Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 579 views

    Chavez v. Romulo

    Uploaded by

    Void Less
    The Supreme Court ruled that the revocation of permits to carry firearms outside the residence (PTCFOR) by the Philippine National Police did not violate due process rights. A license is a privilege granted by the government, not a property right. It can be revoked at any time by executive action, as it does not confer an absolute right. PTCFOR holders receive the privilege subject to conditions, including revocation. Therefore, revoking PTCFORs did not deprive holders of any constitutional property or due process rights.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Chavez v. Romulo

    Uploaded by

    Void Less
    579 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that the revocation of permits to carry firearms outside the residence (PTCFOR) by the Philippine National Police did not violate due process rights. A license is a privilege granted by the government, not a property right. It can be revoked at any time by executive action, as it does not confer an absolute right. PTCFOR holders receive the privilege subject to conditions, including revocation. Therefore, revoking PTCFORs did not deprive holders of any constitutional property or due process rights.

    Original Description:

    M

    Original Title

    3. Chavez v. Romulo

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that the revocation of permits to carry firearms outside the residence (PTCFOR) by the Philippine National Police did not violate due process rights. A license is a privilege granted by the government, not a property right. It can be revoked at any time by executive action, as it does not confer an absolute right. PTCFOR holders receive the privilege subject to conditions, including revocation. Therefore, revoking PTCFORs did not deprive holders of any constitutional property or due process rights.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as odt, pdf, or txt
    579 views1 page

    Chavez v. Romulo

    Uploaded by

    Void Less
    The Supreme Court ruled that the revocation of permits to carry firearms outside the residence (PTCFOR) by the Philippine National Police did not violate due process rights. A license is a privilege granted by the government, not a property right. It can be revoked at any time by executive action, as it does not confer an absolute right. PTCFOR holders receive the privilege subject to conditions, including revocation. Therefore, revoking PTCFORs did not deprive holders of any constitutional property or due process rights.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as odt, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    3. Chavez v.

    Romulo (431 SCRA 534)


    FACTS: President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo delivered a speech before the members of the
    PNP stressing the need for a nationwide gun ban in all public places to avert the rising crime
    incidents. She directed the then PNP Chief, respondent Ebdane, to suspend the issuance of
    Permits to Carry Firearms Outside of Residence (PTCFOR). Ebdane then issued Guidelines
    in the Implementation of the Ban on the Carrying of Firearms Outside of Residence, which
    prohibited lawful holders of firearms from carrying their firearms outside of their residences.
    Petitioner now contends inter alia that the assailed Guidelines violate the due process clause
    of the Constitution as it deprives of one’s vested property right without due process.
    ISSUE: Whether or not a revocation of PTCFOR is a violation of right to property.
    HELD: No. A license authorizing a person to enjoy a certain privilege is neither a property nor
    property right. In Tan vs. The Director of Forestry, "a license is merely a permit or privilege to
    do what otherwise would be unlawful, and is not a contract between the authority granting it
    and the person to whom it is granted; neither is it property or a property right, nor does it
    create a vested right."
    In Oposa vs. Factoran, Jr., the Supreme Court held that “[a]ll licenses may thus be revoked or
    rescinded by executive action. It is not a contract, property or a property right protected by the
    due process clause of the Constitution."
    Consequently, a PTCFOR, just like ordinary licenses in other regulated fields, may be
    revoked any time. It does not confer an absolute right, but only a personal privilege to be
    exercised under existing restrictions, and such as may thereafter be reasonably imposed. A
    licensee takes his license subject to such conditions as the Legislature sees fit to impose, and
    one of the statutory conditions of this license is that it might be revoked by the selectmen at
    their pleasure. Such a license is not a contract, and a revocation of it does not deprive the
    defendant of any property, immunity, or privilege within the meaning of these words in the
    Declaration of Rights.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy