intermediate Scrutiny Test – the government is required to show that the classification is substantially related in
serving an important state interest.

3. Strict Scrutiny Test – the government is required to show that the classification is necessary to serve a compelling
state interest.

Example 1:
Under a new law, officers of the BSP with higher salary grades are receiving higher compensation package and
benefits to entice them to stay, which are specifically withheld from BSP rank-and-file employees who are low-
salaried and limited to the rates prescribed by the Salary Standardization Law. The Supreme Court that this is not
in accord with the policy of the Constitution which is “to free the people from poverty, provide adequate social
services, extend to them a decent standard of living, and improve of quality of law for all.” Any act of the Congress
that runs counter to this constitutional desideratum deserves strict scrutiny by this Court before it can pass muster.
(Central Bank Employees Association vs. BSP)

Example 2:
In upholding the constitutionality of an ordinance imposing curfew upon minors in Quezon City, the Supreme Court
resorted to the Strict Scrutiny Test and ruled that under our legal system’s own recognition of a minor’s inherent
lack of full rational capacity, and balancing the same against the State’s compelling interest to promote juvenile
safety and prevent juvenile crime, it finds that the curfew imposed is reasonably justified with its narrowly drawn
exceptions, and hence not constitutionally infirm. (SPARK vs. Quezon City)

Suspect classes – A classification that violates a fundamental right, or prejudices a person accorded special
protection by the Constitution. May therefore include a classification on income.

This test is usually applied to cases involving classifications based on race, national origin, religion, alienage, denial
of the right to vote, migration access to courts, and other rights recognized as fundamental.

Examples of Valid Classification

1. Filipino Female Domestics Working Abroad
They are a class by themselves because of the special risks to which their class was exposed.

2. Land-Based vs. Sea-Based Filipino Overseas Workers

There is dissimilarity as to work environment, safety, danger to life and limb, and accessibility to social, civil
and spiritual activities.

3. Office of the Ombudsman

Allowing the Ombudsman to start an investigation based on an anonymous letter does not violate the equal
protection clause. The Ombudsman is different from other investigatory and prosecutory agencies of
government because those subject to its jurisdiction are public officials who, through official pressure and
influence, can quash, delay or dismiss investigations against them.

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Constitutional Basis. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, and the right of
the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for redress of grievances.

12
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

Concept. The freedom of expression is so broad that it extends to all forms of communication such as speech, print, and
assembly regarding secular as well as political causes, and is not confined to any particular field of human interest.

Continuum of thought, speech, expression and speech acts –

The right to freedom of expression applies to the entire continuum of speech from utterances made to conduct enacted, and
even to inaction itself as a symbolic manner of communication.
The right is not limited to vocal communication, CONDUCT which is also referred to as symbolic speech, is also included.

Scope. Expression and speech include:

1. Written or spoken words (recorded or not recorded)

2. Symbolic speech (such as wearing of armbands as a symbol of protest)
However, in the case of Dusit Hotel vs. CA, it was held that labor union members’ violation of the hotel’s grooming
standards constitute an illegal strike which is not protected by the right freedom of expression.
3. Films and television programs.

The right to freedom of expression is not absolute. Examples of unprotected speech are:

1. Obscenity
2. Child pornography
3. Libel

Balance between Unbridled Expression and Liberty – Liberty is not a license; it is a liberty regulated by law for the good of
the individual and for the greater good of the peace and order of the society and the general well-being.

Freedom of Expression and the Right to Privacy – Being a public figure does not automatically destroy in toto a person’s
right to privacy. Invading a person’s privacy to disseminate public information does not extend to a fictional representation of
a person, no matter how public a figure he or she may be.

Freedom of speech and expression includes freedom to film and produce motion pictures. The fact that such film production
is a commercialized activity is not a disqualification for availing of freedom of speech and expression.

The right to privacy cannot be invoked to resist the publication or dissemination of matters of public interest. The intrusion is
no more than necessary to keep the film a truthful historical account. Enrile is a public figure because of his participation as
a principal actor in the culminating events of the EDSA revolution.

SIX (6) TYPES OF REGULATIONS

1. Prior Restraint and Subsequent Punishment

Prior Restraint – this refers to an official government restriction on the press and other forms of expression in advance
of the actual publication or dissemination.
Not all prior restraint is invalid. But all prior restraint is PRESUMED TO BE INVALID.
Every man shall have the right to speak, write and print his opinions upon any subject whatsoever, so always that he
does not injure any other person, his rights, his person or his reputation, and so always that he does not thereby disturb
the public peace or attempt to subvert the government. (Near vs. Minnesota)

Examples of Prior Restraints:

A. Censorship – it conditions the exercise of freedom of expression upon the prior approval of the government. The
censor serves as the political, moral, social, and artistic arbiter of the people, usually applying only their own
subjective standards in determining what is good and what is not.

B. Permits
C. Business Closure

General Rules:

13
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

A. Any system of prior restraints of expression comes to the court with a heavy presumption against its
constitutionality giving the government the heavy burden to show justification for the imposition of such restraint.
B. There need not be total suppression. Even restriction of circulation constitutes censorship.

Subsequent Punishment – Freedom of expression or speech includes freedom after expression or speech. Without this
assurance, citizens would hesitate to speak for fear that they might be provoking the vengeance of the officials they
criticized.

Examples of Valid Subsequent Punishment:

A. Libel – Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it be true, if no good intention and
justifiable motive for making it is shown, except in the following cases:
i. A private communication made in the performance of legal, moral and social duty;
ii. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any comments or remarks, of any judicial, legislative, or
other official proceedings which are not confidential in nature, or of any statement report or speech
delivered in said proceedings, or of any act performed by public officers in the exercise of their functions.

B. Obscenity – Determination of what is obscene is a judicial function.

C. Contempt for criticisms or publications tending to impede, obstruct, embarrass, influence the courts in administering
justice in a pending suit or proceeding.
Note: Criticisms allowed by Court are criticisms made in GOOD FAITH. It shall be bona fide and should not spill
over walls of decency and propriety. A wide chasm exists between fair criticism on one hand, and abuse and
slander of courts and judges on the other.

D. Rights of students to free speech must not infringe on school’s right to discipline its students.

Exceptions to Valid Subsequent Punishment

A. Fair Comment on Matters of Public Interest – Fair comment is that which is true, if not, it expresses the real opinion
of the author based on a reasonable degree of care and reasonable grounds.
B. Criticism of Official Conduct – it is given the widest latitude.

2. CONTENT-BASED AND CONTENT-NEUTRAL REGULATIONS

Content-Based Regulation is a governmental restriction on freedom of speech or of the press based on content is
given the strictest scrutiny in light of its inherent and invasive impact.

(Clear and Present Danger Test) No prior restraint and subsequent punishment can be made on speech or
communication based on its contents unless there is a CLEAR and PRESENT DANGER of a substantial evil that
the State has a right to prevent.

Content-Neutral Regulation is a regulation on the incident of speech such as TIME, PLACE, and MANNER under
well-defined standards.

When speech restraints take the form of a content-neutral regulation, only SUBSTANTIAL GOVERNMENTAL
INTEREST is required for its validity.

Because regulations of this type is not designed to suppress any particular message, they are not subject to the
strictest form of judicial scrutiny but an INTERMEDIATE APPROACH – somewhere between the MERE
RATIONALITY that is required of any other law and the COMPELLING INTEREST STANDARD applied to content-
based regulation.

A government regulation is sufficiently justified if:

1. It is within the constitutional power;

2. It furthers a substantial or important state interest;
3. The government interest is unrelated to the suppression of free expression; and
4. The incident restriction is no greater than essential to the furtherance of that interest.

14
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

CONTENT-BASED REGULATION CONTENT-NEUTRAL REGULATION

OBJECT OF RESTRAINT
The content: the message or idea or the expression Incidents of speech: the time, place and manner of
the expression in public places, not the content.
TEST
a. Clear and Present Danger Test: Only a substantial government interest is required for its
A clear and present danger of a substantial validity.
evil must exist that the State has a right to INTERMEDIATE APPROACH: Somewhere between a
prevent. mere rationality as required in any other law and
b. Balancing of Interest Test compelling state interest required for a contest-based
c. Dangerous Tendency Test regulation.
d. Direct Incitement Test

3. INCITEMENT AND ADVOCACY

Criticism of the government no matter how severe, is within the range of liberty of speech, unless the intention and
effect is subversive.

Direct Incitement Test

Political discussion even among those opposed to the present administration is within the protective clause of the
freedom of speech and expression. The same cannot be construed as subversive activities per se or evidence of
membership in a subversive organization.

4. SPECIFICITY OF REGULATION AND OVERBREADTH DOCTRINE

General Rule: A party may question the validity of a statute only, if as applied to him, it is unconstitutional.

Exception: Facial challenge. A facial challenge may be directed against a statute that is vague or to one which is
overbroad because of the possible “chilling effect” that the statute will have on protected speech.

The theory is that when statutes regulate speech and it is utterly vague on its face, that which cannot be clarified
either by a saving clause or by construction, the transcendent value to all society of constitutionally protected
expression is deemed to justify allowing attacks on overly broad statutes with no requirement that the person
making the attack demonstrate that his own conduct could not be regulated by a statute drawn with narrow
specificity.

The possible harm to society in permitting some unprotected speech to go unpunished is outweighed by the
possibility that the protected speech of others may be deterred and perceived grievances left to fester because of
possible inhibitory effects of overly broad statutes.

This rationale DOES NOT APPLY TO PENAL STATUTES without a free speech aspect. Criminal statutes have
general in terrorem effect (discouraging the citizens from committing the prohibited acts) resulting from their very
existence, and if facial challenge were allowed for this reason alone, the State may well be prevented from enacting
laws against socially harmful conduct. In the area of criminal law, the law cannot take chances as in the area of free
speech.

However, the Void for Vagueness Doctrine and Overbreadth Doctrine applies to PENAL STATUTES when:
1. The statute is challenged AS APPLIED; or
2. The statute involves FREE SPEECH.

OVERBREADTH DOCTRINE. The statute must be carefully drawn or authoritatively construed so as to punish only
unprotected speech and not be susceptible of application to protected expression.

A law may be invalidated as overbroad when a substantial number of its applications are overbroad, judged in relation to the
statute’s plainly legitimate sweep.

A governmental purpose may not be achieved through means which sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the
area of protected freedoms.

VOID FOR VAGUENESS DOCTRINE. A statute establishing criminal offense must define the offense with sufficient
definiteness such that men of ordinary intelligence must understand what conduct is prohibited by the statute. It can only be

15
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

invoked against a specie of legislation that is utterly vague on its face, i.e., that which cannot be clarified either by a saving
clause or by construction.

An act or statute may be said to be vague when it lacks comprehensible standards that men of common intelligence must
necessarily guess at its meaning and differ in its application.

5. SPEECH REGULATION IN RELATION TO ELECTION

The regulation must only be with respect to the time, place, and manner of the rendition of the message. In no situation may
the speech be prohibited or censored on the basis of its content. For this purpose, it will not matter whether the speech is
made within or on private property.

Regulation of speech in the context of electoral campaigns made by persons who are not candidates or who do not speak as
members of a political party which are, taken as a whole, principally advocacies of a social issue that the public must
consider during elections is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Regulation of election paraphernalia will still be CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID if it reaches into speech of persons who are
not candidates or who do not speak as members of a political party if they are not candidates, ONLY IF WHAT IS
REGULATED IS DECLARATIVE SPEECH, taken as a whole has for its principle object the ENDORSEMENT of a candidate
only.

The regulation should be:

A. Provided by law;
B. Reasonable;
C. Narrowly tailored to meet the objective of enhancing the opportunity of all candidates to be heard and considering
the primacy of the guarantee of free expression; and
D. Demonstrably the least restrictive means to achieve that objective.

6. SPEECH REGULATION IN RELATION TO MEDIA (Freedom of the Press)

Constitutional Basis. Section 11 (1), Article XVI. The advertising industry is impressed with public interest and must be
regulated by law for the protection of consumers and the promotion of general welfare.

The Court pronounced that the freedom of BROADCAST MEDIA (film, television, radio) is lesser than that of the press
because of its pervasive presence in the lives of the people and because of their accessibility to children.

Four Aspects of Freedom of the Press

1. Freedom from Prior Restraint

2. Freedom from Punishment Subsequent to Publication
3. Freedom of Access to Information
4. Freedom of Circulation

PRINT VS. BROADCAST MEDIA

While all forms of communication are entitled to the broad protection of freedom of expression clause, the freedom of film,
television, and radio broadcasting is somewhat lesser than the freedom accorded to newspaper and other print media.

RADIO and TELEVISION are accorded less protection because of:

1. The scarcity of the frequencies by which the medium operates (airwaves are physically limited while pint medium
may be limitless);
2. Its pervasiveness as a medium (the quality of spreading widely); and
3. Its unique accessibility to children.

But all forms of media, whether print or broadcast, are entitled to the broad protection of the freedom of expression clause.

16
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

The TEST for limitation of freedom of expression continues to be THE CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TEST. (Same test
for Content-Based Regulation)

MOVIE CENSORSHIP. Censorship is allowable only under the clearest proof of a clear and present danger against
public safety, morals, health or any other legitimate public interest.
Limited intrusion into a person’s privacy is permissible when that person is a public figure and the information sought to be
published is of a public character.

What is protected is the right to be free from unwarranted publicity, from the wrongful publicizing of the private affairs of an
individual which are outside the realm of public concern.

TELEVISION CENSORSHIP. PD No. 1986 gave the MTRCB the power to screen, review, and examine all television
programs, whether religious, public affairs, news documentary, etc. The law also directs the Board to apply contemporary
Filipino values as the standard to determine those which are objectionable for being immoral, indecent, contrary to law
and/or good customs, of with a dangerous tendency to encourage the commission of a violence or of a wrong or a crime.

Live radio and television coverage of the court proceedings shall NOT be allowed considering the prejudice it poses to the
defendant’s right to due process as well as to fair and orderly administration of justice. Video footages of court hearings for
news purposes shall be limited and restricted. The freedom of the press and the right of the people to information may be
served and satisfied by less distracting, degrading and prejudicial means.

Regardless of the regulatory schemes that broadcast media is subjected to, the SC held that the clear and present danger
test applies to content-based restrictions on media, without making a distinction as to traditional print or broadcast.

RADIO CENSORSHIP. In Santiago vs. Far Eastern Broadcasting, the SC did not uphold the claim the FEB had no right to
require the submission of the manuscript. It is the duty of FEB to require the submission of a manuscript as a requirement in
broadcasting speeches. Strict rules have also been allowed for radio because of its pervasive quality and because of the
interest in the protection of children.

JUDICIAL ANALYSIS, PRESUMPTIONS AND LEVELS AND TYPES OF SCRUTINY

A. Clear And Present Danger Test. “There is to be no previous restraint on the communication of views or
subsequent liability unless there be a clear and present danger of a substantive evil that the State has a right to
prevent.”

The question in every case is whether the words are used in such circumstances and are of such nature as to CREATE A
CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. It is a
question of proximity and degree.

Burden of Proof: WITH THE GOVERNMENT

This rule also requires that “the danger created must not only be clear and present but must also be traceable to the ideas
expressed”

i. CLEAR – there must be a connection with the danger of the substantive evil arising from the utterance
questioned.
ii. PRESENT – involved the time element, identified with IMMINENT and IMMEDIATE danger. The danger
must not only be probable, but very likely INEVITABLE.
iii. SUBSTANTIVE EVIL – this evil sought to be prevented is primarily the disorderly and unfair
administration of justice; the evil consequence of the comment or utterance must be extremely serious
and degree of imminence extremely high.

Note: The clear and present danger test is the test most applied by the SC regarding freedom of expression cases.

B. Balancing of Interests Test. When a particular conduct is regulated in the interest of public order, and the
regulation results in an indirect, conditional and partial abridgement of speech, the duty of the courts is to determine
which of the two conflicting interests demands greater protection.

The test is applied when two legitimate values not involving national security crimes compete.

Factors to consider:

17
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

a. Social value of the freedom restricted;

b. Specific thrusts of the restriction (direct or indirect, affects many or few);
c. Value of the public interest sought to be secured by the regulation;
d. Whether the restriction is reasonably appropriate and necessary for the protection of the public interest;
and
e. Whether the necessary safeguarding of the public interest may be achieved by a measure less restrictive
of the protective freedom.

C. Dangerous Tendency Test. Under this test, the question is whether the words will create a dangerous tendency
that the state has a right to prevent. It looks at the probability that a substantive evil will result, and it is not
necessary that some definite or immediate acts of force, violence or unlawfulness be advocated.

It is sufficient if the natural tendency and the probable effect of the utterance were to bring about the substantive
evil that the legislative body seeks to prevent.

D. O’brien Test

A government regulation is sufficiently justified if:

1. It is within the constitutional power;
2. It furthers an important or substantial government interest;
3. The government interest is unrelated to the suppression of free expression;
4. The incident restriction is no greater than essential to the furtherance of that interest. [US v. O'Brien,
supra]

Clear And Present Danger Test Dangerous Tendency Test Balancing of Interests Test
Definition
The question in every case is A person could be punished for It is the standard when courts need
whether the words are used in such words uttered or for ideas to balance conflicting social values
circumstances and are of such a expressed which create a and individual interests. Requires a
nature as to create a clear and dangerous tendency. conscious and detailed
present danger that they will bring consideration of the interplay of
about the substantive evils that interests observable in a given
Congress has a right to prevent. It is situation.
a question of proximity and degree.
Question
Whether the words are used in such Whether the words will create a The courts need to balance
circumstances and are of such a dangerous tendency that the state conflicting social values and
nature as to create a clear and has a right to prevent. It looks at the individual interests. Requires a
present danger that they will bring probability that a substantive evil conscious and detailed
about the substantive evils that will result, and it is not necessary consideration of the interplay of
Congress has a right to prevent. It is that some definite or immediate acts interests observable in a given
a question of proximity and degree. of force, violence or unlawfulness situation.
This rule also requires that the be advocated.
danger created must not only be
clear and present but also traceable
to the ideas expressed.
As to Preference
Liberty Authority It depends on the circumstances of
the case.

SPECIAL TOPICS IN FREE EXPRESSION CASES

A. Hate Speech.

Hate Speech. Speech designed to promote hatred on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity or national origin.

18
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Covenant mandates State Parties to prohibit by law "any advocacy
of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence." [Article 20]

In Philippine jurisdiction, it is arguable that "hate speech" is not protected speech. In Diocese of Bacolod v. COMELEC, the
Court recognized that the right to freedom of expression is not absolute [and that] some forms of speech are still subject to
some restrictions.

B. Defamation and Libel

Libel. Libel is not constitutionally protected speech. The government has an obligation to protect individuals from defamation
[Disini v. Sec. of justice, G.R. No. 203335 (2014)].

The onus of proving malice shifts to the plaintiff, who must prove that the defendants were actuated by ill will in what they
caused to be published, with a design to injure the plaintiff.

In US v. Bustos, supra, a criminal action was instituted against defendants for allegedly publishing writings which were
libelous against a justice of the peace. The SC held that the said writings constitute qualifiedly privileged matter as public
opinion, therefore, they cannot be presumed malicious.

In Re: Jurado, supra, the SC held that false reports about a public official or other person are not shielded from sanction by
the right to free speech. Free speech has countenanced the publication of falsehoods, especially the persistent and
unmitigated dissemination of patent lies.

Group Libel. Where the defamation is alleged to have been directed at a group or class, it is essential that the statement
must be so sweeping or all-embracing as to apply to every individual in that group or class, or sufficiently specific so that
each individual in the class or group can prove that the defamatory statement specifically pointed to him, so that he can
bring the action separately, if need be. [Newsweek Inc. v. iAC, G.R. No. L-63559 (1986)].

As the size of these groups increases, the chances for members of such groups to recover damages for tortious libel
become elusive. This principle is said to embrace two important public policies:
(1) Where the group referred to is large, the courts presume that no reasonable reader would take the statements
as so literally applying to each individual member; and
(2) The limitation on liability would satisfactorily safeguard freedom of speech and expression, as well as of the
press, effecting a sound compromise between the conflicting fundamental interests involved in libel cases [MVRS v.
Islamic Da’wah Council of the Philippines, G.R. No. 135306 (2003).

C. Sedition and Speech in Relation to Rebellion

Heckler's Veto. Heckler's veto is an attempt to limit unpopular speech. This occurs when an acting party's right to freedom
of speech is curtailed or restricted by the government in order to prevent a reacting party's behavior.

For example, an unpopular group wants to hold a rally and asks for a permit. The government is not allowed to refuse the
permit based on the beliefs of the applicants, but the government may deny the permit on the ground of fear that many
people will be outraged and cause violent protests, not because the government disapproves of the group's message.

Under the free speech clause, the government may not silence speech based on the reaction (or anticipated reaction) of a
hostile audience, unless there is a clear and present danger of grave and imminent harm, which is not easy to prove. [Also
refer to F.2.c. Incitement and Advocacy]

D. Obscenity/Pornography

Obscenity. The State in pursuing its mandate to protect, as parens patriae, the public from obscene, immoral and indecent
materials must justify the regulation or limitation.

One such regulation is Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code. To be held liable, the prosecution must prove that (a) the
materials, publication, picture or literature are obscene; and (b) the offender sold, exhibited, published or gave away such
materials. Necessarily, that the confiscated materials are obscene must be proved.

No one will be subject to prosecution for the sale or exposure of obscene materials unless these materials depict or describe
patently offensive hard core sexual conduct. Examples included (a) patently offensive representations or descriptions of

19
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated; and (b) patently offensive representations or descriptions of
masturbation, excretory functions, and lewd exhibition of the genitals. [Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, (1973)]

What remains clear is that obscenity is an issue proper for judicial determination and should be treated on a case to case
basis and on the judge's sound discretion.

Freedom of Expression and Obscenity

Determination: Community Standard

Pictures depicting inhabitants of the country in their native dress as they appear and can be seen in the regions in which
they live are not obscene or indecent. The pictures in question merely depict persons as they actually live, without attempted
presentation of persons in unusual postures or dress. [People v. Kottinger, supra].

A dance portraying the life of a widow who lost her husband cannot be considered protected speech if the audience, about a
hundred customers, was howling and shouting, "sige muna, sige nakakalibog" (go ahead, go ahead. it is erotic), during the
performance [People v. Aparici, supra.

Child Pornography. The State is entitled to greater leeway in the regulation of pornographic depictions of children because:
a. A state's interest in safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of a minor is compelling. The
prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse of children constitutes a government objective of surpassing
importance.
b. Distribution of photographs and films depicting sexual activity by juveniles is intrinsically related to the sexual
abuse of children.
c. Advertising and selling of child pornography provide an economic motive for, and are thus an integral part of, the
production of such materials.
d. Value of permitting live performances and photographic reproductions of children engaged in lewd sexual
conduct exceedingly modest.

E. Commercial Speech

Commercial speech. Commercial speech is a separate category of speech which is not accorded the same level of
protection as that given to other constitutionally guaranteed forms of expression but is nonetheless entitled to protection.

Central Hudson Gas & Elec. v. Public Svc. Comm' [447 U.S. 557 (1980)] established the test to be applied to regulations on
commercial speech:
(1) Speech must not be false, misleading, or proposing an illegal activity;
(2) Government interest sought to be served by the regulation must be substantial;
(3) The regulation must advance government interest; and
(4) The regulation must not be overbroad.

Political Speech. Political speech is pure and protected speech. The government is required to prove a "true threat" it
cannot punish mere political hyperbole [Watts v. US, 394 U.S. 705 (1969)1.
A tarpaulin that expresses a political opinion constitutes political speech. Speech that promotes dialogue on public affairs, or
airs out grievances and political discontent, should be protected and encouraged [Diocese of Bacolod V. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 205728 (2015)].

F. National Emergencies. One of the misfortunes of an emergency, particularly, that which pertains to security, is
that military necessity and the guaranteed rights of the individual are often not compatible. The right against
unreasonable search and seizure; the right against warrantless arrest; and the freedom of speech, of expression, of
the press, and of assembly under the Bill of Rights suffered the greatest blow. [David v. Macapagal-Arroyo, supre.]

G. Speech of Public Officer. Parliamentary immunity guarantees the members of Congress the freedom of
expression without fear of being held responsible in criminal or civil actions before courts or fora outside of
Congress, but this does not protect them from being held responsible by the legislative body. The members may
nevertheless be questioned in Congress itself.

For unparliamentary conduct, members of the Congress have been or could be censured, committed to prison, or even
expelled by the votes of their colleagues [Osmeña V. Pendatun, G.R. No. L-17144 (1960)].

20
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

A libelous letter of a congressman, published in a newspaper, does not fall under "speech or debate" protected by the
Constitution. Speech or debate refers to speeches, statements, or votes made within Congress while it is in session, or duly
authorized actions of congressmen in the discharge of their duties [Jimenez v. Cabangbang, G.R. No. L-15905 (1966)].

False reports about a public official or other person are not shielded by the right to free speech enshrined in the Constitution.
Making knowingly false statements made with reckless disregard of the truth does not enjoy constitutional protection. The
guaranty of free speech cannot be considered as according protection to the disclosure of lies, gossip or rumor [In Re:
Jurado, supra].

RIGHTS DURING EXPROPRIATION

Concept. Sec. 9, Art. III. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.

The power of eminent domain is the inherent right of the State to forcibly acquire needed property upon just compensation,
in order to devote it to the intended public use [CRUZ).

Also called the power of expropriation. Sec. 9, Art. Ill merely imposes a limit on the government's exercise of this power
[Republic v. Tagle, G.R. No. 129079 (1998)1.

The exercise of the right of eminent domain whether directly by the State or by its authorized agents, is necessarily in
derogation of private rights. The authority to condemn is to be strictly construed in favor of the owner and against the
condemnor. When the power is granted, the extent to which it may be exercised is limited to the express terms or clear
implication of the statute in which the grant is contained [National Power Corp. v. Tarcelo, G.F. No. 198139 (2014)].

Who May Exercise. The repository of eminent domain powers is legislature, i.e. exercised through the enactment of laws.
But power may be delegated to LGUs and other government entities (via charter); still, the delegation must be by law
(Manapat v. CA, supra].

Under existing laws, the following may exercise the power of expropriation:

a. Congress
b. President
c. Local legislative bodies
d. Certain public corporations, like the National Housing Authority and water districts
e. Quasi-public corporations like the Philippine National Railways (PNR), PLDT, Meralco

Requisites for Valid Exercise

a. Private property
b. Genuine necessity - inherent/presumed in legislation, but when the power is delegated (e.g. local
government units), necessity must be roven.
c. For public use - Court has adopted a broad definition of "public use"
d. Payment of just compensation
e. Due process

How Exercised. Our laws require that the State's power of eminent domain shall be exercised through expropriation
proceedings in court. Whenever private property is taken for public use, it becomes the MINISTERIAL DUTY
(official/mandatory) of the concerned government office or agency to initiate expropriation proceedings.

Prior filing of an expropriation case is a condition sine qua non before the government is allowed to enter the property being
reclaimed and without which, the government's possession over the subject property becomes illegal.

HOWEVER, full payment of just compensation is not a prerequisite for the Government's effective taking of the property.
When the taking of the property precedes the payment of just compensation, the Government shall indemnify the property
owner by way of interest.

The taking of property is different from the transfer of the property title from the private owner to the Government.

Under Rule 67 of the Rules of Court, there are two phases of expropriation:
(a) the condemnation of the property after it is determined that its acquisition will be for a public purpose or public use; and

21
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

(b) the determination of just compensation to be paid for the taking of private property to be made by the court with the
assistance of not more than three commissioners.

Difference Between Eminent Domain (Compensable Taking) and Regulatory Taking

 Eminent domain is an inherent power of the state based on the Constitution. Just compensation must be paid.
 Regulatory taking is the exercise of the state of its police power. In this case, just compensation need not be paid.

Examples from Jurisprudence

 The imposition of an aerial easement of right-of-way was held to be compensable taking. The exercise of the power
of eminent domain does not always result in the taking or appropriation of title to the expropriated property; it may
also result in the imposition of a burden upon the owner of the condemned property, without loss of title or
possession.
 A municipal ordinance prohibiting a building which would impair the view of the plaza from the highway was
considered regulatory taking. [People v. Fajardo, G.R. No. L-12172 (1958)]

Expansive Concept of Public Use

a. Traditional definition – Any use directly available to the general public as a matter of right and not merely of
forbearance or accommodation. Where the expropriated property is converted into a plaza, park, airfield or
highway, it thereby becomes res communes and, as such, subject to direct enjoyment by any and all members of
the public indiscriminately.

There is also public use even if the expropriated property is not actually acquired by the government but is merely devoted to
public services administered by privately-owned public utilities like telephone or light companies.

Public use may be free or for a fee, as long as any member of the general public can demand the right to use the converted
property for his direct and personal convenience [CRUZ.

b. Broadened definition – Public use may also cover uses which, while not directly available to the public, redound to
their indirect advantage or benefit.

Example: Subdivision of expropriated lands into small lots for sale at cost to deserving citizens. Once transferred, the lots
cease to be public property and come under the exclusive ownership of the transferees.

The requirement of public use is deemed satisfied because of the vicarious advantages enjoyed by the people as a whole,
by the promotion of social justice objectives (e.g. equitable diffusion of property ownership; agrarian reform; enhancement of
the dignity; welfare and security of the underprivileged).

Examples:

 Expropriation for slum clearance and urban development, even if developed area is later sold to private
homeowners, commercial firms, entertainment and service companies and other private concerns [Reyes v. NHA,
G.R. No. 147511 (2003)]
 Urban land reform and housing, or socialized housing program involving only a one-half hectare area [Manapat v.
CA, supra]

Under the new concept, "public use" means public advantage, convenience or benefit, which tends to contribute to
the general welfare and the prosperity of the whole community, like a resort complex for tourists or housing
project.

1. Just Compensation

a. Definition – The property's fair market value at the time of the filing of the complaint, or that sum of money which a person
desirous to buy but not compelled to buy, and an owner willing but not compelled to sell, would agree on as price to be given
and received therefor"

22
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

A full and fair equivalent of the property taken from the private owner by the expropriator. The measure is not the taker's
gain but the owner's loss.

Just compensation is intended to indemnify the owner fully for the loss he has sustained as a result of the expropriation

It shall be "real, substantial, full, and ample.”

b. Determination of just compensation – Determination of just compensation is a judicial function that cannot "be usurped by
any other branch or official of the government"

 No legislative enactment or executive issuances can prevent the courts from determining whether the right of the
property owners to just compensation has been violated.
 Statutes and executive issuances fixing or providing for the method of computing just compensation are not binding
on courts and, at best, are treated as mere guidelines in ascertaining the amount thereof.

General Rule: Computed at the time of the filing of the complaint for expropriation (Sec. 4, Rule 67, ROC), whether the filing
takes place before or at the same time as the taking or entry.

When the taking of the property sought to be expropriated coincides with the commencement of the expropriation
proceedings, or takes place subsequent to the filing of the complaint for eminent domain, the just compensation should be
determined as of the date of the filing of the complaint.

Exception: When property is taken before filing the complaint, assessment should be made as of the time of taking or entry.

In cases where the fair market value of the property is difficult to ascertain, the court may use other just and equitable
market methods of valuation in order to estimate the fair market value of the property.

In order to determine just compensation, the trial court should first ascertain the market value of the property by considering:

a. the cost of acquisition

b. the current value of like properties
c. its actual or potential uses
d. and in the particular case of lands, their size, shape, location, and the tax declarations thereon.

If as a result of the expropriation, the remaining lot suffers from an impairment or decrease in value, CONSEQUENTIAL
DAMAGES may be awarded by the trial court, provided that the CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS which may arise from the
expropriation do not exceed said damages suffered by the owner of the property.

PREVAILING RATE OF INTEREST – Six percent (6%) per annum.

Effect of Delay

General Rule: For non-payment, the remedy is the demand of payment of the fair market value of the property and not the
recovery of possession of the expropriated lots.

Exception: When the government fails to pay just compensation within five years from the finality of the judgment in the
expropriation proceedings, the owners concerned shall have the right to recover possession of their property

Abandonment of Intended Use and Right of Repurchase

If the expropriator (government) does not use the property for a public purpose the property reverts to the owner in fee
simple.

In Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority v. Tudtud [G.R. No. 174012 (2008)], the Court held that the expropriator has
the obligation to reconvey property expropriated but (never used, on the condition that the landowners would return the just
compensation they received, plus interest.

Miscellaneous Application

23
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

"Taking" under Social Justice Clause Agrarian Reform [Art. XIII, Sec. 4]: This provision is an exercise of the police power of
the State through eminent domain as it is a means to regulate private property.

When the State exercises the power of eminent domain in the implementation of its agrarian reform program, the
constitutional provision which governs is Section 4, Article XIll of the Constitution. Notably, this provision also imposes upon
the State the obligation of paying the landowner compensation for the land taken, even if it is for the government's 7 agrarian
reform purposes.

Taking also occurs when agricultural lands are voluntarily offered by a landowner and approved by the Presidential Agrarian
Reform Council for coverage under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program coverage through a stock distribution
scheme.

SEARCHES AND SEIZURES

Section 2, Article III. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable
searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of
arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or
affirmation by the complainant and the witness he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and
the persons or things to be seized.

To whom is it directed: AGAINST THE STATE; the right cannot be invoked against a provate individual.

Who may invoke: It is a personal right, invocable only by those whose rights have been infringed. It protects all persons
(natural and juridical) including aliens.

Concept of Privacy – Zones of privacy are recognized and protected in our laws. Within these zones, any form of intrusion is
impermissible unless excused by law and in accordance with customary legal process. The Constitution does not have a
specific provision protecting the right to privacy. It is a penumbral right formed from the shadows created by several
constitutional provisions. That is to say, the right to privacy is located within the zones created by various provisions of the
Constitution and various statutes which protect aspects of privacy.

Concept of a Search – The constitutional right against unreasonable searches and seizures is a personal right invocable
only by those whose rights have been infringed or threatened to be infringed.

What constitutes reasonable or unreasonable search and seizure in any particular case is purely a judicial question,
determinable from a consideration of the circumstances involved [ld].

Types of Warrants

1. A Search Warrant is an order in writing, issued in the name of the People of the Philippines, signed by a judge and
directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for personal property described therein and bring it before
the court.

Purpose: to gain evidence to convict.

2. A Warrant of Arrest is a writen order issued and signed by a judge directed to a peace
officer or some other person specially named, commanding him to arrest the body of a person named in it who is
accused of an offense.

Purpose: to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the accused.

Requisites of a Valid Warrant

a. Existence of Probable Cause
b. Probable cause must be personally determined by the Judge
c. After personal examination under affirmation of the complaint and the witnesses he may produce
d. On the basis of their personal knowledge of the facts they are testifying
e. Particularly describing the places to searched and the persons or things to be seized.
f. The warrant must refer to one specific offense (Requisite added by jurisprudence)

A. Existence of Probable Cause

Probable Cause for Search Warrant

24
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

Such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense
has been committed AND the objects sought in connection with the offense are in the place sought to be searched.

Probable Cause for Warrant of Arrest

Such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense
has been committed and the person to be arrested is probably guilty thereof.

B. Probable cause must be personally determined by the Judge

The judge must make an exhaustive and probing examination of witnesses and the applicant, and not merely
routine or pro forma examination.

The determination of probable cause calls for an exercise of judgment after a judicial
appraisal of the facts and should not be allowed to be delegated in the absence of any rule to the contrary.

How it is done: In the form of searching questions and answers, in writing and under oath. [Sec. 6, Rule 126, ROC]

Mere affidavits of the complainant and his witnesses are thus not sufficient. The examining Judge has to take
depositions in writing of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce and attach them to the record.

The examining judge must not simply rehash the contents of the affidavit but must make his own inquiry on the
intent and justification of the application. [Roan v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 71410 (1984)]

Such written deposition is necessary in order that the Judge may be able to properly determine the existence or
non-existence of the probable cause, to hold liable for perjury the person giving it if it will be found later that his
declarations are false [Mata v. Bayona, G.R. No. 50720 (1984)1.

C. After personal examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may
produce

Requisites:
1. Must refer to facts
2. Such facts are of personal knowledge of the petitioner or applicant or witnesses, not hearsay.

Test of sufficiency of an oath – Whether or not it was drawn in a manner that perjury could be charged against the
affiant and he be held liable for damages.

On the basis of their personal knowledge of the facts they are testifying to. Nala v.
Barroso, Jr., supra]

The purpose of having personal knowledge by the complainant and witnesses and the
sufficiency of the warrant is to convince the magistrate seeking she issuance of the warrant that there is probable
cause.

Personal knowledge is not the same as personal belief [Nala v. Barroso, Jr., supra].

The testimony must be based on the own personal knowledge of the complainant and of
the witnesses, not mere hearsay or information from a "reliable source" [Alvarez v. CFI, G.R. No. L-45358 (1937)}

D. There must be particularity in the description of the places to searched and the persons or things to be
seized

General Rule: The warrant must indicate the particular place to be searched and person or thing to be seized.

Exception:
If the nature of the goods to be seized cannot be particularly determined:
 the nature of the thing is general in description
 the thing is not required of a very technical description

Requirement is primarily meant to enable the law enforcers serving the warrant to:

25
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

 readily identify the properties to be seized and thus prevent them from seizing the wrong items;
 leave said peace officers with no discretion regarding the articles to be seized and thus prevent unreasonable
searches and seizures [People v. Tee, G.R. Nos. 140546- 47 (2003).

Description of the Place. The warrant issued to search petitioner's compound for unlicensed firearms was held invalid for
failing to describe the place with particularity, considering that the compound was made up of 200 buildings, 15 plants, 84
staff houses, one airstrip etc. spread out over 155 hectares. [PICOP v. Asuncion, G.R. No. 122092 (1999)].

Description of Things. The description of the property to be seized need not be technically accurate or precise/Its nature will
vary according to whether the identity of the property is a matter of concern. The description is required to be specific only
insofar as the circumstances will allow [Kho v. Judge Makalintal, G.R. Nos. 94902-06 (1999)].

A search warrant may be said to particularly describe the things to be seized when the:

 Description therein is as specific as the circumstances will ordinarily allow [People v. Rubio, G.R. No. L- 35500
(1932)]; or
 Description expresses a conclusion of fact, not of law, by which the warrant officer may be guided in making the
search and seizure; or
 Things described are limited to those which bear direct relation to the offense for which the warrant is being issued
[Bache and Co. v. Ruiz, supra].

Description of Persons. An error in the name of the person in the search warrant does not invalidate the warrant, as long as
it contains a description personae [including additional descriptions that will enable the officer to identify the accused without
difficulty [Nala v. Barroso, Jr., supra).
Search warrant is valid despite the mistake in the name of the persons to be searched. The authorities conducted
surveillance and test-buy operations before obtaining the search warrant and subsequently implementing it. They had
personal knowledge of the identity of the person and the place to be searched, although they did not specifically know the
name of the accused [People v. Tiu Won Chua, C.. No. 149878 (2003)].

A John Doe search warrant is valid. There is nothing to prevent issue and service of warrant against a party whose name is
unknown. [People v. Veloso, G.R. No. L-23051 (1925)1.

E. The warrant must refer to one specific offense.

However the rule is not violated if the offenses are closely related or under the same category.
In a case, the Court ruled that the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 is a special law that deals specifically with dangerous drugs
which are subsumed into "prohibited" and "regulated" drugs and defines and penalizes categories of offenses which are
closely related or which belong to the same class of species. Accordingly, one (1) search warrant may thus be validly issued
for the said violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act.

What may be searched. A search warrant may be issued for the search and seizure of personal property:

 Subject of the offense

 Stolen or embezzled/and other proceeds, or fruits of the offense; or
 Used or intended to be used as the means of committing an offense [Sec. 3, Rule 126, ROC].

The officers of the law are to seize only those things particularly described in the search warrant. A search warrant is not a
sweeping authority empowering a raiding party to undertake a fishing expedition to seize and confiscate any and all kinds of
evidence or articles relating to a crime. The search is limited in scope so as not to be general or explanatory.

Nothing is left to the discretion of the officer executing the warrant [UNILAB v. Isip, G.M. No. 163858 (2005)].

Where the warrant authorized only the seizure of shabu, and not marijuana, the seizure of the latter was held unlawful
[People v. Salanguit, G..R. Nos. 133254-55 (2001]

It is not necessary that the property to he searched or seized should be owned by the person against whom the warrant is
issued; it is sufficient that the property is within his control or possession [Burgos v. Chief of Stati, supra].

General Warrant. A general warrant is one that:

26
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

 Does not describe with particularity the thing: subject of the search and seizure; or
 Where probable cause has not been properly established.

Effects of a General Warrant. It is a void warrant. Any evidence obtained in violation (of this or the preceding section shall
be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.

The unconstitutionality of the search and the seizure or the use of a void search warrant. renders the items seized
inadmissible in evidence.

Exception: General descriptions will not invalidate the entire warrant if other items have been particularly described |Uy v.
BIR, G.R. No. 129651 (2000)

Effect of a void arrest warrant. A void arrest warrant would render the arrest invalid and illegal.
The illegality of arrest will not bar the court from prosecuting the accused. Despite illegality of the search and seizure, guilt
may still be established through eyewitness testimony.

WARRANTLESS SEARCHES

Probable cause for effecting warrantless searches must be based on a “reasonable ground of suspicion or belief that a crime
has been committed or is about to be committed.”
Exceptions to the warrant requirement; VALID WARRANTLESS SEARCHES

1. Warrantless search incidental to a lawful arrest

2. Seizure of evidence in plain view
3. Search of a moving vehicle
4. Customs search
5. Consented warrantless search
6. Stop and Frisk
7. Exigent and emergency circumstances

A. WARRANTLESS SEARCH INCIDENTAL TO A LAWFUL ARREST

A person lawfully arrested may be searched for dangerous weapons and proof of the commission of the offense,
even without a valid warrant.

Absent a valid search warrant, the search is confined to the person lawfully arrested.

As an incident of the lawful arrest, the arresting officer can search the place or premise where the arrest was made,
even without a search warrant. The extent and reasonableness of this search must be decided on its own facts and
circumstances.

Test for Validity:

1. Item to be searched is within the custody of the arrester; and
2. Search is contemporaneous to the lawful arrest.

An arrest being incipiently illegal, it thus follow that the search conducted is also illegal.
The arresting officer may search the person of the arrestee:

1. To discover and remove weapons; and

2. To seize evidence subject to concealment and destruction;
3. The area within the IMMEDIATE CONTROL of the arrestee (from which he might gain possession of a
weapon or a destructible evidence)

Immediate Control – immediate area to the defendant’s person where there are nearby weapons he could grab to attack the
officer or what he has in his pocket.
Purpose of the Exception. To protect the arresting officer from harm that the person to be arrested might cause because of a
concealed weapon, and to prevent the latter from destroying evidence within reach.

B. SEIZURE OF EVIDENCE WITHIN PLAIN VIEW (PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE)

27
JAZZTINE M. ARTIZUELA The Law Pertaining to the State and Its Relationship with Its Citizens

Things seized are within the plain view of the searching party.

Requisites:

1. Prior valid intrusion based on a valid warrantless arrest in which the police is legally present in pursuit of their
official function;
2. Evidence is inadvertently discovered by the police who have the right to be there;
3. Evidence is immediately apparent; and
4. Plain view justifies mere seizure of the evidence without further search

28