Human Rights 2024

SMU DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE THE SEVENTH PLACER FILES 2024
SAINT MARY’S UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF TEACHER EDUCATION AND HUMANITIES
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE
NOTE IN HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION
(BS FORENSIC SCIENCE/BS NURSING)
SY 2023 - 2024
======================================================
A BRIEF HISTORY OF HUMAN RIGHTS
THE CYRUS CYLINDER (539 B.C.)
In 539 B.C., the armies of Cyrus the Great, the first king of ancient
Persia, conquered the city of Babylon. But it was his next actions that
marked a major advance for Man. He freed the slaves, declared that all
people had the right to choose their own religion, and established racial
equality. These and other decrees were recorded on a baked-clay
cylinder in the Akkadian language with cuneiform script.
Known today as the Cyrus Cylinder, this ancient record has now been
recognized as the world’s first charter of human rights. It is translated
into all six official languages of the United Nations and its provisions
parallel the first four Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights.
THE SPREAD OF HUMAN RIGHTS
From Babylon, the idea of human rights spread quickly to India, Greece
and eventually Rome. There the concept of “natural law” arose, in
observation of the fact that people tended to follow certain unwritten
laws in the course of life, and Roman law was based on rational ideas
derived from the nature of things.
Documents asserting individual rights, such as the Magna Carta (1215),

the Petition of Right (1628), the US Constitution (1787), the French
Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789), and the US
Bill of Rights (1791) are the written precursors to many of today’s
human rights documents.
1
THE MAGNA CARTA (1215)
The Magna Carta, or “Great Charter,” was arguably the most significant
early influence on the extensive historical process that led to the rule
of constitutional law today in the English-speaking world.
In 1215, after King John of England violated a number of ancient laws

and customs by which England had been governed, his subjects forced
him to sign the Magna Carta, which enumerates what later came to be
thought of as human rights.
Among them was the right of the church to be free from governmental
interference, the rights of all free citizens to own and inherit property
and to be protected from excessive taxes. It established the right of
widows who owned property to choose not to remarry, and established
principles of due process and equality before the law. It also contained
provisions forbidding bribery and official misconduct.
Widely viewed as one of the most important legal documents in the

development of modern democracy, the Magna Carta was a crucial
turning point in the struggle to establish freedom.
PETITION OF RIGHT (1628)
The next recorded milestone in the development of human rights was

the Petition of Right, produced in 1628 by the English Parliament and
sent to Charles I as a statement of civil liberties. Refusal by Parliament
to finance the king’s unpopular foreign policy had caused his
government to exact forced loans and to quarter troops in subjects’
houses as an economy measure. Arbitrary arrest and imprisonment for
opposing these policies had produced in Parliament a violent hostility
to Charles and to George Villiers, the Duke of Buckingham.
The Petition of Right, initiated by Sir Edward Coke, was based upon
earlier statutes and charters and asserted four principles:
1. No taxes may be levied without consent of Parliament,
2. No subject may be imprisoned without cause shown

(reaffirmation of the right of habeas corpus),
3. No soldiers may be quartered upon the citizenry, and
2
4. Martial law may not be used in time of peace.
UNITED STATES DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (1776)
On July 4, 1776, the United States Congress approved the Declaration

of Independence. Its primary author, Thomas Jefferson, wrote the
Declaration as a formal explanation of why Congress had voted on July
2 to declare independence from Great Britain, more than a year after
the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War, and as a statement
announcing that the thirteen American Colonies were no longer a part
of the British Empire. Congress issued the Declaration of Independence
in several forms. It was initially published as a printed broadsheet that
was widely distributed and read to the public.
Philosophically, the Declaration stressed two themes: individual rights

and the right of revolution. These ideas became widely held by
Americans and spread internationally as well, influencing in particular
the French Revolution.
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (1787)

AND BILL OF RIGHTS (1791)
Written during the summer of 1787 in Philadelphia, the Constitution of

the United States of America is the fundamental law of the US federal
system of government and the landmark document of the Western
world. It is the oldest written national constitution in use and defines
the principal organs of government and their jurisdictions and the basic
rights of citizens.
The first ten amendments to the Constitution—the Bill of Rights—came

into effect on December 15, 1791, limiting the powers of the federal
government of the United States and protecting the rights of all
citizens, residents and visitors in American territory.
The Bill of Rights protects freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the

right to keep and bear arms, the freedom of assembly and the freedom
to petition. It also prohibits unreasonable search and seizure, cruel and
unusual punishment and compelled self-incrimination.
Among the legal protections it affords, the Bill of Rights prohibits

Congress from making any law respecting establishment of religion and
prohibits the federal government from depriving any person of life,
liberty or property without due process of law. In federal criminal cases
it requires indictment by a grand jury for any capital offense, or
3
infamous crime, guarantees a speedy public trial with an impartial jury

in the district in which the crime occurred, and prohibits double
jeopardy.
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND OF THE CITIZEN (1789)
In 1789 the people of France brought about the abolishment of the

absolute monarchy and set the stage for the establishment of the first
French Republic. Just six weeks after the storming of the Bastille, and
barely three weeks after the abolition of feudalism, the Declaration of
the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (French: La Déclaration des Droits
de l’Homme et du Citoyen) was adopted by the National Constituent
Assembly as the first step toward writing a constitution for the Republic
of France.
The Declaration proclaims that all citizens are to be guaranteed the

rights of “liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression.” It
argues that the need for law derives from the fact that “...the exercise
of the natural rights of each man has only those borders which assure
other members of the society the enjoyment of these same rights.”
Thus, the Declaration sees law as an “expression of the general will,
“intended to promote this equality of rights and to forbid “only actions
harmful to the society.”
THE FIRST GENEVA CONVENTION (1864)
In 1864, sixteen European countries and several American states

attended a conference in Geneva, at the invitation of the Swiss Federal
Council, on the initiative of the Geneva Committee. The diplomatic
conference was held for the purpose of adopting a convention for the
treatment of wounded soldiers in combat.
The main principles laid down in the Convention and maintained by the
later Geneva Conventions provided for the obligation to extend care
without discrimination to wounded and sick military personnel and
respect for and marking of medical personnel transports and
equipment with the distinctive sign of the red cross on a white
background.
4
THE UNITED NATIONS (1945)
World War II had raged from 1939 to 1945, and as the end drew near,
cities throughout Europe and Asia lay in smoldering ruins. Millions of
people were dead, millions more were homeless or starving. Russian
forces were closing in on the remnants of German resistance in
Germany’s bombed-out capital of Berlin. In the Pacific, US Marines were
still battling entrenched Japanese forces on such islands as Okinawa.
In April 1945, delegates from fifty countries met in San Francisco full
of optimism and hope. The goal of the United Nations Conference on
International Organization was to fashion an international body to
promote peace and prevent future wars. The ideals of the organization
were stated in the preamble to its proposed charter:
“We the peoples of the United Nations are determined to save succeeding
generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has
brought untold sorrow to mankind.”
The Charter of the new United Nations organization went into effect on
October 24, 1945, a date that is celebrated each year as United Nations
Day.
THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS (1948)
By 1948, the United Nations’ new Human Rights Commission had

captured the world’s attention. Under the dynamic chairmanship of
Eleanor Roosevelt—President Franklin Roosevelt’s widow, a human
rights champion in her own right and the United States delegate to the
UN—the Commission set out to draft the document that became the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Roosevelt, credited with its
inspiration, referred to the Declaration as the international Magna Carta
for all mankind. It was adopted by the United Nations on December 10,
1948.
In its preamble and in Article 1, the Declaration unequivocally

proclaims the inherent rights of all human beings: “Disregard and
contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have
outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which
human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom
from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of
the common people...All human beings are born free and equal in
dignity and rights.”
5
The Member States of the United Nations pledged to work together to

promote the thirty Articles of human rights that, for the first time in
history, had been assembled and codified into a single document. In
consequence, many of these rights, in various forms, are today part of
the constitutional laws of democratic nations.
https://www.humanrights.com/what-are-human-rights/brief-history/
THE BASIC CONCEPTS OF HUMAN RIGHTS
WHAT ARE HUMAN RIGHTS?
Human rights are the basic rights and freedoms that belong to every
person in the world, from birth until death. They apply regardless of
where you are from, what you believe or how you choose to live your
life. They can never be taken away, although they can sometimes be
restricted – for example if a person breaks the law, or in the interests
of national security. These basic rights are based on shared values like
dignity, fairness, equality, respect and independence.
Human rights are like armour: they protect you; they are like rules,
because they tell you how you can behave; and they are like judges,
because you can appeal to them. They are abstract – like emotions; and
like emotions, they belong to everyone and they exist no matter what
happens.
They are like nature because they can be violated; and like the spirit
because they cannot be destroyed. Like time, they treat us all in the
same way – rich and poor, old and young, white and black, tall and
short. They offer us respect, and they charge us to treat others with
respect. Like goodness, truth and justice, we may sometimes disagree
about their definition, but we recognise them when we see them.
FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS CONCEPTS
Human rights are universal, indivisible, inalienable and

interdependent. They are universal because everyone is born with and
possesses the same rights regardless of their background, nationality,
place of living or status; indivisible because all rights are equally
important and cannot be separated from each other; inalienable
because all human rights are non-derogable and cannot be removed by
any political order; and interdependent because rights – political, civil,
6
social, cultural and economic – are connected and none can be fully
enjoyed without the others.
1. UNIVERSALITY
Human rights apply at all times to every human being across the globe.
This has been affirmed by Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR), which states that “All human beings are born
free and equal in dignity and rights.” The universality of human rights
is a principle proclaimed to ensure and reinforce the weight to be
placed on these rights.
Human rights apply equally to all people everywhere in the world, and
with no time limit. Every individual is entitled to enjoy his or her human
rights without distinction of "race" or ethnic background, colour, sex,
sexual orientation, disability, language, religion, political or other
opinion, national or social origin, birth or other status.
2. INALIENABILITY
To say that human rights are inalienable means that every human being
has human rights, independently of his or her knowledge of it and that
it is impossible for an individual to lose his/her human rights for any
reason whatsoever. It thus follows that, theoretically, whether an
individual possesses human rights does not depend on State
recognition of those rights.
Thus, what makes human rights inalienable is the fact that nobody
should be deprived from his or her human rights and that it does not
depend on any domestic authority to recognize them. Even people who
have committed atrocities still have human rights.
However, even if this is the case, it is still disputed whether one truly
is in possession of human rights if supposed human rights are so often
and blatantly violated, or if there is no formal or legal recognition of
such rights.
Inalienability of rights means that you cannot lose them, because they
are linked to the very fact of human existence, they are inherent to all
human beings. In particular circumstances some – though not all – may
be suspended or restricted.
For example, if someone is found guilty of a crime, his or her liberty

can be taken away; or in times of national emergency, a government
7
may declare this publicly and then derogate from some rights, for
example in imposing a curfew restricting freedom of movement.
3. INDIVISIBILITY
Human rights are indivisible and represent a coherent and
homogeneous whole that is necessary for every human being. It is not
for the State to decide which category of rights it decides to guarantee.
Human rights reinforce each other – as an illustration, it is hard to
imagine an effective right to life without a right to water for example.
Indivisibility of rights simply means that different human rights are

intrinsically connected and cannot be viewed in isolation from each
other. The enjoyment of one right depends on the enjoyment of many
other rights and no one right is more important than the rest.
4. EQUALITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION
One of the core obligations under human rights law is the principle of
non-discrimination which stems from the universal nature of these
rights. While no express definition is given of the concept of
discrimination in the common Art. 1 of the two covenants of 1966, the
Human Rights Committee has stated that discrimination should be
understood to imply “any discrimination, exclusion, restriction or
preference which is based on any ground such as race, colour, sex,
language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,
property, birth or other status, and which has the purpose or effect of
nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by all
persons, on an equal footing, of all rights and freedoms”. The
prohibition of such behaviour is repeatedly included in most, if not all,
human rights instruments. In addition to the two covenants of 1966
(Art. 2), the Convention on the Rights of the Child as well as the
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities prohibit
discrimination as well.
5. BOTH RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS
Human rights entail both rights and obligations. States assume

obligations and duties under international law to respect, to protect and
to fulfil human rights.
The obligation to respect means that States must refrain from

interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human rights. The
obligation to protect requires States to protect individuals and groups
against human rights abuses.
8
The obligation to fulfill means that States must take positive action to
facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights. At the individual level,
while we are entitled our human rights, we should also respect the
human rights of others.
CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS VERSUS ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND

CULTURAL RIGHTS
Most commonly, human rights are distinguished in two main

categories: civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural
rights. Each of them can be subdivided. This classification is supported
by the adoption of two separate covenants in 1966.
CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS: These rights are said to be “classic” and
are known as “liberty oriented human rights” because they provide,
protect and guarantee individual liberty to an individual against the
State and its agencies.
They include the right to right to life, right to freedom from torture,
right to a fair trial, right to freedom of assembly and association, right
to liberty and security and right to freedom from discrimination.
Civil and political rights are intended to be immediately implemented

and precise, to facilitate judges’ interpretation. They reflect a liberal
ideology. These rights came to the fore in the 18th and 19th centuries,
where the struggle for rights focused on the liberation from
authoritarian oppression and the corresponding rights of free speech,
association and religion and the right to vote.
In particular, civil rights were commonly associated with the 1960s

movement in the US to establish equality for people of African descent
and with the US Bill of Rights. By the end of the 20th century, their reach
and recognition was global, embodying and providing legal support for
basic concepts of human dignity and respect for individuals and groups
in their diverse cultures and ways.
While this category of rights had previously been seen as only

necessitating a negative action from the State, according to more
modern concepts of political rights, every citizen should have the right
and opportunity, without unreasonable restrictions, to take part in the
conduct of public affairs. It follows that such rights presume that the
government actively structures its processes so as to provide
opportunities for political participation of all eligible citizens.
9
ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS: These rights were

developed in the aftermath of World War II against the background of
growing inequalities and the changed view of the state’s role in an
industrializing world. Unlike civil and political rights, economic, social
and cultural rights typically require more economic resources and
positive actions from the State and have thus been referred to as
“rights-debts”.
They are known as “security-oriented human rights” because these

rights jointly provide and guarantee the essential security in the life of
an individual. They include the right to an adequate standard of living,
the right to education, the right to a healthy environment and the right
to social security. One of their particular features is the ‘progressive
realization.
The ICESCR (INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND

CULTURAL RIGHTS), for example, recognizes that such rights are not all
immediately realizable. States have the obligation to take appropriate
measures, based on their available resources, towards the full
realization of the ECS rights. Economic, social, and cultural rights have
been criticized as being “vague”, difficult to monitor effectively and
thus not judicially enforceable as there is no metric to measure whether
a state has fulfilled its obligations.
However, most sovereign states have enshrined ESCR in their

constitutions, and there are numerous examples of courts applying
domestic and international law to protect these rights. Vagueness has
also not prevented international development agencies from
attempting to develop metrics to “measure” the extent to which states
have fulfilled these obligations, for instance, the UNDP’s (UN
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME) human development index and gender-
related indices, UNICEF’s rate of progress measurements and the World
Bank’s World Development Reports.
HUMAN RIGHTS – PHILIPPINES
HUMAN RIGHTS
Human Rights is defined as the supreme, inherent, and inalienable

rights to life, to dignity, and to self-development. It is concerned with
issues in both areas of civil and political rights, economic, social, and
cultural rights founded on internationally accepted human rights
obligations to which the Philippine Government is a state party.
10
All Human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and inter-

related.
CLASSIFICATION
Rights can be classified according to following:
1. Individual Rights - are those rights being accorded to individuals.
2. Collective Rights - (also called “people rights" or "solidarity rights")

are those rights of the society that can be enjoyed only in company
with others. Examples are, Right to Peaceably Assemble, right to
peace, right to development, right to self-determination, and right
to environment.
3. Civil Rights - are those which the law will enforce at the instance of
private individuals for the purpose of securing to them the
enjoyment of their means of happiness.
They include the rights against involuntary servitude and

imprisonment for non-payment of debt or poll tax; the
constitutional rights of the accused; the social and economic rights;
liberty of the abode and changing the same. Freedom of speech, of
expression, and the right to form associations are likewise civil
rights.
However, they partake of the nature of political rights when they are
utilized as a means to participate in the government.
4. Political Rights - are those rights that enable us to participate in

running the affairs of the government either directly or indirectly.
Examples are the Right to Vote, the right to information on matters

of public concern, and the right to initiative and referendum.
5. Economic and Social Rights - are those which the law confers upon
the people to enable them to achieve social and economic
development, thereby ensuring them their well-being, happiness
and financial security.
Examples are the right to property, education, and promotion of

social justice.
11
6. Cultural Rights - are those that ensure the well-being of the

individual and foster the preservation, enrichment, and dynamic
evolution of national culture based on the principle of unity and
diversity in a climate of free artistic and intellectual expression.
https://sites.google.com/site/humanrightspromotions/human-rights
THE STATE, ITS POLICE POWER AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Police Power – This is the power vested in the Legislature by the

Constitution to make, ordain, and establish all manner of wholesome
and reasonable laws, statutes and ordinances, either with penalties or
without, not repugnant to the Constitution, for the good and welfare of
the State and its subjects.
Basis: This power is based on the legal maxim “salus populi est suprema
lex” (the voice of the people is the supreme law). Every citizen of every
community, in a civilized society must bear certain burdens imposed
for the good of all.
Note: No right is absolute in the face of the common good.
Nature: Police power is an attribute of sovereignty and is founded on

the obligation of the State to provide protection for its citizens and the
safety and good order of society.
Scope: Police power is founded on which our social system rests and
has for its object the improvement of social and economic conditions
affecting the community.
It depends on the security of the social order, life and health of citizens,
comfort and existence in a thickly populated community, enjoyment of
social life, and beneficial use of property.
Requisites
1. Interest of the public is general, not that of a particular class
2. Means used are reasonably necessary for the purpose, and not
unduly oppressive upon individuals
https://www.lexanimo.com/2016/09/16/fundamental-powers-of-
the-state/
12
10 NGOS ADVOCATING FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE PHILIPPINES
At time of writing this article, there were over a hundred political

prisoners in prison in the Philippines. Many of them are tortured and
mistreated during interrogations. Many people have disappeared, and
civilians were killed over land disputes. The human rights situation in
the Philippines is deteriorating in a fast pace and the Filipino
government is doing very little to tackle the issues. Nevertheless, these
following 10 human rights NGOs are constantly fighting for the
improvement of the human rights situation in the country.
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL PHILIPPINES
Amnesty International is a global movement of more than seven million

people who are independent of any type of political ideology, religion
or economic interest and who take injustice personally. They campaign
for the world in which human rights are enjoyed by all.
Through its office located in Manila, Amnesty International employs

research, advocacy, lobbying and campaigns to fight for human rights
in the country.
They lobby for adoption of anti-torture laws, ratification of the Optional

Protocol to the Convention Against Torture, reproductive health
policies, abolition of the death penalty, juvenile justice and adoption
of laws that would stop violence against women.
ASIAN FEDERATION AGAINST INVOLUNTARY DISAPPEARANCES
The Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD) was

established in 1998 in Manila as a federation of human rights
organizations working on the issues of involuntary disappearances in
Asia. They see enforced disappearances as one of the cruelest forms of
human rights violations and work to support families of the
disappeared.
They promote international solidarity among organizations of the

families of the disappeared in Asia and other continents and provide
support to their member organizations to better respond to this issue.
AFAD also conducts campaigns and lobbies to address the issue of
enforced disappearances in Asia to ensure there are truth, justice, and
the reconstruction of the collective memory of the disappeared.
13
PHILIPPINE ALLIANCE OF HUMAN RIGHTS ADVOCATES
Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates is human rights NGO

working with a mission ‘’to develop a strong, progressive, dynamic, and
pluralist human rights movement that engages the state to comply with
its human rights obligations and non-state actors to fulfill their human
rights responsibilities.’’
To achieve their goals, PAHRA conducts campaigns and advocates for

the respect of human rights. They work closely with other human rights
organizations, as well as with individuals and government agencies to
promote and defend human rights. Since their establishment in 1986,
PAHRA serves as an advocacy center committed to promotion of human
rights and their recognition and realization as embodied in
international human rights instruments such as the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights.
KARAPATAN
KARAPATAN was founded in 1995 as an alliance of groups,

organizations and individuals working for the promotion and
protection of human rights in the Philippines. They conduct several
programs to raise awareness about human rights in the country,
including education and training, services programs, documentation
and research, and networking.
However, a large portion of KARAPATAN’s work involves campaigning

and advocacy through which they seek to develop a strong public
opinion and support for human rights issues and concerns. To achieve
this, they lobby for the defense and promotion of human rights and
disseminate information about the importance of human rights.
PHILIPPINE HUMAN RIGHTS INFORMATION CENTER
Philippine Human Rights Information Center or popularly known and

PhilRights was founded by the PAHRA in 1991 as the research and
information human rights NGO, and since then they gained a special
consultative status with the UN ECOSOC (UN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
COUNCIL) and the UNDPI (UN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INFORMATION).
They conduct research and produce studies on terrorism, child

soldiers, the death penalty, poverty and other pressing human rights
issues in the Philippines. They also provide human rights education
programs and trainings and document the cases of human rights
14
violations, all while providing long-term support to victims of human

rights violations and their families.
WOMEN’S LEGAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS BUREAU
Legal and Human Rights Bureau (WLB) is a feminist legal non-

government organization composed of women’s rights activists,
advocates and development workers’’. They were founded in 1990 with
a goal of engaging in feminist legal advocacy and to pursue programs
that uphold the rights of Filipino women.
Currently, they focus on women’s economic, social and cultural rights

through maximizing gains won by women in arenas such as the
Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination Against women and
other UN agencies and international organizations. They work to
transform the society by engaging institutions to support women’s
rights and dignity.
PHILIPPINE TASK FORCE FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ RIGHTS
The Philippine Task Force for Indigenous Peoples’ is a network of NGOs

working to advance rights of indigenous peoples in the country. They
envision ‘’a society that promotes and defends indigenous peoples’
rights and upholds their self-determined development.
Their programs encompass network-building and information

dissemination, research for enriched knowledge-base on indigenous
peoples’ rights, sharing of resources and information exchange and
capacity-building and policy advocacy. They also work to
ensure indigenous peoples’ rights to their ancestral lands and
resources in order to ensure their food security.
CAMPAIGN FOR HUMAN RIGHTS PHILIPPINES
Campaign for Human Rights in the Philippines (CHRP) was founded in

2006 in response to the increasing number of political killings and
human rights abuses in the country. They work to raise awareness of
the critical human rights situation in the Philippines and put pressure
on the government to investigate these killings and protect its citizens.
Their activities include holding seminars, hosting speaker tours and

organizing protest actions. They also work to raise awareness in the UK
about human rights situation in the Philippines and to put spotlight on
the British investment and trade that benefit from the human rights
violations in the Philippines.
15
PREDA FOUNDATION
PREDA Foundation is a human rights NGO ‘’giving freedom and a new

lease of life to the girls rescued from the streets, brothels, human
traffickers and sex offenders and pedophiles’’. They also rescue young
boys detained by the government from being abused and deprived from
their children’s rights.
The heart of PREDA’s mission is working, educating and advocating

human rights and especially children’s rights through public seminars
and a theater group that tours internationally. They provide therapy
and safe homes for children who suffered from abuse and promote
their education and employment.
FREE LEGAL ASSISTANCE GROUP
Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) is a human rights lawyers NGO

committed to the protection and promotion of human rights and civil
liberties in the Philippines. They advocate against political repression,
police and military abuses, and death penalty.
FLAG is a leading NGO in prosecuting military and policemen and these

actions have led to some landmark decisions before the courts. FLAG
also incorporates the educative role of lawyers in their work with ‘’ a
belief that the legal process is but part of a larger process that should
involve those who are directly affected by a problem’’.
https://www.humanrightscareers.com/issues/ngos-advocating-for-
human-rights-in-the-philippines/
THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS (1948)
By 1948, the United Nations’ new Human Rights Commission had

captured the world’s attention. Under the dynamic chairmanship of
Eleanor Roosevelt—President Franklin Roosevelt’s widow, a human
rights champion in her own right and the United States delegate to the
UN—the Commission set out to draft the document that became the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Roosevelt, credited with its
inspiration, referred to the Declaration as the international Magna Carta
for all mankind. It was adopted by the United Nations on December 10,
1948.
16
In its preamble and in Article 1, the Declaration unequivocally

proclaims the inherent rights of all human beings: “Disregard and
contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have
outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which
human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom
from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of
the common people...All human beings are born free and equal in
dignity and rights.”
The Member States of the United Nations pledged to work together to

promote the thirty Articles of human rights that, for the first time in
history, had been assembled and codified into a single document. In
consequence, many of these rights, in various forms, are today part of
the constitutional laws of democratic nations
(https://www.humanrights.com/what-are-human-rights/brief-
history/).
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS: AN INTRODUCTION
On October 24, 1945, in the aftermath of World War II, the United
Nations came into being as an intergovernmental organization, with the
purpose of saving future generations from the devastation of
international conflict.
United Nations representatives from all regions of the world formally

adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10,
1948.
The Charter of the United Nations established six principal bodies,

including the General Assembly, the Security Council, the International
Court of Justice, and in relation to human rights, an Economic and Social
Council (ECOSOC).
The UN Charter empowered ECOSOC to establish “commissions in

economic and social fields and for the promotion of human rights….”
One of these was the United Nations Human Rights Commission, which,
under the chairmanship of Eleanor Roosevelt, saw to the creation of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The Declaration was drafted by representatives of all regions of the

world and encompassed all legal traditions. Formally adopted by the
United Nations on December 10, 1948, it is the most universal human
rights document in existence, delineating the thirty fundamental rights
that form the basis for a democratic society.
17
Following this historic act, the Assembly called upon all Member
Countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and “to cause it to be
disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools
and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the
political status of countries or territories.”
Today, the Declaration is a living document that has been accepted as

a contract between a government and its people throughout the world.
According to the Guinness Book of World Records, it is the most
translated document in the world.
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
PREAMBLE
Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and

inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation
of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in

barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and
the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of
speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed
as the highest aspiration of the common people,
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse,

as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human
rights should be protected by the rule of law,
Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations

between nations,
Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter

reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and
worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women
and have determined to promote social progress and better standards
of life in larger freedom,
Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in

cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal
respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,
Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of

the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,
18
Now, therefore,
The General Assembly,
Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common

standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that
every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration
constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote
respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures,
national and international, to secure their universal and effective
recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States
themselves and among the peoples of territories under their
jurisdiction.
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
ARTICLE 1: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and
rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act
towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
ARTICLE 2: Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth
in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color,
sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social
origin, property, birth or other status.
Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political,

jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which
a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing
or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
ARTICLE 3: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of

person.
ARTICLE 4: No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and

the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
ARTICLE 5: No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman

or degrading treatment or punishment.
ARTICLE 6: Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a

person before the law.
19
ARTICLE 7: All are equal before the law and are entitled without any
discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal
protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration
and against any incitement to such discrimination.
ARTICLE 8: Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the

competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights
granted him by the constitution or by law.
ARTICLE 9: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or

exile.
ARTICLE 10: Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public

hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination
of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
ARTICLE 11.
1. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be

presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a
public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for
his defense.
2. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any

act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under
national or international law, at the time when it was committed.
Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was
applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
ARTICLE 12: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with

his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his
honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the
law against such interference or attacks.
ARTICLE 13:
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence

within the borders of each State.
2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own,
and to return to his country.
ARTICLE 14:
20
1. Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries

asylum from persecution.
2. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions

genuinely arising from nonpolitical crimes or from acts contrary
to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
ARTICLE 15:
1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied

the right to change his nationality.
ARTICLE 16:
1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race,
nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a
family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during
marriage and at its dissolution.
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent
of the intending spouses.
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society

and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
ARTICLE 17:
1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in

association with others.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
ARTICLE 18: Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience

and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief,
and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or
private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship
and observance.
ARTICLE 19: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and

expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without
interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas
through any media and regardless of frontiers.
21
ARTICLE 20:
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and

association.
2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
ARTICLE 21:
1. Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his

country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
2. Everyone has the right to equal access to public service in his

country.
3. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of

government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine
elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall
be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
ARTICLE 22: Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social

security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and
international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and
resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights
indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his
personality.
ARTICLE 23:
1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to

just and favorable conditions of work and to protection against
unemployment.
2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay

for equal work.
3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favorable

remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence
worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by
other means of social protection.
4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the
protection of his interests.
22
ARTICLE 24: Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including
reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.
ARTICLE 25:
1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the

health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food,
clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services,
and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness,
disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in
circumstances beyond his control.
2. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and

assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall
enjoy the same social protection.
ARTICLE 26:
1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at

least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary
education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional
education shall be made generally available and higher education
shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human

personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights
and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding,
tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious
groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for
the maintenance of peace.
3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that

shall be given to their children.
ARTICLE 27:
1. Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of

the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific
advancement and its benefits.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material
interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic
production of which he is the author.
23
ARTICLE 28: Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in

which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully
realized.
ARTICLE 29:
1. Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and
full development of his personality is possible.
2. In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be

subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely
for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the
rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just
requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in
a democratic society.
3. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary

to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
ARTICLE 30: Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as

implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any
activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the
rights and freedoms set forth herein.
BILL OF RIGHTS: PHILIPPINES
PRELIMINARIES
Government Power vs. Individual Freedom
1. Among the changes brought about by the Period of Enlightenment

was the shift of power from the crown to the individual. The long reign
of monarchs came to an end, and the rule of the people became the
standard. The government, while still the repository of power, was
limited to its role as the protector of the people and the guardian of
rights. Liberalism, which took its cue from individualism, advocated the
principle of egalitarianism, in which men, regardless of their status in
life, are regarded as equals in terms of rights before the law. Modern
democracies are founded on these liberal ideals, in that the heart of
democratic objectives is the protection of human dignity and respect
for human rights.
24
2. Nonetheless, the government remains to be a powerful institution,

capable of summoning the military, evoking its past image as the
uncontestable holder of sovereignty. In fact, republicanism essentially
requires delegation of powers to the government; that although the
people remain to be the sovereign, actual exercise of it is given to the
government. Protection and service of the people is the primal duty of
the government, but be that as it may, the government is still the single
biggest institution that exercises sovereign powers.
3. More so, it possesses the “inherent powers” that the Constitution

itself does not confer. Every government for it to exist exercises “police
power,” “power of eminent domain,” and “power of taxation.” A
constitution does not grant such powers to the government; a
constitution can only define and delimit them and allocate their
exercise among various government agencies. These are awesome
powers, which, if left unchecked, may seriously restrict and jeopardize
the freedom of individuals.
Thus, it is built in every democratic constitution to meticulously

include provisions guaranteeing the rights of the individuals and those
restricting the powers of the government. This is to prevent the tragedy
that the government created by the people will in turn be the
instrument to enslave and abuse them.
4. The Bill of Rights (Article III) is an indispensable part of the

Constitution. In fact, it is one of the most important parts of the
fundamental law since it aims at balancing the power of the government
and the various freedoms of the individual. As will be seen below, the
Bill of Rights provide for two things: first, restrictions directed against
the state, and, second, explicit identification and limitation of rights of
the individuals.
On the one hand, the government exercises its tremendous powers, but
its powers are limited by the Constitution. On the other hand, the
individuals are guaranteed of their rights, but subject also to
limitations in recognition of the powers of the government.
What balances the two (power and freedom) are the limitations
provided by the Constitution, which limitations are by nature
compromises or solutions to situations resulting from the overlapping
or conflict of the two realms.
For example, while the government has the inherent authority to take
and convert a property for public use, and the people on the other have
the right to hold their private property, the Constitution, contemplating
25
a case of overlap or conflict between the two, compromises both by

prescribing that the government gives just compensation to the private
owner who in turn must surrender his property.
Meaning of the Bill of Rights
1. From the foregoing, it is not difficult to understand that the Bill of

Rights refers to the declaration and enumeration of the fundamental
civil and political rights of a person with the primary purpose of
safeguarding the person from violations by the government, as well as
by individuals and group of individuals. It includes the protection of the
following rights:
(a) Civil rights or those rights belonging to individuals by virtue

of their citizenship, such as freedom to contract, right to
property, and marriage among others;
(b) Political rights which are rights pertaining to the citizenship

of the individual vis-à-vis the administration of the government,
such as right of suffrage right to hold office, and right to petition
for redress of wrong;
(c) Socio-economic rights or those which ensure the well-being

and economic security of an individual; and
(d) Rights of the accused which refer to protections given to the

person of an accused in any criminal case.
2. It must be noted that the restriction provided in the Bill of Rights is

directed against the government, so that it does not govern private
relations. As far as the Constitution is concerned, Article III can be
invoked only against the government. Nonetheless, with the inclusion
of almost all the constitutional rights in Article 32 of the Civil Code, the
same may now be invoked in civil cases involving relations between
private persons. Thus, the definition above indicates that the bill of
rights is a safeguard not just against the abuses of the government but
also of individuals or group of individuals.
RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION
LIFE, LIBERTY, AND PROPERTY
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 1, Article III of the Constitution

states “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without
26
due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection
of the laws.” The provision speaks of “due process” and “equal
protection.”
2. Scope of Protection. The protection covers all persons, whether

citizens or aliens, natural or juridical.
3. Meaning of Life, Liberty, and Property. Due process and equal

protection cover the right to life, liberty, and property. It is important
therefore to know the meaning of the three.
(a) Life. When the constitution speaks of right to life, it refers not
just to physical safety but also to the importance of quality of
life. Thus, right to life means right to be alive, right to one’s limbs
against physical harm, and, equally important, right to a good
quality of life. Life means something more than mere animal
existence.
(b) Liberty. It includes “negative” and “positive” freedom.

Negative freedom means freedom from, or absence of, physical
constraints, while positive freedom means freedom to exercise
one’s faculties.
Right to liberty therefore includes the two aspects of freedom and

it cannot be dwarfed into mere freedom from physical restraint
or servitude, but is deemed to embrace the right of man to enjoy
his God-given faculties in all lawful ways, to live and work where
he will, to earn his livelihood by any lawful calling, to pursue any
vocation, and enter into contracts.
(c) Property. It refers either to the thing itself or right over the
thing. As a thing, property is anything capable of appropriation,
and it could be personal or real. As a right, it refers to right to
own, use, possess, alienate, or destroy the thing. The constitution
uses property in the sense of right, and as such it includes, among
others, right to work, one’s employment, profession, trade, and
other vested rights.
It is important to note however that privileges like licenses are

not protected property; but they may evolve in a protected right
if much is invested in them as means of livelihood. Public office
is not also a property; but to the extent that security of tenure
cannot be compromised without due process, it is in a limited
sense analogous to property.
27
4. These rights are intimately connected. For example, if one’s property

right over employment is taken away, the same will adversely affect
one’s right to life since quality of living is jeopardized. Consequently,
in the absence of property and a good quality of life, the ability to do
what one wants is impeded.
5. Hierarchy of Rights. While the rights are intimately related, they have
a hierarchy. As to their order of importance, right to life comes first,
followed by right to liberty, and then right of property.
DUE PROCESS
1. Meaning. Due process of law is a constitutional guarantee against

hasty and unsupported deprivation of some person’s life, liberty, or
property by the government. While is it true that the state can deprive
its citizens of their life, liberty, or property, it must do so in observance
of due process of law.
This right is “the embodiment of the supporting idea of fair play” and
its essence is that it is “a law which hears before it condemns, which
proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgment only after trial.”
2. When Invoked. The right is invoked when the act of the government
is arbitrary, oppressive, whimsical, or unreasonable. It is particularly
directed against the acts of executive and legislative department.
3. Two Aspects of Due Process. Due process of law has two

aspects: procedural and substantive. Basically, the procedural aspect
involves the method or manner by which the law is enforced, while the
substantive aspect involves the law itself which must be fair,
reasonable, and just.
4. Procedural due process requires, essentially, the opportunity to be

heard in which every citizen is given the chance to defend himself or
explain his side through the protection of general rules of procedure. It
contemplates notice and opportunity to be heard before judgment is
rendered.
In judicial proceedings, the requirements of procedural due process are:
a. An impartial or objective court or tribunal with jurisdiction over

the subject matter;
28
b. Court with jurisdiction over the person of the defendant or the

property which is the subject of the proceeding;
c. Defendant given the opportunity to be heard (requirement on

notice and hearing); and
d. Judgment rendered after lawful hearing.
Since some cases are decided by administrative bodies, the Court also
provides requirements of procedural due process in administrative
proceedings. These requirements, also known as “seven cardinal
primary rights,” are:
a. The right to a hearing, where a party may present evidence in

support of his case;
b. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented;
c. The decision of the tribunal must be supported by evidence;
d. The evidence must be substantial. Substantial evidence is such

relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate
to support a conclusion;
e. The evidence must have been presented at the hearing, or at least

contained in the record and known to the parties affected;
f. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must rely on its own
independent consideration of evidence, and not rely on the
recommendation of a subordinate; and
g. The decision must state the facts and the law in such a way
that the parties are apprised of the issues involved and the
reasons for the decision.
5. Notice and Opportunity to be Heard. What matters in procedural

due process are notice and an opportunity to be heard.
a. Notice. This is an essential element of procedural due process,

most especially in judicial proceedings, because without notice
the court will not acquire jurisdiction and its judgment will not
bind the defendant.
The purpose of the notice is to inform the defendant of the nature

and character of the case filed against him, and more importantly,
29
to give him a fair opportunity to prepare his defense.

Nevertheless, the notice is useless without the opportunity to be
heard.
b. Opportunity to be Heard. It must be emphasized that what is

required is not “actual” hearing but a real “opportunity” to be
heard. If, for instance, a person fails to actually appear in a
hearing even though he was given the chance to do so, a decision
rendered by the court is not in violation of due process.
Moreover, strict observance of the rule is not necessary,

especially in administrative cases. In fact, in administrative
proceedings, notice and hearing may be dispensed with for public
need or for practical reasons. It is also sufficient that subsequent
hearing is held if the same was not previously satisfied.
6. Substantive due process requires that the law itself is valid, fair,
reasonable, and just. For the law to be fair and reasonable it must have
a valid objective which is pursued in a lawful manner.
The objective of the government is valid when it pertains to the interest

of the general public, as distinguished from those of a particular class.
The manner of pursuing the objective is lawful if the means employed
are reasonably necessary and not unduly oppressive.
EQUAL PROTECTION
1. Meaning. The guarantee of equal protection means that “no person

or class of persons shall be deprived of the same protection of the laws
which is enjoyed by other persons or other classes in the same place
and in like circumstances.” It means that “all persons or things similarly
situated should be treated alike, both as to rights conferred and
responsibilities imposed.”
The guarantee does not provide absolute equality of rights or

indiscriminate operation on persons. Persons or things that are
differently situated may thus be treated differently. Equality only
applies among equals. What is prohibited by the guarantee is
discriminatory legislation which treats differently or favors others
when both are similarly situated.
2. Purpose. The purpose of the guarantee is to prohibit hostile

discrimination or undue favor to anyone, or giving special privilege
when it is not reasonable or justified.
30
3. Reasonable Classification. Well established is the rule that reasonable

classification does not violate the guarantee, provided that the
classification has the following requisites:
a. It must be based upon substantial distinctions;

b. It must be germane to the purpose of the law;
c. It must not be limited to existing conditions only; and
d. It must apply equally to all members of the class.
4. Example. In one case, Section 66 of the Omnibus Election Code was

challenged for being unconstitutional, as it is violative of the equal
protection clause. The provision distinguishes between an elective
official and an appointive official in the filing of their certificate of
candidacy. While elective officials are not deemed resigned upon the
filing of their certificates, appointive officials are.
The Supreme Court held that the law is constitutional and not violative
of equal protection since the classification is valid. The Court argues
that elective office is different from appointive office, in that the
mandate of the former is from the people, while that of the latter is
from the appointing authority. The term of the elective officials are
likewise longer than that of the appointive officials. Thus, the
classification is adjudged reasonable and valid.
5. Discrimination against Aliens. Although the protection extends to

both citizens and aliens, discrimination against aliens may be held valid
under certain circumstances. For example, citizens by virtue of their
membership to the political community possess complete civil and
political rights, while aliens do not have complete political rights. The
former can vote during elections, run for public office, own real
property, while aliens cannot.
ARRESTS, SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
RIGHT AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 2, Article III states that people have

the inviolable right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature
and for any purpose, and a search warrant or warrant of arrest can only
be issued upon showing of a probable cause determined personally by
the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly
31
describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be

seized.
2. Scope. The protection extends to all persons, aliens or citizens,

natural or juridical. It is a personal right which may be invoked or
waived by the person directly affected against unreasonable arrests or
searches by the government and its agencies. It cannot, however, be
invoked against private individuals.
WARRANT OF ARREST AND SEARCH WARRANT
1. Generally, the right against unreasonable searches and seizures

requires that before a person is arrested or a personal property seized,
it must be supported by a valid warrant of arrest or a search warrant.
The exceptions are in cases of valid warrantless arrests and searches.
2. A warrant of arrest is a written order of the court, issued in the name

of the Philippines, authorizing a peace officer to arrest a person, and
put him under the custody of the court.
3. A search warrant is a written order of the court, authorizing or

directing a peace officer to search a specific location, house, or other
premises for a personal property allegedly used in a crime or may be
utilized as a tool to prove a crime.
REQUISITES OF A VALID WARRANT
1. Since as a general rule, an arrest or search is reasonable when it is

covered by a valid warrant, it is thus important to know the requisites
a valid warrant. The Court enumerates the requisites as follows:
a. It must be based upon a probable cause. Probable cause refers to

such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably
discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense has been
committed and that the objects sought in connect with the
offense are in the place sought to be searched;
b. The probable cause must be determined personally by the judge.

That the judge “personally” determines the probable cause means
that “he personally evaluates the report and the supporting
documents submitted by the public prosecutor regarding the
existence of the probable cause,” or, if the same is insufficient,
“require additional evidence to aid him in arriving at a conclusion
as to the existence of probable cause.”
32
Thus, personal determination does not mean that he must

personally examine the complainant and his witnesses. He may
rely on reports and evidence submitted to him, on the basis of
which he determines the existence of probable cause and orders
the issuance of warrant.
What is prohibited is to rely solely on the recommendation of the

prosecutors without doing any determination on his own.
c. The determination must be made after examination under oath or

affirmation of the complainant and the witness he may produce;
and
d. It must particularly describe the place to be searched and the

persons or things to be seized. The property subject to search
includes those used in the commission of the offense, stolen or
embezzled and other proceeds or fruits of the offense, or used or
intended to be used in the commission of the offense.
2. General warrants are those that do not particularly describe the

place to be searched or the persons or things to be seized. They are
unconstitutional because the sanctity of the domicile and privacy of
communication and correspondence of individuals are placed at the
mercy, caprice, and passion of peace officers.
WARRANTLESS ARREST
1. When Warrantless Arrest Valid. Arrest without a warrant is strictly

construed as an exception to the general rule requiring a warrant. Under
the Rules of Court, a peace officer or a private person may arrest a
person even without a warrant under the following instances:
a. In flagrante delicto arrest. When, in his presence, the person to

be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is
attempting to commit an offense;
b. Hot pursuit. When an offense, has in fact just been committed,

and he has personal knowledge of facts indicating that the person
to be arrested has committed it; and
c. Arrest of escaped prisoners. When the person to be arrested is a

prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment of place
where he is serving final judgment or temporarily confined while
his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from
one confinement to another.
33
2. Citizen Arrest. It must be noted that a lawful warrantless arrest may

be performed not just by a peace officer but also by a civilian. This is
permitted under the rules under limited circumstances, and it is
called citizen arrest.
3. In the case of flagrante delicto arrest, an offense is committed “in the

presence” of the arresting officer or civilian. For example, if a person
pushes illegal drugs in the presence of a police officer, the latter can
arrest the pusher even without a warrant of arrest because an offense
is actually being committed in his presence.
The same principle underlies the “buy-bust” or “entrapment”

operations conducted by police officers in catching law offenders. In
one case, the Court held that rebellion is a continuing offense, and so
the rebel may be arrested anytime even without a warrant because he
is deemed to commit the offense in the presence of the arresting officer
or person.
4. Illegal Detention is the offense committed by the arresting officer or

civilian if the warrantless arrest is performed outside the above rules.
WARRANTLESS SEARCHES
A search is valid even without a warrant, under the following instances:
a. Search as an incident to a lawful arrest. When a valid arrest

precedes the search or contemporaneous with it, and the search
is limited to the immediate vicinity of the place of arrest, for
purposes of securing dangerous objects and effects of the crime;
b. Consented search. When the right has been voluntarily waived by

person who has a right, aware of such right, and has an actual
intention to relinquish such right;
c. Plainview search. When prohibited articles are within the sight of

an officer who has the right to be in a position to that view;
d. Visual search at checkpoints. When the search at stationary

checkpoints is pre-announced, and limited to a visual search
only;
e. Terry search. When a police officer, in interest of effective crime

prevention, performs a “stop-and-frisk” or patting of outer
34
clothing for dangerous weapons, after observing a suspicious

conduct on the part of a citizen;
f. Search of moving vehicles, vessels, and aircrafts for violation of

laws;
g. Inspection of buildings and other premises for the enforcement of

fire, sanitary, and building regulations; and
h. Search in airports and other populous places.
Administrative Searches and Arrests
1. In cases of deportation, where the State expels an undesirable alien

from its territory, court intervention and proceedings are not required.
Nonetheless, the alien’s constitutional rights are still preserved
because they are given fair trial and administrative due process.
2. Important to note is that no probable cause is required in deportation

proceedings. It is the Commissioner of Immigration or any officer
designated by him, not the judge, who issues the administrative
warrant, after determination by the Board of Commissioners of the
existence of a ground for deportation.
RIGHT TO PRIVACY
PROVISIONS AND LAWS ON RIGHT TO PRIVACY
1. Constitutional Provisions. The right to privacy is scattered throughout

the Bill of Rights. The right against unreasonable searches and seizures,
in Section 2, is an expression of this right, inasmuch as it is based on
the sacred right to be secure in the privacy of one’s person, house,
paper, and effects. Due process of law, in Section 1, also provides the
same privacy security by protecting an individual’s life, liberty, and
property against undue interference by the government. Section 6
speaks of the right to establish and change one’s home which likewise
deals with the privacy and comfort of one’s home. The right to form
unions or associations under Section 8, and the right against self-
incrimination under Section 17 are also privacy rights which need
protection against undue intrusion by the government.
2. Nonetheless, the word “privacy” is expressly provided in Section 3(1),

Article III, which states that “the privacy of communication and
correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the
35
court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise, as prescribed

by law.” Privacy of communication and correspondence is also an
expression of the right to privacy.
3. Statutory Reinforcements. To reinforce these constitutional

provisions, the Congress has passed laws that recognize and protect
the zones of privacy of an individual. These laws include:
(a) The Civil Code of the Philippines

(b) The Revised Penal Code
(c) Anti-Wire Tapping Act
(d) The Secrecy of Bank Deposits; and
(e) Intellectual Property Code.
PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
1. Subject of the Right. Invasion of communication and correspondence

is one kind of search. However the subject of search is not a tangible
object but an intangible one, such as telephone calls, text messages,
letters, and the like. These forms of communication and
correspondence may be intruded into by means of wiretapping or other
means of electronic eavesdropping.
What the constitution prohibits is government intrusion, by means of

wiretapping or electronic eavesdropping, into the privacy of
communication without a lawful court order or when public safety and
order does not demand.
2. Rule. As a rule, the government cannot intrude into the privacy of

communication and correspondence. The exceptions are:
(a) when the court allows the intrusion, and

(b) when public safety and order so demands.
ANTI-WIRE TAPPING ACT
1. R.A. 4200 or the Anti-Wire Tapping Act, as a reinforcement of privacy

of communication, is a law that prohibits a person not authorized by
all the parties to any private communication, to wiretap or use any
device to secretly overhear, intercept, record, or communicate the
content of the said communication to any person.
2. Wiretapping or the use of record may be permitted in civil or criminal

proceedings involving specified offenses principally affecting national
security, and only with previous authorization by the court which must
36
comply with the requirements of a warrant. The authority is effective

only for sixty days.
EXCLUSIONARY RULE
1. The exclusionary rule states that any evidence unlawfully obtained is

inadmissible as evidence before the courts. This is based on Section
3(2), Article III which provides that any evidence obtained in violation
of right to privacy of communication or right to due process of law shall
be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding. The same rule is
applied to any evidence taken in violate of R.A. 4200.
2. The rule is also called Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine. The name
of the doctrine metaphorically describes what happens to an “evidence”
(fruit) taken through “unlawful means” (poisonous tree). The evidence-
fruit is discarded because it may infect or destroy the integrity of the
case and forfeit the purpose of the law.
3. For example, if police officers search a house without a search

warrant and the same does not fall under any of the instances of a valid
warrantless search, the evidence obtained even if material in the case
cannot be admitted in court. Or if police officers wiretap a conversation
without court authorization, the recorded conversation shall be
excluded as an evidence in court. Thus, the evidences are said to be
fruits of a poisonous tree.
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
MEANING AND SCOPE
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 4, Article III provides that “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.” The right underscores
tolerance to different views and thoughts.
2. Aspects of the Right. Freedom of expression has four aspects, to wit:

(a) freedom of speech; (b) freedom of expression; (c) freedom of the
press; and (d) freedom of assembly. Nonetheless, the scope of the
protection extends to right to form associations or societies not
contrary to law, right to access to information on matters of public
concern, and freedom of religion. These are all crucial to the
37
advancement of beliefs and ideas and the establishment of an

“uninhibited, robust and wide-open debate in the free market of ideas.”
3. Importance of the Right. Freedom of expression is accorded the

highest protection in the Bill of Rights since it is indispensable to the
preservation of liberty and democracy. Thus, religious, political,
academic, artistic, and commercial speeches are protected by the
constitutional guarantee.
4. Limitation. The right is not absolute. It must be exercised within the

bounds of law, morals, public policy and public order, and with due
regard for others’ rights. Thus, obscene, libelous, and slanderous
speeches are not protected by the guarantee. So are seditious and
fighting words that advocate imminent lawless conduct.
Freedom from Prior Restraint and Subsequent Punishment
1. Freedom of speech and of the press has two aspects: (a) freedom
from prior restraint, and (b) freedom from subsequent punishment.
2. On the one hand, freedom from prior restraint means freedom from
censorship or governmental screening of what is politically, morally,
socially, and artistically correct.
In here, persons and the media are freed from total suppression or
restriction by the government of what could be disseminated and
prevents the government from being a subjective arbiter of what is
acceptable and not. Although the system of prior restraint is presumed
unconstitutional, it is allowed under the following instances:
a. Undue utterances in times of war;
b. Actual obstruction or unauthorized dissemination of military

information;
c. Obscene publication; and
d. Inciting to rebellion.
3. On the other hand, freedom from subsequent punishment refers to

the assurance that citizens can speak and air out their opinions without
fear of vengeance by the government. Subsequent chastisement has the
effect of unduly curtailing expression, and thus freedom therefrom is
essential to the freedom of speech and the press. The State, however,
38
can validly impose subsequent punishment under the following

instances:
(a) Libel which is the most common form of subsequent punishment,

refers to a public and malicious imputation of a crime, vice or defect,
real or imaginary or any act or omission, status tending to cause
dishonor, discredit or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or
blacken the memory of one who is dead;
(b) Obscenity which includes works (taken as a whole) appealing to

prurient interest or depicting sexual conduct as defined by law or
lacking of serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.
Freedom of Speech, and Expression, and the Press - the rights to

freely utter and publish whatever one pleases without previous
restraint, and to be protected against any responsibility for so doing as
long as it does violate the law, injure someone's character, reputation,
or business.
Scope of Freedom of Expression - the rights of assembly and petition,

the right to form associations or societies not contrary to the law, and
the right to religious freedom.
Scope of Terms, Speech, Expression, And Press
1. Speech and expression cover any form of oral utterances such as

protests and expression of opinion about subjects of public concern.
2. The Press covers any sort of publications as instruments for mass

communication.
Freedom of Expression Not Absolute
1. Subject to regulation by the state.
2. Subject one to liability when abused.
FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY
1. Meaning. Freedom of assembly refers to the right to hold a rally to

voice out grievances against the government.
39
2. Freedom not Subject to Prior Restraint. As a rule, freedom of

assembly is not subject to prior restraint or prior issuance of permit
by government authorities.
Nevertheless, it must be exercised in such a way that will not to

prejudice public welfare. Freedom of assembly is reinforced by Batas
Pambansa Blg. 880, otherwise known as the Public Assembly Acts of
1985, which basically provides the requirements and procedure for
holding rallies.
It also implements the observance of “maximum tolerance” towards

participants of rallies consistent with the clear and present danger
test.
3. Permit Requirement. Under the said law, permit is required to hold a

rally. It must be emphasized, however, that the permit is not a
requirement for the validity of the assembly or rally, because the
right is not subject to prior restraint. Rather, the permit is a
requirement for the use of the public place.
4. When Permit not Required. Permit is not required if the rally is held
in a private place, in a campus of a state college or university, or in
a freedom park, in which case only coordination with the police is
required. If the application for permit is not acted upon by the mayor
within two working days, then the same is deemed granted.
5. Political rally during election is regulated by the Omnibus Election

Code, not by BP 880.
Meaning of Right of Assembly and Right of Petition
1. The right of assembly means the right on the part of the citizens to
meet peaceably for consultation concerning public affairs.
2. The right of petition means the right of any person or group of

persons, to apply without fear of penalty to the appropriate branch
or office of government for regress of grievances
RIGHT TO FORM ASSOCIATIONS
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 8, Article III provides that “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.”
40
2. Who may Exercise the Right. The right of association may be exercised
by the employed or the unemployed and by those employed in the
government or in the private sector. It likewise embraces the right to
form unions both in the government and private sector. The right of
civil servants to unionize is expressly provided in Section 2(5), Article
IX-B: “The right to self-organization shall not be denied to government
employees.” The right of labor in general to unionize is likewise
provided in Section 3, Article XIII: “[The State] shall guarantee the rights
of all workers to self-organization, collective bargaining and
negotiations, and peaceful concerted activities, including the right to
strike in accordance with law.”
3. Right to Strike not Included. The right to form associations or to self-

organization does not include the right to strike. Thus, public school
teachers do not enjoy the right to strike even if they are given the
constitutional right of association.
The terms and conditions of employment in the Government, including

in any political subdivision or instrumentality thereof and government
owned and controlled corporations with original charters, are governed
by law and the employees therein shall not strike for purposes of
securing changes.
RIGHT TO INFORMATION
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 7, Article III provides that “the right

of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be
recognized. 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, subject to such limitations as may be provided
by law.”
2. Scope and Limitation. The right guarantees access to official records

for any lawful purpose. However, access may be denied by the
government if the information sought involves:
(a) National security matters, military and diplomatic secrets;

(b) Trade or industrial secrets;
(c) Criminal matters; and
(d) Other confidential information (such as inter-government exchanges
prior to consultation of treaties and executive agreement, and privilege
speech).
41
FREEDOM OF RELIGION
TWO ASPECTS OF FREEDOM OF RELIGION
1. Freedom of religion has two aspects: (a) the freedom to believe, and
(b) the freedom to act on one’s belief. The first aspect is in the realm of
the mind, and as such it is absolute, since the State cannot control the
mind of the citizen. Thus, every person has the absolute right to believe
(or not to believe) in anything whatsoever without any possible external
restriction by the government.
The aspect refers to the externalization of belief as it is now brought

out from the bosom of internal belief. Since it may affect peace, morals,
public policy, and order, the government may interfere or regulate such
aspect of the right.
2. The second aspect is expressed in Section 5, Article III, thus “… The

free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship,
without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No
religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political
rights.”
NON-ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 5, Article III provides that “no law

shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting
the free exercise thereof.”
2. Explanation. The non-establishment clause holds that the State

cannot set up a church or pass laws aiding one religion, all religion, or
preferring one over another, or force a person to believe or disbelieve
in any religion.
In order words, it prohibits the State from establishing an official

religion. It discourages excessive government involvement with
religion and manifest support to any one religious denomination.
Manifestly, the clause is rooted in the principle of separation of church
and state.
3. Particular Prohibitions. In particular, the non-establishment clause

prohibits, among others, prayers of a particular denomination to start
a class in public schools, financial subsidy of a parochial
school, display of the ten commandments in front of a courthouse, law
prohibiting the teaching of evolution, mandatory reading of the
bible, and using the word “God” in the pledge of allegiance.
42
4. Exceptions to the Prohibition. The clause, however, permits the

following:
a. Tax exemption on property “actually, directly and exclusively

used” for religious purposes;
b. Religious instruction in sectarian schools and expansion of

educational facilities in parochial schools for secular activities;
c. Religious instruction in public schools, elementary and high

school, at the option of parents or guardians expressed in writing,
within regular class hours by designated instructors, and without
additional costs to the government;
d. Financial support given to priest, preacher, minister, or dignitary

assigned to the armed forces, penal institution or government
orphanage or leprosarium;
e. Government sponsorship of town fiestas which traditions are

used to be purely religious but have now acquired secular
character; and
f. Postage stamps depicting Philippines as the venue of a significant

religious event, in that the benefit to religious sect is incidental
to the promotion of the Philippines as a tourist destination.
Meaning of Religious Freedom - The right of a man to worship God,

and to entertain such religious views as appeal to his individual
conscience, without dictation or interference by any person or power,
civil or ecclesiastical.
Meaning of Religion - all forms of belief in the existence of superior

beings exercising power over human beings and imposing rules of
conduct with future state of rewards or punishments.
Aspects of Religious Freedom
1. The separation of Church and State.
2. The freedom of religious profession and worship
RELIGIOUS SOLICITATIONS
43
Under Presidential Decree No. 1564, also known as the Solicitation Law,
permit is required before solicitations for “charitable and public
welfare purposes” may be carried out. The purpose of the law is to
protect the public from fraudulent solicitations. Nonetheless, permit is
no longer required if the solicitation is for “religious purposes.” Fraud
is much less in religion.
If the law is extended to religion, then it becomes unconstitutional; it

constitutes restriction on freedom of religion as resources necessary
for maintenance are deprived of churches.
CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR TEST
A conscientious objector is someone who sincerely claims the right to

refuse to perform military service and salute a flag on the grounds of
freedom of thought, conscience, and/or religion. He may be granted
exemption from military service or from saluting the flag if he
establishes that his objection is “sincere,” based on “religious training
and belief,” and not arbitrary.
LIBERTY OF ABODE AND RIGHT TO TRAVEL
FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 6, Article III provides that “the

liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed
by law shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court.
Neither shall the right to travel be impaired except in the interest of
national security, public safety, or public health, as may be provided
by law.”
2. Aspects of the Freedom. Freedom of movement has two aspects: (a)

Freedom to choose and change one’s domicile, and (b) Freedom to travel
within and outside the country. A person’s place of abode or domicile
is his permanent residence.
LIMITATIONS
1. Freedom of movement is not an absolute right. It has limitations.

Liberty of abode may be impaired or restricted when there is a “lawful
court order.”
44
2. The right to travel may also be restricted in interest of national

security, public safety, or public health, or when a person is on bail, or
under a watch-list and hold departure order.
RIGHT TO RETURN TO ONE’S COUNTRY
Although the right to return to one’s country is not among the rights
expressly mentioned in the Bill of Rights, it is nonetheless recognized
and protected in the Philippines.
It is a generally accepted principle of international law, and as such it

is part of the law of the land, pursuant to the doctrine of incorporation.
It is different from the right to travel and is guaranteed under the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
NON-IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACTS
CONTRACT CLAUSE
1. Section 10, Article III provides that “no law impairing the obligation
of contracts shall be passed.” This is the so-called contract clause,
which seeks to restrain substantial legislative impairment of, or
intrusion into, the obligations of contracts. What the clause guarantees
is the integrity of contracts against undue interference by the
government.
2. For example, if a lawyer enters into a contract with a client by which

the latter will pay 5% of the value of the monetary claim, a subsequent
law which deprives the lawyer of the said value is arbitrary and
unreasonable since it is destructive of the inviolability of contracts, and
therefore invalid as lacking of due process.
Contracts Affected
1. Only valid contracts, either executed or executory, are covered by the

guarantee.
2. The agreement of the parties, as long as it is valid, is the law between

them. Their will should prevail, and this must be respected by the
legislature and not tampered with by subsequent laws.
Well-established is the policy that the subject of contractual

agreements is “imbued with paramount public interest.”
45
Kind of Impairment Covered
1. For the clause to be operative, the impairment caused by law must

be substantial. Substantial impairment happens when the law changes
the terms of a legal contract between parties, either in the time or mode
of performance, or imposes new conditions, or dispenses with those
expressed, or authorizes for its satisfaction something different from
that provided in its terms. In other words, the act of impairment is
anything that diminishes the value of the contract.
2. The cause of the impairment must be legislative in nature. The

obligation of contract must be impaired by a statute, ordinance, or any
legislative act for it to come within the meaning of the constitutional
provision. An administrative order or court decision is not included in
the scope of the constitutional guarantee.
3. In one case, the Court held that a Rehabilitation Plan approved by the
Securities and Exchange Commission which suspends contractual
claims against an insolvent or bankrupt corporation does not violate
the contract clause. The impairment must be legislative in character.
SEC’s approval of the plan is not a legislative act but an administrative
act. Thus, there is not impairment of the freedom to contract.
LIMITATIONS
1. As between freedom of contract and police power, police power

prevails. Thus, laws enacted in exercise of police power will prevail over
contracts. After all, private rights and interest in contracts must yield
to the common good. Every contract affecting public welfare is
presumed to include the provisions of existing laws and a reservation
of police power.
2. The supremacy of police power is felt most clearly in labor contracts

and agricultural tenancy contracts. For instance, a law (Blue Sunday
Law) which provides for work or play on a Sunday is upheld as valid
even if it nullifies existing labor contracts, since it is a legitimate
exercise of police power.
In another case, a law (R.A. No. 34) changed the crop-sharing system
between the landlord and tenants from 50-50 to 55-45 in favor of the
tenants. The Court held that the law is valid. Consistent with the policy
of social justice, the law favored the tenants as well as the general
welfare of the people in exchange of contractual rights.
46
3. The power of taxation and power of eminent domain, inasmuch as

they are also sovereign powers of the state, can validly impair
obligations of contracts.
4. Licenses are different from contracts. Licenses are franchises or

privileges given by the State to qualified entities that may be withdrawn
or relinquished when national interests so require. However, like
contracts, they yield to police power.
LEGAL ASSISTANCE AND FREE ACCESS TO COURTS
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 11, Article III provides that “free

access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal
assistance shall not be denied to any person by reason of poverty.”
2. Protection for the Poor. Free access is a right covered by the due
process clause, because a person, regardless of his status in life, must
be given an opportunity to defend himself in the proper court or
tribunal. Nonetheless, the right is placed in a separate provision to
emphasize the desire for constitutional protection of the poor.
3. Litigation in Forma Pauperis. In consonance with this constitutional

provision, the Rules of Court provide for litigation in forma pauperis in
which paupers and indigents, who have only their labor to support
themselves, are given free legal services and access to courts.
RIGHTS OF PERSONS UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION
MIRANDA RIGHTS
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 12, Article III enumerates the rights

of a person under custodial investigation for the commission of an
offense, to wit:
a. Right to remain silent, right to have a competent and independent

counsel preferably of his own choice, right to free legal services if
he cannot afford one, and the right to informed of these rights.
These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the
presence of counsel;
b. Right against the use of torture, force, violence, threat,

intimidation, or any other means which vitiate his free
47
will. Prohibition against secret detention places, solitary,

incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention;
c. Exclusion of any confession or admission obtained in violation of

this provision or the right against self-incrimination as evidence
against him; and
d. Sanctions against violators and compensation for rehabilitation of

victims.
2. Why called Miranda Rights. The present provision is usually referred

to as the “Miranda Rights” because it is an adoption of the rights
provided in the American case “Miranda v. Arizona.”
PURPOSE OF THE RIGHT
The provision emphasizes on the duty of law enforcement officers to

treat properly and humanely those under investigation. It recognizes
the fact that the environment in custodial investigations is
psychologically if not physically coercive in nature, so that law
enforcers should be reminded of the sanctity of individual rights and
the limitations on their means of solving crimes.
In fact, as far as the present provision is concerned, the “presumption

of regularity” of official acts and the behavior of police or prosecution
is not observed if the person under investigation was not informed.
CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION
1. This enumeration of rights above may be invoked during custodial

investigations. Custodial investigation refers to any questioning
initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into
custody.
The rights are available when the person interrogated is already treaded
as a particular suspect and the investigation is no longer a general
inquiry into an unsolved crime.
However, during this stage, no complaint or criminal case has been filed
yet. As such, the person suspected to have committed a crime is not yet
an accused, since no case was instituted against him.
2. During custodial investigations, suspects are identified by way

of show-ups, mug shots, and line ups. Show-ups are done by bringing
the lone suspect face-to-face with the witness for identification. Mug
48
shots are performed by showing photographs to witnesses to identify

the suspect. And in line ups, the witness identifies the suspect from a
group of persons.
EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION
1. Meaning. Extrajudicial confession refers to a confession or admission

of guilt made outside (extra) the court (judicial). It is a critical area of
study in Constitutional Law. With respect to the present provision, it
refers to a confession given during a custodial investigation, which is
not judicial in nature.
Under the Miranda Rights, a person may waive his right to remain silent
and admit the charge against him because anything that he says may
be used against him. However, the waiver or confession must be valid
to be admissible as evidence against him.
2. Requisites for Validity. For an extrajudicial confession to

be valid and admissible as evidence in court, it must be: (a) voluntary;
(b) made in the assistance of a competent and independent counsel; (c)
express; and (d) in writing.
3. Involuntary Confession. There are two kinds of involuntary

confession: (a) confession through coercion; and (b) confession without
being informed of the Miranda rights. Both forms are invalid and cannot
be admitted as evidence against the confidant, the confession
considered as a fruit of a poisonous tree. Extrajudicial confessions must
be given voluntarily.
However, there is a distinction between the two. On the one hand, an

extrajudicial confession alleged to be taken through torture or coercion
is presumed voluntarily given and valid since the law enforcers are
presumed to perform their duty regularly, so that the complainant-
suspect should prove that there is torture to invalidate his confession.
On the other hand, a confession given without being informed of the

Miranda rights is presumed involuntarily given, so that the law enforces
must prove its regularity.
4. Assistance of Counsel. An extrajudicial confession made in the

absence of a counsel, or even in his presence but without adequate
assistance, is also invalid and inadmissible. The rule requires that the
assisting counsel must be independent and competent.
49
For this matter, a fiscal or a public prosecutor, who represents the

interest of the State, cannot assist the suspect or person under
investigation. His interest is adverse to the latter. Thus, even if
competent, he cannot be an independent counsel for the suspect.
5. A counsel from the Public Attorney’s Office is qualified to assist a

person in executing an extrajudicial confession, his interest not adverse
to the latter.
6. An extrajudicial confession to a mayor, even if uncounselled, may be

admissible. While a mayor has power of supervision over the police, an
admission to him, not in the capacity of a law enforcer, is deemed freely
given. The uncounselled admission to him does not violate the right to
legal assistance and therefore the confession is admissible as evidence
against the confidant.
In addition, extrajudicial confession to a media man who is acting as a

news reporter and not under the supervision of the police, is
admissible.
7. Because of the inherent danger of using information from broadcast

media, extreme caution must be taken in further admitting similar
evidence or confession. There is presumption of voluntariness in
confessions which media describes as freely given. They must be
strictly scrutinized.
RIGHT TO BAIL
MEANING OF RIGHT
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 13, Article III provides that “all

persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion
perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be
bailable by sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance as may
be provided by law.
The right to bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus is suspended. Excessive bail shall not be
required.”
2. Meaning of Bail. Bail refers to the security given for the temporary
release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by him or a
bondsman, conditioned upon his appearance before any court as may
be required.
50
For instance, a person arrested and detained for the offense of

homicide may post a bond for his temporary release on the condition
that he will appear in the court during the trial or when the court so
requires.
3. Purpose of Bail. Probational release through bail is corollary to the

right to be presumed innocent and a means of immediately obtaining
liberty. During the duration of release, the accused is given the chance
to prepare his defense, and thus level the playing field for the parties.
Worth emphasizing is the reason why those charge with offenses

punishable by reclusion perpetua and against whom evidence of guilt is
strong, are not allowed to bail. Under such circumstances, there is
improbability of appearance, and bail merely becomes an instrument
of evading the law.
STANDARDS FOR FIXING AMOUNT OF BAIL
1. The law does not prescribe for a fix amount of bail. What it requires
is that the amount should be reasonable and not excessive otherwise
the right is rendered useless. Under the Rules of Court, the amount is
reasonable if the judge bases it primarily, but not exclusively, on the
following guidelines:
a. Financial ability of the accused;

b. Nature and circumstances of offense;
c. Penalty for offense charged;
d. Character and reputation of accused;
e. Age and health of the accused;
f. Weight of evidence against him;
g. Probability of his appearance at trial;
h. Forfeiture of other bonds by him;
i. The fact that he is a fugitive from justice when arrested; and
j. Pendency of other cases where he is also under bail.
WHEN RIGHT MAY BE INVOKED
1. General Rule. The right to bail may be invoked from the moment of
detention or arrest. Even if no formal charges have been filed yet, for
as long as there is already an arrest, the right may already be availed
of.
51
2. Bail as a Matter of Right. Bail may be invoked as a matter of right if

the charge is not punishable by reclusion perpetua and there is no final
judgment of conviction yet. Technically, the instances when bail is a
matter of right are: (a) Before or after conviction by the MTC; and (b)
Before conviction of the RTC of an offense not punishable by death,
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.
3. Bail as a Matter of Discretion. Bail may be invoked as a matter of

discretion on the part of the court in the following instances:
a. After conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by

death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment;
b. Pending appeal subject to the consent of the bondsman; and
c. After conviction, pending appeal when the court imposed a

penalty of imprisonment for more than six years but not more
than twenty years, and it is not shown that the accused
repeated a crime, an escapee, committed an offense while
under the custody of the probational release, or had the
tendency of flight or to commit another offense.
3. Right not Suspended. The present constitutional provision clearly

provides that the right to bail is not suspended when the President
suspends the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. While bail and
habeas corpus are remedies intended for the immediate release of a
detainee, there are fundamental differences between them so that the
suspension of one does not mean the suspension of the other.
Firstly, in bail, there is an implicit recognition of the validity of

detention or arrest, while in habeas corpus, there is an assumption that
the detention or arrest is illegal. And secondly, the prayer in bail is for
the temporary release of the detainee, whereas in habeas corpus, the
prayer is for permanent release.
When the privilege of habeas corpus is suspended, the remedy of

immediate release cannot be availed of (although filing is still allowed).
Under the current rules, if the detainee files a bail for his temporary
release, then it moots the purpose of habeas corpus, because it destroys
the assumption of illegality of the arrest or detention.
4. The law still allows those who jumped bail to exercise the right
before conviction for as long as bail is still a matter of right. What the
court must do in such cases is to increase the amount of bail.
52
5. Bail is now available in extradition cases, consistent with the

developments in international law which now treats an individual as a
subject or party.
WHEN RIGHT MAY NOT BE INVOKED
1. It could be inferred from the present provision that the right to bail
may not be invoked if the offense for which the person is detained is
punishable by reclusion perpetua and the evidence of guilt is strong.
2. Important also to note is that the military may not invoke the right
to bail. Among other reasons, allowing military members to bail would
pose a great danger to national security.
They are allowed to use firearms and they are paid using government
money. Their sheer number and unique structure, as well as the military
mentality that they carry, may very well result to the overthrow of the
government if continuous allowance of the right to bail is given them
most especially when there are coup attempts. Allowing them to bail
could mean resumption of widespread commission of heinous
activities.
MANDATORY HEARING
When the offense charged is punishable by reclusion perpetua, before

rendering a judgment, due process demands that the court must
conduct a mandatory hearing to determine if evidence of guilt is strong.
This is one of the instances when bail is a matter of discretion. But if

the prosecutor simply manifested that he leaves it to the sound
discretion of the judge to grant bail and the judge grants the same
without hearing, then the judge commits an error because he cannot
repose solely on the prosecutor his decision. Even if there is no
objection, there must be a hearing.
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
CRIMINAL CASES
1. Section 14, Article III deals with the rights of the accused. It
contemplates a scenario where a case has already been filed against a
person, in contrast to custodial investigations where a case may not
have been filed yet. The case filed is a criminal case, in which the
parties are the “People of the Philippines” and the “accused.” The People
53
of the Philippines is the complainant, while the accused is the person

formally charged of a crime or offense punishable by law.
2. A case is said to be criminal when it involves the prosecution of a

crime by the State and the imposition of liability on erring individuals.
It highlights the relation of the individual and the state, with the state
having the right to inflict punishment to an offender once his guilt is
proven beyond reasonable doubt.
3. The real offended party or victim in a criminal case is the State or

the People of the Philippines, and not the private complainant. This is
because what has generally been violated is the law of the Philippines
which provides protection to the people and guarantees peace and
order in the land. Violation of the law poses danger not just to a private
person, but to the people as a whole, and is a threat to the sovereignty
of the State.
4. The accused, who is the person charged in a criminal case, is pitted

against the State. With all its machineries, manpower, and almost
unlimited sources of money, the State is placed in an advantaged
position. To level therefore the playing field, the Constitution provides
for numerous rights of the accused and of persons under investigation.
Justice demands that they should be given a fighting chance against the
most power institution, which is the State.
CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 14(1), Article III provides that “no

person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due
process of law.”
2. The provision refers to due process in criminal cases. As to its

procedural aspect, criminal due process requires that: (a) The accused
is brought into a court of competent jurisdiction; (b) He is notified of
the case; (c) He is given the opportunity to be heard; and (d) There is a
valid judgment deliberated and rendered by the court. As to its
substantive aspect, the criminal cases must be based on a penal law.
3. The right to appeal is not a constitutional right. It is a statutory right

granted by the legislature. But when it is expressly granted by law, then
it comes within the scope of due process.
4. Criminal due process requires impartiality or objectivity on the part

of the court. Although a separate right to impartial trial is granted in
Section 14, paragraph 2 of the Bill of Rights, it refers only to the right
54
of the accused during trial. Impartiality in criminal due process

(Section 14, paragraph 1) is broader since it extends to preliminary
investigations conducted before the filing criminal cases in court. One
of the instances wherein impartiality is compromised is the so-
called trial by publicity. When preliminary investigations are held for
purposes of determining whether an information or a case should be
filed against the respondent, the investigating prosecutor should not
be swayed by the circumstances of pervasive and prejudicial publicity.
It was held that prejudicial publicity may be invoked as denial of due

process if it prevents the “observance of those decencies” or
requirements of procedural due process.
5. A military court has its own unique set of procedures consistent with
the nature and purpose of the military. Because of its distinct features,
a military court cannot try and exercise jurisdiction, even during
martial law, over civilians for offenses allegedly committed by them as
long as civilian courts are still open and functioning.
Due process therefore demands that civilians can only be tried for an
offense in civilian courts and not in military courts, unless no civilian
court is available.
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED DURING TRIAL
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 14(2), Article III enumerates rights

of the accused in all criminal prosecutions, to wit:
a. Right to be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved;
b. Right to be heard by himself and counsel;
c. Right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation

against him;
d. Right to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial;
e. Right to meet the witnesses face to face; and
f. Right to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of

witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf.
2. Criminal Prosecution. These are rights of the accused “in criminal

prosecutions.” Under the Rules, criminal proceedings start from
arraignment up to the rendition of final judgment by the
55
court. Arraignment refers to that stage of the criminal proceeding when

the information is read to the accused to which he pleads guilty or not
guilty. The proceeding continues until a final judgment is entered by
the court. The judgment is final when there is nothing for the court to
do but to execute it. Thus, during this duration the accused can invoke
the said rights under the proper circumstances.
RIGHT TO BE PRESUMED INNOCENT
1. Meaning. The right refers to the constitutional guarantee that the

accused should be treated as if innocent until he is proven guilty
beyond reasonable doubt.
2. Presumption of Innocence and Criminal Due Process. Basically, the

rights in Section 14(2) are elaborations of criminal due process. The
right to presumption of innocence, for instance, is based on the
fundamental procedural rule that the court must hear first before it
condemns. If what the court presumes is the guilt of the accused, then
procedural due process is violated.
In fact, the accused is already in a disadvantaged position since he is

pitted against the State. Presumption of guilt renders the rights of the
accused nugatory. To protect therefore individual rights, in particular
one’s liberty, it should be the State that proves the guilt of accused, and
not that the accused proves his innocence.
It is the prosecution (State) who has the burden of overcoming the

presumption of innocence. It should rely on its own merits and not on
the weakness of the defense.
2. When Presumption is Overcome. The presumption of innocence is

overcome by proof beyond reasonable doubt. Under the rules of
evidence, proof beyond reasonable doubt is the highest quantum of
evidence. Such proof requires that the court is morally certain that the
accused is guilty of the crime, so that if there is reasonable doubt that
lurks in the mind of the judge, the accused must be acquitted.
When the defense creates reasonable doubt, the presumption of

innocence remains. It must be noted that the certainty required by law
is not absolute certainty but moral certainty as to every proposition of
proof requisite to constitute the offense.
3. Why Right is Granted. The philosophy behind the very high quantum
of evidence to establish the guilt of the accused is expressed by the
court as follows: “It is better to acquit a person upon the ground of
56
reasonable doubt even though he may in reality be guilty, than to inflict

imprisonment on one who may be innocent.”
4. Presumption of Guilt. The law and rules, however, allow that

presumption of innocence may be overcome by another presumption
through prima facie evidence. Prima facie evidence means an evidence
deemed sufficient unless contradicted.
This is based on logic and human experience. When the prosecution,

for instance, establishes that the stolen object is in the possession of
the accused, it creates a prima facie evidence that the accused
committed the crime of theft. The presumption of innocence is
overturned, and the evidence creates a prima facie proof of the guilt of
the accused. This does not, however, mean that the presumption of
innocence is finally overcome. The burden of proof simply shifts from
the prosecution to the defense (side of the accused) who will in turn
present contradictory evidence to overcome the prima facie proof.
RIGHT TO BE HEARD BY HIMSELF AND COUNSEL
1. Right to be Heard. The right to be heard is the heart of criminal due

process. Basically, it refers to all the mechanisms afforded to the
accused during the criminal proceedings. It is a safeguard against
prejudicial and partial judgments by the courts, as well as a guarantee
that the accused be given an opportunity to participate during trial in
defense of himself.
2. Related Rights. Participation of the accused in the right to be heard

includes three specific rights: (a) the right to present evidence and to
be present at the trial; (b) the right to be assisted by counsel; and (c)
the right to compulsory process to compel the attendance of witnesses
in his behalf.
3. Ratio of Right to Counsel. The right of the accused to counsel is based

on the reason that only a lawyer has a substantial knowledge of the
rules of evidence, and a non-lawyer, in spite of his education in life,
may not be aware of the intricacies of law and procedure. Depriving a
person of such right constitutes violation of due process.
4. Related Right. Included in the right to counsel is the duty of the court
to inform the accused of his right to counsel before arraignment and to
give a counsel in case the accused cannot afford the services of one. The
counsel representing the accused must be independent and competent.
A counsel who has a divided interest between the prosecution (State)
57
and the defense (accused) is disqualified on the ground of lack of

independence and conflict of interest.
RIGHT TO BE INFORMED OF NATURE AND CAUSE OF ACCUSATION
1. Right to be informed is again an essential aspect of procedural due

process. The constitutional mandate is complied with by
the arraignment of the accused in which he is informed by the court of
the offense charged to which the accused either pleads guilty of not
guilty.
2. Well-settled is the rule that the allegations in the complaint and not
the title of the case that determines the nature of the offense.
RIGHT TO SPEEDY, IMPARTIAL AND PUBLIC TRIAL
1. Right to speedy trial is based on the maxim that “justice delayed is

justice denied.” Unreasonable delays may result to a prolonged
suffering of an innocent accused or an evasion of justice by a truly
guilty person. It offends not just the accused but also the State,
inasmuch as what is at stake is the speedy, inexpensive, and orderly
administration of justice.
Undue postponements not only depletes the funds of the defense but
also of prosecution. Thus, if the prosecution unreasonably delays the
criminal proceedings because of too many postponements and
unjustifiable absences, the accused may be acquitted on the ground of
violation of right to speedy trial.
This does not, however, mean that the court cannot grant reasonable
postponements. What is prohibited is oppressive and vexatious
postponements.
2. Right to impartial trial primarily requires that the judge who sits in
the case must be objective and renders a decision based on the cold
neutrality of the evidence presented.
For instance, a judge who is hostile to the accused based on his

comments and utterances, or who is substantially swayed by the
prejudicial publicity of the case, is a partial judge and must be inhibited
from the case.
3. Right to public trial demands that the proceedings be conducted in

such a way that the public may know what transpires during the trial.
It is not necessary that the entire public can witness the proceedings;
58
it is enough that the relatives and friends of the interested parties are
accommodated in the trial venue.
In fact, the court is allowed under the rules to order the public to leave
the premises of the court room in interest of morality and order.
RIGHT TO MEET THE WITNESSES FACE-TO-FACE
The right to confrontation enables the accused to test the credibility of

the witnesses. The right is reinforced under the rules of criminal
procedure by the so-called cross-examination. Cross-examination is
conducted after the presentation and direct examination of witnesses
by the opposing side. Both parties are allowed to test the veracity of
the testimonies presented by the other.
RIGHT TO COMPULSORY PROCESS
1. Reason for the Right. The form of criminal proceeding is adversarial

because two opposing parties battle out against each other and only
one of them could emerge as victor. It is often the case that the party
with the weightier evidence wins. In criminal proceedings, the accused
needs only to create reasonable doubt on the mind of the court to be
acquitted.
Nevertheless, evidence is difficult to find because of people’s anxiety

in testifying in court as well as their dislike for burdensome court
processes. In recognition therefore of this fact, the law and the rules
give the accused the right to avail of compulsory means for attendance
of witnesses and production of needed document or things.
2. Kinds of Compulsory Processes. When the person sought to testify is

uncooperative or just afraid of court-related actions, the remedy
of subpoena ad testificandum may be availed to compel the person to
testify. When relevant documents are needed but the holder thereof
refuses to produce them, the remedy of subpoena duces tecum may be
availed of to compel the production of the same. These remedies are
also available to the prosecution.
RIGHT TO BE PRESENT
1. Meaning and Purpose of the Right. As a rule, the accused has the right
to be present at all stages of trial, from arraignment to rendition of
judgment, in order that he may be informed of what transpires in every
stage of the proceedings, to guard himself from technical blunders, and
59
ultimately, to fully defend himself from the accusation against him.

Thus, it is again an incident of criminal due process.
2. Waiver of Right. Right to be present, inasmuch as it is a right, may be

waived by the accused. For as long as it does not prejudice others,
rights may be waived by its possessor.
An example of a valid waiver of the right to be present is the so-

called trial in absentia. Even in the absence of the accused, trial may
still proceed (trial in absentia) if after his arraignment and notification
of the date of the hearing, he still unjustifiably failed to appear. The
effect of the waiver is that the accused will no longer have the right to
present evidence and confront the witnesses.
3. When Right not Waivable. It must be noted that the presence of the
accused becomes a duty, and therefore not waivable, in the following:
(a) During arraignment and plea; (b) When he is to be identified; (c)
During the promulgation of judgment, except when it is for a light
offense.
In all these instances, the accused must appear because his non-
appearance may either prejudice his rights or that of the State.
PRIVILEGE OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 15, Article III states that “the

privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in
cases of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it.” This
is a reiteration of Section 18, Article VII.
What is constitutionally guaranteed is the right of a person detained by

another to test or challenge, through habeas corpus, the validity of his
detention when the authority of the detaining person or agency is at
issue.
2. The writ of habeas corpus is a written order issued by the court

directed to a person detaining another commanding him to produce the
body of the prisoner at a designated time and place, with the day and
cause of his capture and detention, to do, to submit to, and to receive
whatever court or judge awarding the writ shall consider in his behalf.
When a person is illegally confined or detained, or when his liberty is

illegally restrained, he has the constitutional right to file a petition of
habeas corpus. Should the court find out that the person is illegally
confined or detained, he shall be immediately released from detention.
60
3. When Privilege Suspended. The privilege of habeas corpus is

suspended in cases of rebellion or invasion. This is in order to meet the
exigencies in such cases.
4. Writ of Amparo. Aside from the writ of habeas corpus, the writ of
amparo is another available remedy to any person whose right to life,
liberty, and security has been violated or threatened to be violated by
an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a
private individual or entity. This remedy is especially available in cases
of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings.
RIGHT TO SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF CASES
Section 16, Article III states that “all persons shall have the right to a
speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or
administrative bodies.”
Unlike the right to speedy trial which applies only in criminal

proceedings, the right to speedy disposition of cases may be invoked
in all cases, whether judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative. Thus,
right to speedy disposition of cases is broader than right to speedy trial.
RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION
MEANING OF RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION
Section 17, Article III provides that “no person shall be compelled to be
a witness against himself.” This constitutional guarantee is better
known as right against self-incrimination.
The right allows a person not to answer an incriminating question. An

incriminating question is one that if answered renders a person liable
for an offense. However, it is only when the incriminating question is
put to a witness stand that the right may be invoked.
WHEN RIGHT AVAILABLE
1. The right is available in all government proceedings, whether

criminal or civil, and whether judicial or quasi-judicial or
administrative. It is even available in legislative investigations and
impeachment proceedings.
61
In addition, the right may be invoked by all persons subject to judicial

examination and legislative investigation. Thus it may be invoked not
just by the accused in criminal cases, but also defendants in civil cases,
and witnesses in all kinds of proceedings.
2. The right, nonetheless, is not self-executing. It is not automatically

operational once an incriminating question is asked. It must be
properly invoked by objecting to an incriminating question. For
example, when a witness is subjected to direct examination by the
opposing party, and the opposing counsel asked “was there an instance
that you cheated on your wife?,” the right may be invoked by a timely
objection to the incriminating question. If no objection is raised, then
the answer may be used as evidence against the witness for the proper
criminal charge.
3. Although all persons subject to judicial, quasi-judicial,

administrative, and legislative investigations can invoke the right
under proper circumstances, special utilization of the right is given to
the accused.
A witness can invoke the right only when the question tends to be self-
incriminating, but an accused can invoke the same in two ways. First is
by refusing to testify altogether during trial. And the second is, when
he chooses to testify, by refusing to answer questions that tend to
incriminate him for another offense.
4. In criminal proceedings what is prohibited is physical or moral

compulsion to extort communication from the accused. Subjecting the
body of the accused when material to solve the case is allowed and not
violative of the right.
In one case, the Court held that writing is not a pure mechanical act but
requires the use of the intellect. Thus, an accused cannot be compelled
to write or sign and use the same as evidence against him.
5. State witnesses cannot avail of the right because the very purpose of
their being state witnesses is to give them immunity or protection to
testify. Their testimonies are so crucial to the resolution of a criminal
case so that in attainment thereof immunity is given to them by the
State.
This means that they will no longer be prosecuted for the crime for
which they are testifying. Since they have to unravel everything, even
their guilt, in exchange of immunity, the right against self-
incrimination could no longer be invoked.
62
BASIS OF THE RIGHT
1. The philosophy behind the constitutional guarantee is similar to the

other rights of the accused. From the very start, the accused is already
in an adverse position pitted against the entire machinery of the State.
If evidence will still be taken from the lips of the accused, it would even
tilt the scales heavily in favor of the State.
2. The right is founded on public policy and humanity. Public policy

demands that a person be spared from answering incriminating
questions because requiring him would likely lead to the crime of
perjury, which is basically lying to the court after having promised to
tell the truth and nothing but the whole truth. Humanity prevents
extorting confession by duress.
RIGHT AGAINST INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 18, Article III provides that no

person should be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and
aspirations, nor should involuntary servitude in any form exist, except
as a punishment for a crime.
The first part of the provision deals with the right not to be detained
by reason solely of political beliefs and aspirations. This is essentially
embodied in the freedom of expression but with emphasis on the
prohibition against incarceration of “political prisoners.”
The second part deals with the right against involuntary servitude.
Involuntary servitude refers to the compulsory service of another or
simply modern day slavery. The right is based on the egalitarian
principle of democracy which prescribes equality of everyone in law,
and on humanity which prevents degradation of human dignity through
enforced labor.
2. Slavery is an ancient practice of treating man as a commodity under

the complete power of the master. This has never been practiced in the
Philippines, but has its remnants in modern forms of enforced labor
and peonage.
Enforced labor happens when a person is unlawfully compelled to work

against his will; it is involuntary and to a certain extent resembles
slavery.
63
When a person, because of poverty or lack of money, works for another

in payment of his debt, the same is prohibited by the present guarantee
even if the service is rendered voluntarily. This voluntary service in
payment of debt is called peonage. While it appears voluntary, peonage
is prohibited because the person is forced to work by the circumstances
of his indebtedness, although not by his creditor.
2. Exceptions. Involuntary servitude may be allowed under the following

instances:
(a) as punishment for crime;
(b) in the case of personal, military or civil service in defense of the

State; and
(c) in compliance to a return to work order issued by the Department of

Labor and Employment.
RIGHT AGAINST EXCESSIVE FINES AND CRUEL PUNISHMENTS
MEANING OF EXCESSIVE FINE AND CRUELTY
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 19(1), Article III states that

“excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman
punishment inflicted…”
2. A fine is excessive when it is unreasonable and beyond the limits

prescribed by law. The amount of the fine is said to be unreasonable if
the court does not take into consideration certain standards, such as
the nature of the offense, and the circumstances of the person punished
by fine. The imposed fine may never go beyond the statutory
prescription, otherwise it is unlawfully excessive.
3. A punishment is cruel when it is shocking to the conscience of

mankind and it involves prolonged suffering and agony to the person
punished. For a penalty to violate the constitutional guarantee, it must
be so flagrant and oppressive so as to be degrading to human dignity,
and it must be unreasonably disproportionate to the nature of the
offense as to shock the senses of the community.
The mere severity of a penalty does not make the punishment cruel or
inhumane, for as long as it is within the limits provided by law. As one
maxim states, “even if the law is harsh, it is still the law (dura lex sed
64
lex).” A penalty that is germane to purpose of the penal law is not cruel
and inhumane.
4. Lastly, a penalty must be acceptable to the contemporary society.

Ancient forms of punishment, such as pillory, disembowelment, and
crucifixion, which are already considered barbarous practices, are cruel
and inhumane. If a person, for instance, is paraded around town naked
with a tag on his neck saying “I am a thief; do not imitate me,” the form
of punishment is cruel and inhuman; it is barbarous and so ancient that
it is no longer acceptable to the present-day society.
DEATH PENALTY
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 19(2) also states that “… neither

shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons
involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any
death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.”
The present provision abolishes death penalty, although with a

reservation that the Congress can subsequently pass a law imposing it
for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes.
2. Death Penalty not Cruel. The constitutional provision on death

penalty or capital punishment does not explicitly mention that it is
cruel and inhumane. In fact, the Constitution allows the Congress to
impose death penalty for the right reasons. It could even be argued that
extinguishment of human life is not cruel and inhumane for the
following reasons:
a. It is proportionate to the nature of the offense. Death penalty may

only be imposed by Congress in the commission of heinous
crimes and for compelling reasons. Heinous crimes are crimes
which are so flagrant and evil so as to be shocking to the
conscience of civilized persons, such as genocide, rape with
homicide, murder, rebellion, and treason, especially when
committed against the innocent and helpless. With compelling
reasons, Congress may impose death penalty since it is
proportionate to the atrocities committed;
b. This form of penalty still has currency in the contemporary time.

Death by lethal injection is prevalently practiced by many
countries for the punishment of heinous offenses; and
c. Death by lethal injection is not cruel and inhumane because it

does not prolong suffering or inflict excruciating agony to the
65
person punished. In truth, it only induces the person to sleep

through a lethal substance injected in the bloodstream which
thereafter painlessly put the person to death.
PROPER TREATMENT OF PERSONS LEGALLY DETAINED OR

IMPRISONED
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 19(2), Article III provides that “the

employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment
against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or
inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt
with by law.”
2. Purpose of the Right. This constitutional guarantee recognizes the

inalienability of human dignity. Even when a person is imprisoned or
detained, and even if he commits heinous crimes, he is still a person
entitled to proper treatment and protection. Paraphrasing it, the
Constitution provides that even if a person is imprisoned or detained,
he must be protected against physical, psychological, or degrading
punishment, and is entitled to the use of standard or adequate penal
facilities under humane conditions.
RIGHT AGAINST IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 20, Article III provides that “no

person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax.”
2. A debt, as covered by the constitutional guarantee, refers to a

contractual obligation by a debtor to pay money to the creditor. If by
reason of poverty or lack of money a person cannot pay his debt, he
cannot be imprisoned by reason thereof.
The creditor only has himself to blame if he voluntarily agreed to lend

money to someone who apparently cannot pay or whom he thought
could pay but did not.
Nevertheless, although the debtor cannot be imprisoned, his property

may be taken or attached by the court, and then sold at public auction
in payment of his debt to the creditor.
3. Estafa is not covered by this constitutional guarantee. What is

punished in estafa is not the non-payment of debt but the deceit
accompanying the act of non-payment.
66
4. Non-payment of poll tax cannot be a cause of imprisonment. A poll

tax is a tax of a fixed amount imposed on individuals residing within a
specified territory, whether citizens or not, without regard to their
property or the occupation in which they may be engaged. Community
tax or residence tax is an example of poll tax.
As far as poll tax is concerned, non-payment is not punished by the

government in consideration of the plight of the poor who cannot even
afford to pay it. Poverty could never be a reason for a person’s
imprisonment.
It must be emphasized, however, that as regards other forms of taxes,

non-payment may be a cause of imprisonment. Failure to pay income
taxes is considered a crime (tax evasion), and punishable under the law
by imprisonment.
Meaning of Debt - as intended to be covered by the constitutional

guarantee, means any liability to pay money arising out of a contract,
express or implied.
Meaning of Poll Tax - a tax of a fixed amount imposed on individuals

residing within a specified territory, whether citizens or not, without
regard to their property or the occupation in which they may be
engaged.
RIGHT AGAINST DOUBLE JEOPARDY
MEANING OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 21, Article III states that “no person
shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. If
an act is punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal
under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same
act.” This is more famously known as the right against double jeopardy.
2. Double jeopardy means that a person is twice put at the risk of

conviction for the same act or offense. The right against double
jeopardy therefore means that a person can only be indicted or charge
once by a competent court for an offense.
When a person, for instance, has been charged of homicide and the
court acquitted him of the case, he can no longer be prosecuted for the
same offense or act. He can now invoke his right against double
jeopardy.
67
3. There are two types of double jeopardy. The first happens when a
person is put twice in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense,
and the second happens when an act is punishable by a law and an
ordinance at the same time, in which case the conviction or acquittal in
either one of them constitute as bar to another prosecution for the same
act.
3. The requisites of double jeopardy are:
a. A valid complaint or information;
b. Filed before a competent court;
c. To which the defendant has pleaded; and
d. The defendant was previously acquitted or convicted or the case

dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent.
WHEN DOUBLE JEOPARDY COULD BE CLAIMED
1. Before double jeopardy could be claimed, there must be a first

jeopardy. The first jeopardy attaches only: (a) upon good indictment;
(b) before a competent court; (c) after arraignment; (d) when a valid plea
has been entered; and (e) the case was dismissed or otherwise
terminated without the consent of the accused. A case is said to be
terminated without the consent of the accused when there is acquittal
or a final decision convicting him.
2. To substantiate therefore the claim for double jeopardy, the

following must be proven:
a. A first jeopardy must have attached prior to the first jeopardy;
b. The first jeopardy must have been validly terminated; and
c. The second jeopardy must be for the same offense, or the second
offense includes or is necessarily included in the offense charged
in the first information, or is an attempt to commit the same or
is a frustration thereof.
Meaning of Rights Against Double Jeopardy - means that when a

person is charged with an offense and the case is terminated either by
acquittal or conviction or in any other manner without the express
consent of the accused, the latter cannot again be charged with the
same or identical offense.
68
RIGHT AGAINST EX POST FACTO LAW AND BILL OF ATTAINDER
MEANING OF EX POST FACTO LAW
1. Constitutional Provision. Section 22, Article III provides that “no ex

post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.”
2. An ex post facto law is one which:
a. Makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law which
was innocent when done, and punishes such an act;
b. Aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when

committed;
c. Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than

the law annexed to the crime when committed;
d. Alters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes conviction upon

less or different testimony than the law required at the time of
the commission of the offense;
e. Assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies only, in effect

imposes penalty or deprivation of a right for something which
when done was lawful; and
f. Deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful protection

to which he has become entitled, such as the protection of a
former conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of amnesty.
3. Applicable only in Criminal Cases. The constitutional prohibition

applies only in criminal cases. One of the characteristics of criminal
law is prospectivity in which only crimes committed after the
enactment of a penal are punishable. It cannot retroact and punish
acts which were not yet criminalized before its passage.
The basic rule is that before an act may be considered an offense or

crime, it must first be defined as a crime and a penalty must be
imposed for it under a law passed by the legislative body. An act
therefore is not a crime if there is no law punishing it.
In the same vein, a person does not commit a crime, no matter how
apparently illegal it is, if there is no law defining and punishing it. It
69
is for this reason that an ex post facto law is not allowed because it
criminalizes what was not yet a crime during its commission.
Characteristics of Ex Post Facto Law
They are:
1. Ex-post facto laws relate to penal or criminal matters only.

2. They are retroactive in their operation; and
4. They deprived persons accused of crime of some protection or
defense previously available, to their disadvantage.
MEANING OF BILL OF ATTAINDER
1. Definition. A bill of attainder is “a legislative act which inflicts

punishment without trial. Its essence is the substitution of a legislative
for a judicial determination of guilt.”
2. Two Kinds of Bill of Attainder: (a) the bill of attainder proper which
involves the legislative imposition of death penalty, and (b) bill of pains
and penalties which involves imposition of a lesser penalty.
3. Reason for Prohibition. The prohibition against bill of attainder is

an implementation of the principle of separation of powers. The
legislature cannot bypass the judiciary by enacting a law that punishes
an act without need of judicial proceedings. The legislative department
should be confined to its law-making function; it cannot encroach the
authority of the courts by prescribing a law that directly adjudges guilt
without judicial determination.
4. Example. In one case, the Court held that the Anti-Subversion Law
(R.A. 1700) is not a bill of attainder. The law declared the Communist
Party of the Philippines (CPP) a clear and present danger to Philippine
security, and thus prohibited membership in such organization.
It is not a bill of attainder because it does not define a crime, but only
lays a basis for the legislative determination that membership in CPP
and any other organization having the same purposes is a crime.
It does not automatically secure judgment by mere membership. In

operation, the law does not render unnecessary judicial proceedings.
The guilt of the individual members of subversive groups must still be
judicially established.
https://tamayaosbc.wordpress.com/2014/06/20/bill-of-rights/
70
Republic Act No. 7438 April 27, 1992
AN ACT DEFINING CERTAIN RIGHTS OF PERSON ARRESTED,

DETAINED OR UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION AS WELL AS THE
DUTIES OF THE ARRESTING, DETAINING AND INVESTIGATING
OFFICERS, AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

Philippines in Congress assembled:
Section 1. Statement of Policy – It is the policy of the Senate to value

the dignity of every human being and guarantee full respect for human
rights.
Section 2. Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or Under Custodial

Investigation; Duties of Public Officers.
(a) Any person arrested detained or under custodial investigation shall

at all times be assisted by counsel.
(b) Any public officer or employee, or anyone acting under his order or
his place, who arrests, detains or investigates any person for the
commission of an offense shall inform the latter, in a language known
to and understood by him, of his rights to remain silent and to have
competent and independent counsel, preferably of his own choice, who
shall at all times be allowed to confer privately with the person
arrested, detained or under custodial investigation. If such person
cannot afford the services of his own counsel, he must be provided with
a competent and independent counsel by the investigating officer.
(c) The custodial investigation report shall be reduced to writing by the

investigating officer, provided that before such report is signed, or
thumb marked if the person arrested or detained does not know how to
read and write, it shall be read and adequately explained to him by his
counsel or by the assisting counsel provided by the investigating
officer in the language or dialect known to such arrested or detained
person, otherwise, such investigation report shall be null and void and
of no effect whatsoever.
(d) Any extrajudicial confession made by a person arrested, detained or

under custodial investigation shall be in writing and signed by such
person in the presence of his counsel or in the latter's absence, upon a
valid waiver, and in the presence of any of the parents, elder brothers
and sisters, his spouse, the municipal mayor, the municipal judge,
71
district school supervisor, or priest or minister of the gospel as chosen

by him; otherwise, such extrajudicial confession shall be inadmissible
as evidence in any proceeding.
(e) Any waiver by a person arrested or detained under the provisions of

Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, or under custodial investigation,
shall be in writing and signed by such person in the presence of his
counsel; otherwise the waiver shall be null and void and of no effect.
(f) Any person arrested or detained or under custodial investigation

shall be allowed visits by or conferences with any member of his
immediate family, or any medical doctor or priest or religious minister
chosen by him or by any member of his immediate family or by his
counsel, or by any national non-governmental organization duly
accredited by the Commission on Human Rights of by any international
non-governmental organization duly accredited by the Office of the
President. The person's "immediate family" shall include his or her
spouse, fiancé or fiancée, parent or child, brother or sister, grandparent
or grandchild, uncle or aunt, nephew or niece, and guardian or ward.
As used in this Act, "custodial investigation" shall include the practice

of issuing an "invitation" to a person who is investigated in connection
with an offense he is suspected to have committed, without prejudice
to the liability of the "inviting" officer for any violation of law.
Section 3. Assisting Counsel. – Assisting counsel is any lawyer, except

those directly affected by the case, those charged with conducting
preliminary investigation or those charged with the prosecution of
crimes.
The assisting counsel other than the government lawyers shall be

entitled to the following fees;
(a) The amount of One hundred fifty pesos (P150.00) if the suspected
person is chargeable with light felonies;
(b) The amount of Two hundred fifty pesos (P250.00) if the suspected
person is chargeable with less grave or grave felonies;
(c) The amount of Three hundred fifty pesos (P350.00) if the suspected
person is chargeable with a capital offense.
The fee for the assisting counsel shall be paid by the city or
municipality where the custodial investigation is conducted, provided
that if the municipality of city cannot pay such fee, the province
72
comprising such municipality or city shall pay the fee: Provided, That
the Municipal or City Treasurer must certify that no funds are available
to pay the fees of assisting counsel before the province pays said fees.
In the absence of any lawyer, no custodial investigation shall be

conducted and the suspected person can only be detained by the
investigating officer in accordance with the provisions of Article 125 of
the Revised Penal Code.
Section 4. Penalty Clause. – (a) Any arresting public officer or

employee, or any investigating officer, who fails to inform any person
arrested, detained or under custodial investigation of his right to
remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel
preferably of his own choice, shall suffer a fine of Six thousand pesos
(P6,000.00) or a penalty of imprisonment of not less than eight (8) years
but not more than ten (10) years, or both. The penalty of perpetual
absolute disqualification shall also be imposed upon the investigating
officer who has been previously convicted of a similar offense.
The same penalties shall be imposed upon a public officer or employee,

or anyone acting upon orders of such investigating officer or in his
place, who fails to provide a competent and independent counsel to a
person arrested, detained or under custodial investigation for the
commission of an offense if the latter cannot afford the services of his
own counsel.
(b) Any person who obstructs, prevents or prohibits any lawyer, any
member of the immediate family of a person arrested, detained or
under custodial investigation, or any medical doctor or priest or
religious minister chosen by him or by any member of his immediate
family or by his counsel, from visiting and conferring privately with
him, or from examining and treating him, or from ministering to his
spiritual needs, at any hour of the day or, in urgent cases, of the night
shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of not less than four (4) years
nor more than six (6) years, and a fine of four thousand pesos
(P4,000.00).
The provisions of the above Section notwithstanding, any security

officer with custodial responsibility over any detainee or prisoner may
undertake such reasonable measures as may be necessary to secure his
safety and prevent his escape.
Section 5. Repealing Clause. – Republic Act No. No. 857, as amended,

is hereby repealed. Other laws, presidential decrees, executive orders
73
or rules and regulations, or parts thereof inconsistent with the

provisions of this Act are repealed or modified accordingly.
Section 6. Effectivity. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days
following its publication in the Official Gazette or in any daily
newspapers of general circulation in the Philippines.
Approved: April 27, 1992.
https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1992/ra_7438_1992.html
RIGHTS OF PRISONERS: AHRC
1. Prisoners and inmates are human beings entitled to the same basic
rights enjoyed by citizens in a free society, except that the exercise of
these rights are limited or controlled for security purposes. It is in this
context that rights for prisoners have been drafted, and standards for
treatment of prisoners have been set.
2. The Asian Human Rights Commission drafted the rights of prisoners

and political prisoners as follows:
a. That all prisoners have the right to be treated in a humane

manner;
b. That all prisoners have the right to a fair trial with adequate and
free legal assistance;
c. That persons under any form of detention or imprisonment have

the right to be protected from cruel, inhumane, degrading
treatment and punishment, including sexual violence and other
forms of torture;
d. That persons have the right to be kept in official government

civilian prisons and to be protected from being imprisoned in
unofficial places of detention or in military custody;
e. That all persons have the right to appear in public before a

legally-constituted court within a short time after their arrest;
f. That prisoners have the right to fair and humane treatment which
enables the maintenance of self-respect;
74
g. That prisoners have the right to a prison programme which

enhances their social and intellectual abilities;
h. That prisoners have the right to separate living arrangements in

prison in accordance with the categories of gender, age, and
reasons for imprisonment;
i. That prisoners awaiting trial have the right to be held separately

from convicted prisoners;
j. That political prisoners have the right to be segregated from other

prisoners;
k. That prisoners have the right to communicate with their families

and to maintain familial relationships;
l. That prisoners have the right to free legal assistance; and
m. That Asian governments be pressured to observe international

instruments to protect the rights of prisoners, such as the Body
of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under any Form of
Detention or Imprisonment (1988); the Declaration on the
Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
(1975); the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1987); the Principles of
Medical Ethics Relevant to the Role of Health Personnel,
Particularly Physician, in the Protection of Prisoners and
Detainees Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1982); Standard Minimum
Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (1955, 1957, and 1977).
https://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/UNDP4/wp-
content/uploads/2013/01/jail-visitation-system.pdf
PRISONER / DETAINEES: PHILIPPINES
As provided under the Constitution. ‘The State values the dignity of

every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights”. An
individual, though in Prison does not lose his inherent rights to dignity
and his other human rights regardless of what he or she may have done
or whatever political convictions he may have.
RIGHTS OF DETAINEES
75
1. Right to be free from personal abuse and right to be protected against

the following:
a. any deprivation of his basic needs under normal situation

b. corporal punishment
▪ use of physical force
▪ solitary confinement or segregation as positive measures
2. Right to Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) for good behavior
3. Right to have access to the following as far as practicable:
a. medicine and health services
b. rehabilitation program
c. visitation( conjugal) and mail services
d. free legal services and materials
4. Right to exercise his religious beliefs
5. Right to air grievances and complain through proper authorities
6. Right of women offenders to be personally attended/supervised by

women officers, without prejudice to male doctors, nurses and social
welfare officers from carrying out their professional duties in the
institution for women
7. Right of foreign nationals to communicate with their diplomatic and

consular representative
EXISTING MEASURES PROTECTING AND PROMOTING THE RIGHTS OF

DETAINEES AND PRISONERS
a. Upgrading of prison facilities
b. Strengthening rehabilitation strategies
c. Decongestion of prison / jails
76
d. PD 698 as amended, Known as the Adult probation Law
e. Provision of education and training for inmates
f. Passage of RA 6975, Department of local Interior and Local

Government Act of 1990 which provided for the creation of the
Bureau of Jail Management and Penology
g. Creation of the assistance and Visitorial Services by Commission

on Human Rights to Monitor Jails and Detention Centers in the
Country
.
RIGHTS OF WOMEN
1. Right to own a property
2. Right to live with dignity
3. Freedom from fear and violence
4. Freedom from exploitation and abuse
5. Right to vote, hold public office and exercise functions established

under national laws
6. Right to participate in the formulations of public policy and perform

functions at all levels of government
7. Right to equal treatment before the law
8. Reproductive right and freedom to decide the number and gap of

bearing children
9. Right to nationality
10. Protection from sufferings, heavy losses, repression and cruel

treatment during armed conflict situation and ravage of war.
WHAT IS MAGNA CARTA OF WOMEN (REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9710)?
The Magna Carta of Women (MCW) is a comprehensive women’s human

rights law that seeks to eliminate discrimination through the
77
recognition, protection, fulfillment, and promotion of the rights of

Filipino women, especially those belonging to the marginalized sectors
of society.
It is the local translation of the provisions of the Convention on the

Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women’s (CEDAW),
particularly in defining gender discrimination, state obligations,
substantive equality, and temporary special measures. It also
recognizes human rights guaranteed by the International Covenant on
Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
WHAT IS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN?
The Magna Carta of Women defines discrimination against women as:
✓ any gender-based distinction, exclusion, or restriction which has

the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition,
enjoyment, or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital
status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights
and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social,
cultural, civil or any other field;
✓ any act or omission, including by law, policy, administrative

measure, or practice, that directly or indirectly excludes or
restricts women in the recognition and promotion of their rights
and their access to and enjoyment of opportunities, benefits, or
privileges;
✓ a measure or practice of general application that fails to provide

for mechanisms to offset or address sex or gender-based
disadvantages or limitations of women, as a result of which
women are denied or restricted in the recognition and protection
of their rights and in their access to and enjoyment of
opportunities, benefits, or privileges; or women, more than men
are shown to have suffered the greater adverse effects of those
measures or practices; and
✓ discrimination compounded by or intersecting with other

grounds, status, or condition, such as ethnicity, age, poverty, or
religion.
WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN GUARANTEED UNDER THE

MAGNA CARTA OF WOMEN?
78
All rights in the Philippine Constitution and those rights recognized

under international instruments duly signed and ratified by the
Philippines, in consonance with Philippine laws shall be rights of
women under the Magna Carta of Women. These rights shall be enjoyed
without discrimination since the law prohibits discrimination against
women, whether done by public and private entities or individuals.
THE MAGNA CARTA OF WOMEN ALSO SPELLS OUT EVERY WOMAN’S

RIGHT TO:
1. Protection from all forms of violence, including those committed by

the State. This includes the incremental increase in the recruitment
and training of women in government services that cater to women
victims of gender-related offenses. It also ensures mandatory
training on human rights and gender sensitivity to all government
personnel involved in the protection and defense of women against
gender-based violence, and mandates local government units to
establish a Violence Against Women Desk in every barangay to
address violence against women cases;
2. Protection and security in times of disaster, calamities and other

crisis situations, especially in all phases of relief, recovery,
rehabilitation and construction efforts, including protection from
sexual exploitation and other sexual and gender-based violence.
3. Participation and representation, including undertaking temporary

special measures and affirmative actions to accelerate and ensure
women’s equitable participation and representation in the third level
civil service, development councils and planning bodies, as well as
political parties and international bodies, including the private
sector.
4. Equal treatment before the law, including the State’s review and
when necessary amendment or repeal of existing laws that are
discriminatory to women;
5. Equal access and elimination of discrimination against women in

education, scholarships and training. This includes revising
educational materials and curricula to remove gender stereotypes
and images, and outlawing the expulsion, non-readmission,
prohibiting enrollment and other related discrimination against
women students and faculty due to pregnancy outside of marriage;
6. Equal participation in sports. This includes measures to ensure that

gender-based discrimination in competitive and non-competitive
79
sports is removed so that women and girls can benefit from sports
development;
7. Non-discrimination in employment in the field of military, police

and other similar services. This includes the same promotional
privileges and opportunities as their men counterpart, including pay
increases, additional benefits, and awards, based on competency
and quality of performance. The dignity of women in the military,
police and other similar services shall always be respected, they
shall be accorded with the same capacity as men to act in and enter
into contracts, including marriage, as well as be entitled to leave
benefits for women such as maternity leave, as provided for in
existing laws;
8. Non-discriminatory and non-derogatory portrayal of women in

media and film to raise the consciousness of the general public in
recognizing the dignity of women and the role and contribution of
women in family, community, and the society through the strategic
use of mass media;
9. Comprehensive health services and health information and

education covering all stages of a woman’s life cycle, and which
addresses the major causes of women’s mortality and morbidity,
including access to among others, maternal care, responsible,
ethical, legal, safe and effective methods of family planning, and
encouraging healthy lifestyle activities to prevent diseases;
10. Leave benefits of two (2) months with full pay based on gross
monthly compensation, for women employees who undergo surgery
caused by gynecological disorders, provided that they have
rendered continuous aggregate employment service of at least six
(6) months for the last twelve (12) months;
11. Equal rights in all matters relating to marriage and family

relations. The State shall ensure the same rights of women and men
to: enter into and leave marriages, freely choose a spouse, decide on
the number and spacing of their children, enjoy personal rights
including the choice of a profession, own, acquire, and administer
their property, and acquire, change, or retain their nationality. It also
states that the betrothal and marriage of a child shall have no legal
effect.
THE MAGNA CARTA OF WOMEN ALSO GUARANTEES THE CIVIL,

POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC RIGHTS OF WOMEN IN THE
MARGINALIZED SECTORS, PARTICULARLY THEIR RIGHT TO:
80
1. Food security and resources for food production, including equal

rights in the titling of the land and issuance of stewardship contracts
and patents;
2. Localized, accessible, secure and affordable housing;
3. Employment, livelihood, credit, capital and technology;
4. Skills training, scholarships, especially in research and development

aimed towards women friendly farm technology.
5. Representation and participation in policy making or decision

making bodies in the regional, national, and international levels;
6. Access to information regarding policies on women, including

programs, projects and funding outlays that affect them; • Social
protection;
7. Recognition and preservation of cultural identity and integrity

provided that these cultural systems and practices are not
discriminatory to women;
8. Inclusion in discussions on peace and development;
9. Services and interventions for women in especially difficult

circumstances or WEDC;
10. Protection of girl-children against all forms of discrimination in

education, health and nutrition, and skills development; and
11. Protection of women senior citizens.
RIGHTS OF THE CHILDREN
As defined in RA 7610, the Special Protection of Children against Child

Abuse, exploitation and Discrimination Act, children refers to persons
below 8 years of age. These are very vulnerable individuals prone to
abuse, exploitation and violence.
1. Right to equality, regardless of race, color, religion, sex and

nationality
2. Right to name and nationality
81
3. Right to grow in family environment
4. Right to adequate means of survival: Food, clothing, shelter and

medical care
5. Right to free education, play and recreation
6. Right to express his views
7. Right to immediate aid in the event of disaster and emergencies
8. Protection form cruelty, neglect and all forms of exploitation
9. Protection from persecution and upbringing in the spirit of

worldwide brotherhood and peace.
https://sites.google.com/site/humanrightspromotions/human-rights
PRISONERS OF WAR
According to the Third Geneva Convention, Prisoner of War (POW)

includes any individual, whether a combatant or a non-combatant, who
is being held captive by a hostile nation during or immediately after an
armed conflict with the said nation.
POWs are prisoners of the country that captures them. All POWs are
protected by the laws governing the status unless otherwise proven.
The status of POW applies only to international conflicts.
Captured persons are deemed to be a Prisoner of War under the

following circumstances:
a. They are lawful combatants and thus have immunity from

punishment for acts which otherwise would be considered to be
a crime. (e.g. When they kill an enemy combatant.)
b. They must belong to a chain of command and wear a fixed

distinctive marking. Thus this clause includes that the persons
must be donning uniforms and badges.
c. They must bear arms openly.
82
RIGHTS OF THE POWs
The POWs are protected by the Third Geneva Convention. The rules
were first detailed in 1929 and then later modified in 1949, after World
War II, and has143 articles. Geneva Convention of 1949 specifies the
following rules:
a. The POWs cannot be compelled to give any information other

than their name, rank, age and service number.
b. If because of his physical or mental condition, he is unable to

answer the question, he should be handed over to the medical
corps.
c. A POW must be allowed to keep with him all his personal

possessions which does not include arms and military papers.
d. The POWs shall be released and repatriated immediately after the

cessation of active hostilities.
e. They should be treated with honour and humanely.
f. POWs should be allowed to inform the International Committee

of Red Cross of their capture.
g. They should be allowed to inform their family of their status.
h. If held captive for a long period of time, they should be allowed

to contact their relatives on a regular basis.
i. They are allowed to receive packages.
j. POWs should be provided with adequate food.
k. When held captive for long, they should be provided with housing
as well as clothing.
l. They should not be made to do any dangerous or degrading work.
m. They should be reimbursed if any work was done by them.
n. If a POW has been wounded in the battlefield, he shall receive

help from the International Committee of Red Cross.
83
Any country that breaks any of the aforesaid rules concerning a POW is
liable shall be punished.
https://www.mapsofindia.com/my-india/history/prisoners-of-war
VENI VIDI VICI
84

Human Rights 2024

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Human Rights 2024

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Human Rights 2024

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SMU DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE THE SEVENTH PLACER FILES 2024

SAINT MARY’S UNIVERSITY

NOTE IN HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION

(BS FORENSIC SCIENCE/BS NURSING)

A BRIEF HISTORY OF HUMAN RIGHTS

THE CYRUS CYLINDER (539 B.C.)

THE SPREAD OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Documents asserting individual rights, such as the Magna Carta (1215),

THE MAGNA CARTA (1215)

In 1215, after King John of England violated a number of ancient laws

Widely viewed as one of the most important legal documents in the

PETITION OF RIGHT (1628)

The next recorded milestone in the development of human rights was

1. No taxes may be levied without consent of Parliament,

2. No subject may be imprisoned without cause shown

3. No soldiers may be quartered upon the citizenry, and

4. Martial law may not be used in time of peace.

UNITED STATES DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (1776)

On July 4, 1776, the United States Congress approved the Declaration

Philosophically, the Declaration stressed two themes: individual rights

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (1787)

Written during the summer of 1787 in Philadelphia, the Constitution of

The first ten amendments to the Constitution—the Bill of Rights—came

The Bill of Rights protects freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the

Among the legal protections it affords, the Bill of Rights prohibits

infamous crime, guarantees a speedy public trial with an impartial jury

DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND OF THE CITIZEN (1789)

In 1789 the people of France brought about the abolishment of the

The Declaration proclaims that all citizens are to be guaranteed the

THE FIRST GENEVA CONVENTION (1864)

In 1864, sixteen European countries and several American states

THE UNITED NATIONS (1945)

THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS (1948)

By 1948, the United Nations’ new Human Rights Commission had

In its preamble and in Article 1, the Declaration unequivocally

The Member States of the United Nations pledged to work together to

THE BASIC CONCEPTS OF HUMAN RIGHTS

WHAT ARE HUMAN RIGHTS?

FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS CONCEPTS

Human rights are universal, indivisible, inalienable and

For example, if someone is found guilty of a crime, his or her liberty

Indivisibility of rights simply means that different human rights are

4. EQUALITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION

5. BOTH RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS

Human rights entail both rights and obligations. States assume

The obligation to respect means that States must refrain from

CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS VERSUS ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND

Most commonly, human rights are distinguished in two main

Civil and political rights are intended to be immediately implemented

In particular, civil rights were commonly associated with the 1960s

While this category of rights had previously been seen as only

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS: These rights were

They are known as “security-oriented human rights” because these

The ICESCR (INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND

However, most sovereign states have enshrined ESCR in their

HUMAN RIGHTS – PHILIPPINES

Human Rights is defined as the supreme, inherent, and inalienable

All Human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and inter-

Rights can be classified according to following: