Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
ARTICLE III BILL OF RIGHTS - Coggle Diagram
ARTICLE III
BILL OF RIGHTS
B.
DUE PROCESS
C.
EQUAL PROTECTION
D.
SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
E.
PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATIONS & CORRESPONDENCE
F. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, RIGHT TO ASSEMBLY AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM
G.
FREEDOM OF RELIGION
H.
LIBERTY OF ABODE AND
FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT
I.
RIGHT TO INFORMATION
J.
RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION
K.
EMINENT DOMAIN
L.
CONTRACT CLAUSE
2 more items...
EMINENT DOMAIN REQS:
PRIVATE PROPERTY
PUBLIC USE
JUST COMPENSATION
SECTION 9. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.
RIGHT OF
PUBLIC & PRIVATE SECTORS TO:
FORM UNIONS
ASSOCIATIONS
SOCIETIES
SECTION 8. The right of the people, including those employed in the public and private sectors, to form unions, associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged.
RIGHT TO INFORMATION
PUBLIC CONCERN
SECTION 7. The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized.
ACCESS TO:
OFFICIAL RECORDS
DOCS PERTAINING TO:
a.
OFFICIAL ACTS
b.
TRANSACTIONS
c.
DECISIONS
GOV'T RESEARCH DATA
a.
FOR POLICY DEVELOPMENT
Access to official records, and to documents, and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for policy development, shall be afforded the citizen,
EXCEPT IF: LAW
subject to such limitations as may be provided by law.
So if NOT for policy development, government research data is not accessible?
IF NOT PUBLIC CONCERN -> NO RIGHT
NO IMPAIR:
LIBERTY OF ABODE
CHANGE
a.
WITHIN LIMITS OF LAW
SECTION 6. The liberty of abode and of
changing the same
within the limits prescribed by law shall not be impaired...
NO IMPAIR:
TRAVEL
Neither shall the right to travel be impaired
EXCEPTION:
GROUND
a.
NATIONAL SECURITY
b.
PUBLIC SAFETY
c.
PUBLIC HEALTH
AND
LAW
except in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may be provided by law.
EXECUTIVE POWER > RIGHT TO RETURN
Executive power may prohibit former President Marcos from returning to PH. "The right to return to one's country is not among the rights specifically guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, which treats only of the liberty of abode and the right to travel."
(Marcos v. Manglapus)
EXCEPTIONS:
(LAW)
COURT ORDER
...except upon lawful order of the court.
NO LAW SHALL BE MADE:
RESPECTING RELIGION
PROHIBITING FREE EXERCISE
SECTION 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
FOREVER ALLOWED:
FREE EXERCISE & ENJOYMENT OF
a.
RELIGIOUS PROFESSION
b.
WORSHIP
The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without
discrimination or preference
, shall forever be allowed.
NO RELIGIOUS TEST FOR EXERCISE OF:
CIVIL or POLITICAL RIGHTS
No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.
WITHOUT
DISCRIMINATION or PREFERENCE
NO LAW SHALL BE PASSED ABRIDGING:
FREEDOM OF:
a.
SPEECH
b.
EXPRESSION
c.
PRESS
RIGHT TO
a.
PEACABLY ASSEMBLE
b.
PETITION FOR REDRESS
SECTION 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.
RIGHT TO BE SECURE FROM UNREASONABLE SEARCH & SEIZURE
UNREASONABLE
WHATEVER NATURE
ANY PURPOSE
IN:
PERSONS
HOUSES
PAPERS
EFFECTS
SECTION 2. 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,
SEARCH/ARREST WARRANT REQS:
PROBABLE CAUSE
a.
PERSONALLY DETERMINED
b.
BY JUDGE
EXAMINATION
a.
UNDER OATH/AFFIRMATION
b.
OF COMPLAINANT & WITNESSES
PARTICULAR DESCRIPTION OF:
a.
PLACE SEARCHED
b.
PERSONS/THINGS SEIZED
[ONE SPECIFIC OFFENSE] (Jurisprudence)
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 of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
APPLIES AGAINST STATE ONLY
The rule against unreasonable searches and seizures is meant only to protect a person from interference by the government or the state
DOES NOT APPLY TO PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS
The Constitutional proscription enshrined in the Bill of Rights does not concern itself with the relation between a private individual and another individual. It governs the relationship between the individual and the State and its agents. [People v. Hipol]
ZULUETA
The exception here is the privacy of communication and correspondence where the wife took the private letters of her husband. The court ordered the return of such letters and did not admit these in evidence.
Zulueta v. CA
SEARCH WARRANT
NO PI
REQUIRES PERSONAL EXAM
10-DAY VALIDITY
NO COMPETENT JD COURT NEEDED
WAIVE ARREST -> NOT SEARCH
Waiver is limited to the illegal arrest. It does not extend to the search made as an incident thereto, or the subsequent seizure of evidence allegedly found during the search [People v. Peralta, G.R. No. 145176 (2004)]
ARREST WARRANT
PI
NO PERSONAL EXAM REQ
-
MAY ADOPT PROSEC'S FINDINGS
IMMORTAL
COMPETENT JD COURT
PRIVACY OF
COMM & CORR
SHALL BE INVIOLABLE
SECTION 3. (1)The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law.
SEC. 2 & 3 VIOL ->
INAD ANY PROCEEDING
(2)Any evidence obtained in
violation of this or the preceding section
shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.
2 TYPES OF IMMUNITY STATUTES
USE IMMUNITY
TRANSACTIONAL IMMUNITY
Immunity statutes may be generally classified into two: one, which grants "use immunity"; and the other, which grants what is known as "transactional immunity." The distinction between the two is as follows:
USE IMMUNITY
"Use immunity"
prohibits use
of witness' compelled testimony and its fruits in any manner in connection with the criminal prosecution of the witness.
UNDER THIS IMMUNITY, THE WITNESS MAY STILL BE PROSECUTED FOR THE CRIME
it is beyond dispute that said law belongs to the first type of immunity statutes. It grants merely immunity from use of any statement given before the Board, but not immunity from prosecution by reason or on the basis thereof. Merely testifying and/or producing evidence do not render the witness immuned from prosecution notwithstanding his invocation of the right against self-incrimination. He is merely saved from the use against him of such statement and nothing more. Stated otherwise . . . . he still runs the risk of being prosecuted even if he sets up his right against self-incrimination.|||
(Galman v. Pamaran)
PROHBITED USE =
PROHIBITED DERIVATIVE USE
According to this rule, once the primary source (the "tree") is shown to have been unlawfully obtained, any secondary or derivative evidence (the "fruit") derived from it is also inadmissible.*
(People v. Samontañez)
FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE
Stated otherwise, illegally seized evidence is obtained as a direct result of the illegal act, whereas the " fruit of the poisonous tree" is the indirect result of the same illegal act.
The " fruit of the poisonous tree" is at least once removed from the illegally seized evidence, but it is equally inadmissible. The rule is based on the principle that evidence illegally obtained by the State should not be used to gain other evidence because the originally illegally obtained evidence taints all evidence subsequently obtained.
IMMUNE TO USE =
IMMUNE TO DERIVATIVE USE
SIR: If you have immunity from the use of a piece of evidence, then so should you be immune to the derivative use of such evidence.
(Kastigar v. United States)
TRANSACTIONAL IMMUNITY
On the other hand, "transactional immunity" grants immunity to the witness from PROSECUTION
for an offense
to which his compelled testimony relates.
(Galman v. Pamaran)
But does it prohibit the use of his testimony and its fruits?
Sir seems to connote that Transactional Immunity includes the use of his testimony as well. "Broader" might mean it is inclusive of Use Immunity.
WHEN VIOLABLE
(CPPL)
COURT ORDER
PUBLIC ORDER
PUBLIC SAFETY
LAW
DUE PROCESS:
WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW,
NO PERSON SHALL BE DEPRIVED OF:
LIFE
a.
(PRIVACY)
LIBERTY
PROPERTY
a.
(NOT JUST OWNERSHIP)
SECTION 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law,
EQUAL PROTECTION
nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.
SUBSTANTIAL DISTINCTION
DUE PROCESS
SUBSTANTIVE
PROCEDURAL
RIGHT TO PRIVACY SUBSUMED IN RIGHT TO LIFE
Subsumed in the right to life → the right to be left alone (Ople v. Torres). However, this does not bar all incursions into private life, just that the law be narrowly focused and compelling interest justifies such intrusions. Intrusions into the right must be accompanied by proper safeguards and well-defined standards to prevent unconstitutional invasions. Must comply with the strict scrutiny test