Ren Consti

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 14
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
  DUE PROCESS ARTICLE III BILL OF RIGHTS Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law. Definition, Nature and Scope Justice Fernando- Due process means responsiveness to the supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of justice. Justice Frankfurter- Due process is the embodiment of the sporting idea of fair play. Due process- is a guaranty against any arbitrariness on the part of the Government, whether committed by the Legislature, the executive or the judiciary, if the law itself unreasonably deprives a person of his life or his liberty or his property. If the enjoyment of hid rights is conditioned on an unreasonable requirement, due process is likewise violated. Purpose of the guaranty Hurtado v California Issue: Whether Hurtado was denied due process by being tried and found guilty without being presented or indicted by a grand jury. Held: No. State cannot deprive a person of his property without due process of law; but this does not necessarily imply that all trials in the State courts affecting the property of persons must be by jury. This requirement of the Constitution is met if the trial is had according to the settled course of judicial proceedings. Due process of law is process according to the law of the land. This process in the States is regulated by the law of State. Meaning of Life, Liberty and Property Life - Includes the right of an individual to his body in its completeness, free from dismemberment, and extends to the use of God given faculties which make life enjoyable. Liberty - Includes 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. Property - Is anything that come under the right of ownership and be the subject of contract. - It represents more than the things a person owns; - It includes the right to secure, use and dispose them. Substantive Due Process Substantive due process requires the intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with the rights of the person to life, liberty or property. The inquiry in this regard is not whether or not the law is being enforced in accordance with the prescribed manner but whether or not, to begin with, it is proper exercise of legislative power. The means employed must be reasonably related to the accomplishment of the purpose and not duly oppressive. Villegas v. Hiu Chiong Tsai Pao Ho Issue: Whether the Ordinance, requiring aliens - however economically situated - to secure  working permits from the City of Manila at a uniform fee of P50, is reasonable. Held: No. The ordinance is arbitrary, oppressive and unreasonable, being applied only to aliens who are thus, deprived of their rights to life, liberty and property and therefore, violates the due process and equal protection clauses of the Constitution. Requiring a person, before he can be employed, to get a permit from the City Mayor of Manila, who may withhold or refuse it at will is tantamount to denying him the basic right of the people in the Philippines to engage in a means of livelihood. The ordinance’s purpose is clearly to raise money under the guise of regulation by exacting P50 from aliens who have been cleared for employment. The amount is unreasonable and excessive because it fails to consider differences in situation among aliens required to pay it, i.e. being casual, permanent, full-time, part-time, rank-and-file or executive. Rubi, et. al. vs. Provincial Board of Mindoro Issue: Whether due process was followed in the restraint of the Manguianes’ liberty, either on their confinement in reservations and/or imprisonment due to violation of Section 2145 of the Administrative Code. Held: Due process of law means simply that: 1. that there shall be a law prescribed in harmony with the general powers of the legislative department of the Government; 2. that this law shall be reasonable in its operation; 3. third, that it shall be enforced according to the regular methods of procedure prescribed; and 4. that it shall be applicable alike to all the citizens of the state or to all of a class. What is due process of law depends on circumstances. It varies with the subject-matter and necessities of the situation. The pledge that no person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws is not infringed by a statute which is applicable to all of a class. The classification must have a reasonable basis and cannot be purely arbitrary in nature. Void for Vagueness/ Over breadth Ople v. Torres Issue: Whether the Philippine President can issue an  Administrative Order for the adoption of a National Computerized Identification Reference System, independent of a legislative act. Held:  AO 308 was beyond the power of the President to issue.  Administrative Order 308 establishes a system of identification that is all-encompassing in scope, affects the life and liberty of every Filipino citizen and foreign resident, and more particularly, violates their right to privacy.  Administrative Order 308 does not merely implements the Administrative Code of 1987, but establishes for the first time a National Computerized Identification Reference System.  An administrative order is an ordinance issued by the President which relates to specific aspects in the administrative operation of government. It must be in harmony with the law and should be for the sole purpose of implementing the law and carrying out the legislative policy.  Estrada v. Sandiganbayan  A statute or act 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. In such instance, the statute is repugnant to the Constitution in two (2) respects - it violates due process for failure to accord persons, especially the parties targeted by it, fair notice of what conduct to avoid; and, it leaves law enforcers unbridled discretion in carrying out its provisions and becomes an arbitrary flexing of the Government muscle. The void-for-vagueness doctrine states that a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application, violates the first essential of due process of law. The overbreadth doctrine, on the other hand, decrees that a governmental purpose may not be achieved by means which sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the area of protected freedoms.  A facial challenge is allowed to be made to a vague statute and to one which is overbroad because of possible chilling effect upon protected speech. The theory is that [w]hen statutes regulate or proscribe speech and no readily apparent construction suggests itself as a vehicle for rehabilitating the statutes in a single prosecution, 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. Procedural Due Process (Judicial) 1. Impartial court or tribunal clothed with  judicial power to hear and determine the matter before it 2. Jurisdiction lawfully acquired over the person or property of the defendant which is the subject matter of the proceeding 3. Defendant given an opportunity to be heard 4. Judgment rendered upon lawful hearing. Publication Requirement Tanada vs Tuvera Publication is required, even if their enactment is “otherwise provided” or effective immediately. The term laws should refer to all laws and not only to those of general application, for strictly speaking all laws relate to the people in general albeit there are some that do not apply to them directly. To be valid, the law must invariably affect the public interest even if it might be directly applicable only to one individual, or some of the people only, and not to the public as a whole. Publication requirements applies to: 1. all statutes, including those of local application and private laws; 2. presidential decrees and executive orders promulgated by the President in the exercise of legislative powers whenever the same are validly delegated by the legislature or directly conferred by the Constitution; 3. Administrative rules and regulations for the purpose of enforcing or implementing existing law pursuant also to a valid delegation; 4. Charter of a city notwithstanding that it applies to only a portion of the national territory and directly affects only the inhabitants of that place;   5. Monetary Board circulars to fill in the details of the Central Bank Act which that body is supposed to enforce. Publication requirements does not apply to: 1. interpretative regulations and those merely internal in nature, i.e. regulating only the personnel of the administrative agency and not the public; 2. Letters of Instructions issued by administrative superiors concerning the rules or guidelines to be followed by their subordinates in the performance of their duties; and 3. instructions of Ministry heads on case studies. Further, publication must be in full or it is no publication at all since its purpose is to inform the public of the contents of the laws. It should be published in the Official Gazette and not elsewhere. Even if newspapers of general circulation could better perform the function of communicating the laws to the people as such periodicals are more easily available, have a wider readership, and come out regularly, this kind of publication is not the one required or authorized by existing law. PITC Vs Angeles The Administrative order under consideration is one of those issuances which should be published for its effectivity, since its purpose is to enforce and implement an existing law pursuant to a valid delegation. Republic vs Extelcom  Administrative rules and regulations must be published if their purpose is to enforce or implement existing law pursuant to a valid delegation. The only exceptions are interpretative regulations, those merely internal in nature, or those so-called letters of instructions issued by administrative superiors concerning the rules and guidelines to be followed by their subordinates in the performance of their duties. Impartial Court or Tribunal Tanada vs PAEC The PAEC Commissioners would be acting with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction were they to sit in judgment upon the safety of the plant, absent the requisite objectivity that must characterize such an important inquiry because they already have prejudged the safety of PNPP-1. The PAEC Commissioners cannot escape responsibility from the official pamphlets, which clearly indicate the prejudgment that PNPP-1 is safe. The official distribution of the pamphlets continued when the Commissioners had already been appointed to their present positions and even after PAEC had issued its order dated 26 February 1985 formally admitting NAPOCOR’s  motion for conversion. Tabuena v. Sandiganbayan Due process requires no less than the cold neutrality of an impartial judge. Bolstering this requirement, we have added that the judge must not only be impartial but must also appear to be impartial, to give added assurance to the parties that his decision will be just. The parties are entitled to no less than this, as a minimum guaranty of due process. Our courts should refrain from showing any semblance of one-sided or more or less partial attitude in order not to create any false impression in the minds of the litigants. For obvious reasons, it is the bounden duty of all to strive for the preservation of the people's faith in our courts. Respect for the Constitution is more important than securing a conviction based on a violation of the rights of the accused.
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks