Sec.

3 The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires as prescribed by law. Sec. 3. Privacy of Communications May be restricted: Upon lawful order of the court When prescribed by law as public order and safety requires RA 4200 punishes interception and recording of conversation without the consent of both parties. [Anti-Wire Tapping Law] It is similar to Sec. 3 in the sense that they are both exclusionary rules, but it goes further because it punishes. It is narrower in the that it covers only oral communication. Alejano Can letters of detainees or convicts be opened and read? Is Sec. 3 available to them? Exception? Ople: Does the Constitution protect the right to privacy? When may it be curtailed?/Sabio Salcedo-Ortanez taped recorded conversation Zulueta pictures [Marti rule?] Bar Questions: 1998, No. 7: The police had suspicions that Juan Samson, member of the subversive New Proletarian Army, was using the mail for propaganda purposes in gaining new adherents to its cause, The Chief of Police of Bantolan, Lanao del sur ordered the Postmaster of the town to intercept and open all mail addressed to and coming from Juan Samson in the interest of national security. Was the order of the Chief of Police valid?

a. no, because jail authorities cannot restrict the privacy of communication unless there is a court order b. no, because while a rule the letters of detainees may be openned, a letter to ones spouse is covered by marital privilege c. yes, because detainees and prisoners have a limited claim to privacy and all their letters may be read without a court order d. yes, the letter may be opened and read by the warden because it was not addressed to nor was it from his lawyer No. 12, 2001: A has a telephone line with an extension. One day, A was talking to B over the telephone. A conspired with his friend C, who was at the end of the extension line listening to As telephone conversation with B, to overhear and tape-record the conversation wherein B confidentially admitted that with evident premeditation, he killed D for having cheated him in their business partnership. B was not aware that the telephone conversation was being tape-recorded. In the criminal case against B for murder, is the tape recorded conversation containing his admission admissible in evidence? [Assume that C only listened through the extension line and he was later called to testify on what he heard. Would his testimony be admissible?] A filed an annulment case against her husband based on psychological incapacity of the latter. While the case was pending, she broke open the drawers and cabinets in her husbands office and took away the pictures, letters and cards sent to her husband by his paramour. Her husband objected to the admission into evidence of the documents on the ground of illegal search and seizure. Are they admissible? yes, because one cannot invoke the Bill of Rights against a private person, in this case ones spouse yes, because by entering into a contract of marriage, one waives his right to privacy with respect to his spouse no, because there was no court order or a law authorizing the seizure of the documents no, because the seizure violated the Anti-Wire Tapping Act 2009, VI In a criminal prosecution for murder, the prosecution presented, as witness, an employee of the Manila Hotel who produced in court a videotape recording showing the heated exchange between the accused and the victim that took place at the lobby of the hotel barely 30 minutes before the killing. The accused objects to the admission of the videotape recording on the ground that it was taken without his knowledge or consent, in violation of his right to privacy and the Anti-Wire Tapping law. Resolve the objection with reasons. (3%) [Is the evidence admissible?] RA No. 9372

a. yes, because the order was premised on national security b. yes, because a Chief of Police is authorized by law to open the correspondence of any person c. yes, because as a police officer, the presumption of regularity in the performance of official function applies d. no, because the order violates the privacy of communication and correspondence No. 8, 1989: While serving sentence in Muntinglupa for the crime of theft, X stabbed dead one of his guards. X was charged with murder. During his trial, the prosecution introduced as evidence a letter written in prison by X to his wife tending to establish that the crime of murder was the result of premeditation. The letter was written voluntarily. In the course of inspection, it was opened and read by a warden pursuant to the rules of discipline of the Bureau of Prisons and considering its contents, the letter was turned over to the prosecutor. The lawyer of X objected to the presentation of the letter and moved for its return on the ground that it violates the right of X against unlawful search and seizure. Decide.

SEC. 7. Surveillance of Suspects and Interception and 7. Recording of Communications. The provisions of Communications. Republic Act No. 4200 (Anti-wire Tapping Law) to the contrary notwithstanding, a police or law enforcement official and the members of his team may, upon a written order of the Court of Appeals, listen to, intercept and record, with the use of any mode, form, kind or type of electronic or other surveillance equipment or intercepting and tracking devices, or with the use of any other suitable ways and means for that purpose, any communication, message, conversation, discussion, or spoken or written words between members of a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization, association, or group of persons or of any person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism. SECTION 1. Habeas Data.The writ of habeas data is a remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home and correspondence of the aggrieved party. Sec. 4. No law shall be passed abridging 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. Freedom of speech, expression and of the press is the liberty to discuss publicly and truthfully any matter of public interest without censorship or punishment. Outline Forms of restriction Tests on Restriction Petition and Assembly Restraints on Expression:

When the COMELEC exercises its power under Sec. 4, Art. XI . When the restriction is content neutral Content-Neutral v. Content-Based Content-Neutral One that is imposed not on the content of the speech but on the time mode or manner of place of the exercise of the right. [No presumption of unconstitutionality, and a deferential standard of review is required. (intermediate review)] Content-based- imposed on content, suffers from presumption of unconstitutionality and should be subject to the clear and present danger rule

Which restriction is content-based: a. prohibition on the writing of graffiti on walls b. prohibition to conduct rallies within 200 meters of any court house c. prohibition on mass media from selling or giving free of charge print space or air time for campaign purposes d. prohibition on newspaper columnists from discussing plebiscite issues in their columns The prohibition on mass media from selling or giving free of charge print space or air time for campaign purposes is: (a) content-neutral (b) needs to be subjected to the clear and present danger test is presumed unconstitutional (d) can be justified if there is a compelling state interest Challenges to restriction on free speech : Overbreath a law is overbroad which sweeps unnecessarily broadly and invade an area of protected freedom Vagueness a law which lacks comprehensive standard so that people would differ as to its meaning Example of an overbroad restriction: 2003, No. 9: May the COMELEC prohibit the posting of decals and stickers on mobile places, public or private, such as on a private vehicle and limit theor location only to the authorized posting areas that the COMELEC itself fixes. Also ABS-CBN prohibiting exit polls Example of vague law: Ople Case Tests on Restrictions: 1. Dangerous Tendency If the words spoken create a dangerous tendency which the state has a right to prevent, then such words are punishable. 2. Clear and Present Danger Whether the words are used in such circumstances and are such nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evil that the legislature has a right to prevent. (GONZALES VS. COMELEC) 3. Balancing of Interest

1. Prior Restraint Prior restraint is government restriction on forms of expression in advance of actual publication or dissemination. 2. Subsequent Punishment Subsequent punishment is the restraint on freedom of speech, expression and of the press that comes after the exercise of said rights in the form of criminal prosecutions, citations for contempt or suits for damages. Chavez v. Gonzales, 555 SCRA 441 (2008): Do press statements of high officials threatening the press with prosecution, even fi not reduced to formal orders or directives, forms of prior restraint? The exercise of prior restraint bears a presumption of unconstitutionality, except: In times of war

Courts will weigh or balance the conflicting social interests that will be affected by legislation and uphold what should be considered as the most important interest. - Lagunsad -Contempt/SC Libel: Vasquez Rule If the libelous statement relates to official functions, truth is a defense. It is the public official who must prove that the statement is false, and It was made with knowledge of its falsity, or There was reckless disregard whether it is true or not. BorjalThe reverse presumption applies not only to public officials but to a public figure: any person who, by his accomplishment, fame, mode of living, or by adopting a profession or calling which gives the public interest in his doings, affair or character. Question 5, 2004: The STAR, a national daily newspaper, carried an exclusive report stating that Senator XX received a house and lot located at YY St., Makati, in consideration for his vote cutting cigarette by 50%. The Senator sued the Star for libel claiming the report was completely false and malicious. According to the Senator, there is no YY St. in Makati, and the tax cut was only 20%. The defendants denied actual malice, claiming privilege communication and absolute freedom of the press to report on public officials and matters of public concern. If there was any error, the Star said it would publish the correction promptly. Is thee actual malice in Stars report. How is actual malice defined? Are the defendants liable for damages? If a newspaperman accuses a Sangguniang Bayan member of being corrupt, and the latter sues the newsman for libel: (a) the accused has the burden of proving his accusation to be true to get acquitted (b) the government official has the burden of proving that it is false the accused has the burden of proving that it was made without malice (d) the right to free expression cannot be invoked by the accused 2007, No. V. The Destilleria Felipe Segundo is famous for its 15-year old rum, which it has produced and marketed successfully for the past 70 years. Its latest commercial advertisement uses the line: Nakatikim ka na ba ng kinse anyos? Very soon, activist groups promoting womens and childrens rights were up in arms against the advertisement. (b) One of the militant groups, the Amazing Amazonas, call on all the government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCC) to boycott any newspaper, radio or TV station that carries

the kinse anyos advertisements. They call on all government nominees in sequestered corporations to block any advertising funds allocated for any such newspaper, radio or TV station. Can the GOCCs and sequestered corporations validly comply? CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II Petition and Assembly Freedom of assembly is the right of the people to meet peaceably for consultation and discussion of matters of public concern. Test: Clear and Present Danger to Public Safety, Order, Morals, etc. Bayan v. Ermita: 1. Is BP 880 constitutional? 2. Is CPR constitutional? 3. What if there is no freedom park? 4. Who has the burden of proving that there is no permit? 5. When may freedom Of assembly be restricted or denied? IBP v. Atienza, 2010

The IBP applied for a permit to hold a rally at Magsaysay Park at 2-5:00 PM of April10. The Mayor, without any explanation, granted the application for them to hold a rally at Rizal Park. Is the act of the Mayor proper? yes, because as chief executive he has discretion whether or not to grant the application yes, because the right to assembly is not an absolute constitutional right but is subject to restriction no, because he can only modify terms of the of the application on the ground of clear and present danger which must be indicated in his approval no, because the constitutional right is not subject to any limitation by local authorities Bar Questions: 2002, No. 10: 10 public school teachers of Caloocan left their classrooms to join a strike, which lasted for one month, to ask for teachers benefits. They were dismissed by the DECS Secretary. They argue that their strike was an exercise of their Constitutional right to peaceful assembly and to petition the government for redress of grievances. Resolve. [Also 2000, No. 12] 2006, No. II, The SM filed with the Office of the City Mayor of Manila an application for permit to hold a rally on Mendiola St. on Sept. 5, 2006 fro 10:00 to 3:00pm to protest the political killings of journalist. However, the City Mayor denied their application on the ground that a rally at the time and place applied for will block traffic in the San Miguel and Quiapo districts. He suggested the Liwasang Bonifacio, which has been designated a Freedom Park, as venue for the rally. 1. Does the SM have a remedy to contest the denial of its application for a permit? 2. Does the availability of the Freedom Park justify the denial of SMs application for a permit?

3. Is the requirement to apply for a permit to hold a rally a prior restraint on freedom of speech and assembly? 4. Assuming that despite the denial of the application for a permit,its membes held a rally prompting the police to arrest them. Are the arrests without judicial warrants lawful? 2007, VII. Batas Pambansa 880, the Public Assembly Law of 1985, regulates the conduct of all protest rallies in the Philippines. Salakay, Bayan! held a protest rally and planned to march from Quezon City to Luneta in Manila. They received a permit from the Mayor of Quezon City, but not from the Mayor of Manila. They were able to March in Quezon City and up to the boundary separating it from the City of Manila. Three meters after crossing the boundary, the Manila Police stopped them for posing a danger to public safety. Was this a valid exercise of police power? (b) The security police of the Southern Luzon Expressway spotted a caravan of 20 vehicles, with paper banners taped on their sides and protesting graft and corruption in government. They were driving at 50 kilometers per hour in a 40-90 kilometers per hour zone. Some banners had been blown off by the wind, and posed a hazard to other motorists. They were stopped by the security police. The protesters then proceeded to march instead, sandwiched between the caravan vehicles. They were also stopped by the security force. May the security police validly stop the vehicles and the marchers?

Refusal by the mayor to issue a rally permit on the ground that the applicant advocates views contrary to that of the government Refusal by the mayor to issue a permit on the ground that views to be expressed in the rally might outrage other people and violence will result Sec. 5 No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. 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. Manosca owns a small lot which turned out to be the birth place of the founder of the Iglesia Ni Cristo and this was sought to be expropriated by the National Historical Society. The owner challenges the expropriation on the ground that it favors one religion. The issue that was raised in Manosca pertains to: (a) the free exercise of religion [free exercise clause] (b) the establishment of religion [nonestablishment clause] requirement of religious test [religious test clause (d) intramural religious dispute A DECS circular requiring elementary students to sing the national anthem and salute the flag regardless of religion raises an issue about: (a) the free exercise clause (b) the non-establishment clause the religious test clause (d) intramural religious dispute Section 5: Freedom of Religion 1. Non- Establishment Clause The non-establishment clause prohibits legislation which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefers one over another. 2. Free-exercise clause Tests for Allowable Aid to Religion: 1. The statute must have a secular legislative purpose; 2. The principal or primary effect is neither one that advances or inhibits religion; 3. It must not foster excessive government entanglement with religion. ( LEMON VS. KURTZMAN )

2008, No. 15. Nationwide protests have erupted over rising gas prices, including disruptive demonstrations in many universities throughout the country. The Metro Manila State University, a public university, adopted a university-wide circular prohibiting mass demonstrations and rallies within the campus. Offended by the circular, militant students spread word that on the following Friday, all students were to wear black T-shirts as a symbol of their protest both against high gas prices and the university ban on demonstrations. The effort was only moderately successful. Nonetheless, university officials were outraged and compelled the student leaders to explain why they should not be expelled for violating the circular against demonstrations. The student leaders approached you for legal advice. They contended that they should not be expelled since they did not violate the circular, their protest action being neither a demonstration nor a rally since all they did was wear black T-shirts. What would you advise the students? Which one is an example of a Hecklers Veto? Veto by the mayor of an ordinance penalizing the writing of graffiti on the wall Veto by the mayor of an ordinance designating a freedom park where rallies without permit may be held 4

1. Manosca 2000, No. 8 Madlangbayan is the woner of a 500 square meter lot which was the birthplace of a religious sect who admittedly played an important role in Philippine history and culture. The National Historical Commission passed a resolution declaring it a national landmark and on its recommendation the lot was subjected to expropriation proceedings. This was opposed by Madlangbayan on the following grounds .(b) that those to be benefited by the expropriation would only

be the members of the religious sect of its founder. Resolve the opposition. 2. In re: Iglesia 3. Ang Ladlad v. COMELEC, 2010 3. Question 10, 1992: Recognizing the value of education in making the Philippine labor market attractive to foreign investment, the DECS offers subsidies to accredited colleges and universities in order to promote quality education. The DECS grants subsidy to a Catholic school which requires its students to take at elast 3 hours a week of religious instruction. 1. Is the subsidy permissible? yes, because the subsidy does not violate any law no, because the subsidy has no secular legislative purpose no, because the principal effect of the subsidy promotes religion no, because it can create entanglement between state and religion

the program which attacked other religions, the MTRCB required the organization to submit its tapes for review prior to airing. The group brought the case to court on the ground that the action of the MTRCB suppresses its freedom of speech and interferes with its right to free exercise of religion. Decide. [MTRCBs act is: proper, because freedom to believe is subject to the police power of the state proper, because freedom to act may be restricted by the state improper, because freedom to believe is absolute improper, because of separation of church and state 1. Ebralinag, 1997, No. 12, 2003, No. 12 Clear and Present Danger 2. Ang mga Kaanib 3. Victoriano v. Elizalde 4. Escritur: 1. What should be the states attitude towards religion? Benevolent neutrality 2. What test should be applied? Compelling interest test paramount and compelling 3. Has it discharged the burden? Prejudice? Soriano v. Laguardia, 587 SCRA 79 (2009) In an episode of Ang Dating Daan, Eliseo Soriano uttered the following statement: Lehitimong anak ng demonyo; sinungaling; Gago ka talaga Michael, masahol ka pa sa putang babae o di ba. Yung putang babae ang gumagana lang doon yung ibaba, [dito] kay Michael ang gumagana ang itaas, o di ba! O, masahol pa sa putang babae yan. Sabi ng lola ko masahol pa sa putang babae yan. Sobra ang kasinungalingan ng mga demonyong ito. ito. RELIGIOUS DISPUTES 1. As between religious groups (Iglesia) 2. Among members of same group (Austria, Taruc) An ecclesiastical or religious affair is one that concerns doctrine, creed or form of worship of the church, or the adoption and enforcement of regulation within the religious organization for the government of the membership and the power of excluding from such associations those deemed unworthy of membership

2. Presuming that you answer in the negative, would it make a difference if the subsidy were given solely in the form of laboratory equipment in chemistry and physics? 3. Presume, on the other hand, that the subsidy is given in the form of scholarship vouchers given directly to the student and which the student can use for paying tuition in any accredited school of his choice, whether religious or non-sectarian. Will your answer be different?

2010, No. 19: To instill religious awareness in the students of Doa Trinidad High School, a public school in Bulacan, the Parent- Teachers Association of the school contributed funds for the construction of a grotto and a chapel where ecumenical religious services and seminars are being held after school hours. The use of the school grounds for these purposes was questioned by a parent who does not belong to any religious group. As his complaint was not addressed by the school officials, he filed an administrative complaint against the principal before the DECS. Is the principal liable? Explain briefly. (5%) Free Exercise Clause Free exercise of religion is the freedom to believe, which is absolute, and the freedom to act, which may be restricted, in accordance with ones beliefs. Test: Clear and Present Danger

1998, No. 15 A religious organization has a weekly television program. The program presents and propagates its religious doctrines and compares their practices with those of of other religions. As the MTRCB found offensive several episodes of

XVI, 2009 Angelina, a married woman, is a Division Chief in the Department of Science and Technology. She had been living with a married man, not her husband, for the last fifteen (15) years. Administratively charged with immorality and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, she admits her live-in arrangement, but maintains that this conjugal understanding is in conformity with their religious beliefs. As members of the religious sect, Yahweh's

Observers, they had executed a Declaration of Observers, Pledging Faithfulness which has been confirmed and blessed by their Council of Elders. At the formal investigation of the administrative case, the Grand Elder of the sect affirmed Angelina's testimony and attested to the sincerity of Angelina and her partner in the profession of their faith. If you were to judge this case, will you exonerate Angelina? Reasons. (3%) Meanwhile, Jenny, also a member of Yahweh's Observers, was severely disappointed at the manner Observers, the Grand Elder validated what she considered was an obviously immoral conjugal arrangement between Angelina and her partner. Jenny filed suit in court, seeking the removal of the Grand Elder from the religious sect on the ground that his act in supporting Angelina not only ruined the reputation of their religion, but also violated the constitutional policy upholding the sanctity of marriage and the solidarity of the family. Will Jenny's case prosper? Explain your answer. (2%) Sec. 6. 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. Sec. 6. A: Liberty of abode: Restricted by: 1. Congress Within the limits prescribed by law 2. Court lawful order of the court (Yap Case) 1996, No. 2: The military commander in charge of the operation against rebel groups directed the inhabitants of the island which would be the target of attacks by government forces to evacuate the area and offered the residents temporary military hamlet. Can the military commander force the residents to transfer their places of abode without court order? Explain.

B. Right to travel: Who can restrict? 1. Courts, of people out on bail 2. Executive and administrative officials, if they do not act arbitrarily. Meaning that there is a law authorizing them and they do it on the basis of national security, public safety and public health 3. Congress [Silverio Case] -Marcos case -Mirasol Conditions when court may allow travel: 1. Prove urgency 2. State duration 3. Obtain consent of surety/ Bar--1991/No. 6:Mr. Esteban Krony, A Filipino citizen, is arrested for the crime of smuggling. He posts bail for his release. Subsequently, he jumps bail and is about to leave the country when the DFA cancels his passport. He sues the DFA claiming violation of his freedom to travel citing Sec. 6 Art. III, to wit: 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. Decide. Which statement is legally correct? [5%] Sec. 6 of the Bill of Rights with respect to the right to travel: (a) includes the right of citizens to enter another country (b) covers the right of citizens to return to the Philippines guarantees the right of aliens to come to the Philippines (d) protects the right of citizens to leave the country Sec. 7. The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access 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. Sec. 7: A. Right to Information B. Access to official records Matters of public concern those which the public may want to know, because it directly affects their lives or because they arouse the interest of a citizen 1. Bantay Republic v. COMELEC 2. Legaspi CS eligible 3. Hilado Are all court records pertaining to a case public records? 4. Chaves- not only consummated contracts, but also steps leading to a contract, but not inter-agency recommendations. Foreign affairs? 5. Akbayan diplomatic notes [presumptively privilege] 6. . Chavez Bids submitted for evaluation, official recommendation? official acts and transactions

yes, because of the risk to the lives of the people that might be caused by the military operation yes, because executive officials, including the police and the military, can restrict the liberty of abode yes, because forcing people to transfer their residence does not violate any law no, because only the courts or Congress by means of a law can restrict the liberty of abode 1998, 8- Juan Casanova contracted Hansens disease with open lesions. A law requires that lepers be isolated upon petition of the City health Officer. The wife of Juan Casanova wrote a letter to the City Health Officer to have her formerly philandering husband confined in some isolated leprosarium. Juan Casanova challenged the constitutionality of the law as violating his liberty of abode. Will the suit prosper?

7. Bayan v. Ermita: Legislative investigation 8. Who has standing to enforce compliance in courts? Remedy 9. Exceptions: Cabinet sessions, court deliberations, diplomatic and military and national security matters, trade secrets. XIV, 2009 The Philippine Government is negotiating a new security treaty with the United States which could involve engagement in joint military operations of the two countries' armed forces. A loose organization of Filipinos, the Kabataan at Matatandang Makabansa (KMM) wrote the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and the Department of National Defense (DND) demanding disclosure of the details of the negotiations, as well as copies of the minutes of the meetings. The DFA and the DND refused, contending that premature disclosure of the offers and counter-offers between the parties could jeopardize on-going negotiations with another country. KMM filed suit to compel disclosure of the negotiation details, and be granted access to the records of the meetings, invoking the constitutional right of the people to information on matters of public concern. Decide with reasons. (3%) Will your answer be the same if the information sought by KMM pertains to contracts entered into by the Government in its proprietary or commercial capacity? Why or why not? (3%) Which statement is correct: (a) any citizen who questions in court the withholding of information must satisfy locus standi by showing direct injury (b) the right to information is a fundamental right and any restriction is presumed unconstitutional all information in the possession of the government may be accessed by citizens under Sec. 7 (d) the enactment of the Freedom of Information Act is a pre condition for the enjoyment of the right to information

(a) all court records pertaining to a case should be made accessible to the public (b) all pleadings and other documents submitted by the parties should be accessible to the public orders and decisions issued by the judge related to the case should be accessible to the public (d) access to records is a right that cannot be invoked against courts Sec. 8. The right of the people , including those employed in the public and private sectors, to form unions, associations or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged. What the right to association guarantees? The right to join any association The right to refuse to join Exception: Close-shop agreement Exception to the exception: freedom of religion What does it guarantee? 1. PAFLU 2. Philippine Statehood USA 3. Occena 4. Tarnate v. Noriel

But take note of Bell-Air, also PADCOM v. Ortigas [voluntary], but STA Clara? Bar Q, 2000, No. 12: Are employees in the public sector allowed to form unions? To strike? Why? Union A has a close shop agreement with company X. B a new employee refuses to join on the ground that his religion prohibits him from doing so. Can B be forced to join the union? a. yes, because he is bound by the close shop agreement like everyone else b. yes, because the right to association does not include the right not to be a member of an association b. no, because no person can be compelled to join an association against his will c. no, because freedom of religion is superior to a close shop agreement CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II Section 9: Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation Eminent domain is the power of the government to take over private property for public use after payment of just compensation.

Which statement is legally correct? A. Under Sec. 7, citizens can demand from government officials that they be given abstracts, summaries and copies of official records. B. All records kept by any government agency are matters of public concern to which citizens can demand access. C. One can demand information from the Civil Service Commission about the weight and height of an employee when s/he entered government service. D. Information on foreign loans obtained by the government may be excluded from the scope of Sec. 7.

Which statement is correct? 7

Who CANNOT expropriate? a. the City of Davao b. Davao City Water District c. Globe Telecom d. Commission on Elections

Principles: Inherent in the State, but exercised by Congress and those expressly authorized by law. Can the COMELEC expropriate? PPI and Telebap Outline: 1. Taking 2. Public Use 3. Just compensation I. Taking: 1. Physical possession 2. Impairment of use Gutierrez transmission lines Ibrahim - underground tunnels Andaya flooded portion Ayala Land free parking How much should expropriator pay? NPC v. Purefoods, 2008 RA 6395

since they could not agree on the rent, X cancelled the lease, but DECS instituted expropriation proceedings. The court ordered compensation based on the value in 1990. The court is correct because in 1960: a. DECS did not enter the private property; b. The entrance was not under warrant or color of legal authority; c. The property was not devoted to public use ; d. The entrance did not oust the owner and deprive him of beneficial enjoyment . II. Public Use Use by the Public Indirect advantage or benefit to the public/Sumolong/Manosca Limits of second meaning: Manotoc See also Masikip [Homeowners Association]

In expropriation for a right of way by the National Power Corporation, just compensation is equivalent to: (a) the full market value of the property as described in the owners title (b) the full market value of the portion affected by the right of way (c) 10% of the value of the property covered by the right of way clearance (d) the extent of the loss suffered by the owner as he may be able to prove during trial Elements of Taking: 1 . Expropriator must enter the private property; 2. The entrance must be for more than a limited period; 3. The entrance should be under warrant or color of legal authority; 4. The property must be devoted to public use or otherwise informally appropriated or injuriously affected; 5. The entrance must be to oust the owner and deprive him of beneficial enjoyment . ( REPUBLIC VS. CASTELLVI ) Examples NPC v. CA, Tan v. Republic, Tiongson v. NHA In 1980, NPC entered the property of X thinking that it belong to the City of Iligan. It built its power plants and paid royalties to the City. In 1990, it acknowledged that the lot was owned by X and accordingly instituted expropriation proceedings against X. The court ordered the City of Iligan to pay just compensation based on the value in 1990. The court is correct since there was no taking in 1978 because NPC did not : (a) enter the property for more than a momentary period (b) enter under warrant or color of legal authority (c) devote the property to public use (d) did not oust the owner and deprive him of beneficial enjoyment of the property Since 1960, DECS rented the property of X on a yearly basis, and constructed a school thereon. In 1990, 8

1. May the owner recover the property on the ground that expropriator diverted property to another public purpose/or abandons it? Reyes v. NHA 2. As an exception, when may owner be allowed to recover? Heirs of Moreno 3. Must the condition be expressed in the decision? Amount to be paid?

Rights/Obligations of parties: Lozada, etc Expropriator: 1. Return property 2. May give owner option to buy improvements, but if he declines, remove them 3. Keep income and fruits of the property Owner: 1. Return just compensation, without interest 2. Pay expropriator necessary expenses for maintenance of property to the extent he got benefited 3. Pay interest only if there is delay in returning just compensation after expropriator has reconvenyed

Once the public purpose of the expropriation is abandoned, it is correct to say that: (a) as a rule, the expropriated property is restored to the previous owner (b) property is restored only if the expropriation is made on condition that it will be returned if the purpose is abandoned return is only applicable if the condition is stated in the court order allowing the expropriation (d) return is not permitted because the decree of expropriation gives to the State a fee simple title 3. Just Compensation Must be in cash, except Santos Determination is a judicial function [Purefoods and Libunao RA 6395 only 10% for right of way?] Basis: Time of taking or time of filing, whichever comes first, except City of Cebu case 4. What is the rate of interest if expropriator fails to pay on time? Republic v. CA, Reyes v. NHA 12%

[Libunao? 6% apparently if judgment is satisfied on time] 5. Can the owner recover the property if expropriator fails to pay just compensation after an unreasonable lapse of time? Republic v. Lim

In 1978, the NHA took possession of parcels of land pursuant of PD No. 1669 and PD No. 1670, and set up a socialized housing project for squatters. On May 27, 1987, the Supreme Court declared the decrees unconstitutional and the expropriation of the parcels of land null and void for being violative of the owners right to due process. On September 14, 1987, the NHA instituted expropriation of the same parcels of land. From what date should just compensation be based? (a) 1978, because that was the time of the actual taking (b) 1987, because the entrance in 1978 was not under color of title 1987, because the property was not devoted to public purpose in 1978 (d) 1987, because the utilization of the property did not oust the owner and deprive him of beneficial enjoyment of the property Non-payment of just compensation for a long period of time, as a rule: (a) entitles the previous owner to return of the property without further obligations to the expropriator (b) entitles the owner to the market value of the property based at the time when payment is actually made entitles him to the payment of the market value at the time of taking, plus interest. (d) entitles him to the return of the property provided he refunds the just compensation previously received When can expropriator enter the property? After filing of complaint, With notice to owner Deposit with authorized government depository Amount equivalent to assess value for taxation purposes [LGC 15% Expropriation bu LGUs

1993, 5: In expropriation proceedings: 1. What legal interest should be used in the computation of interest on just compensation? 2. Can the judge validly withhold issuance of the writ of possession until full payment of the final value of the expropriated property? 1990, 2: The City of Cebu passed an ordinance proclaiming the expropriation of a 10 hectare property of C Company which is already a developed commercial center. The city proposed to operate the commercial center in order to finance a housing project for city employees in the vacant portion of the said property. The ordinance fixed the price of the land and the value of the improvements to be paid C Company on the basis of the prevailing land value and cost of construction. As counsel for c company, give 2 constitutional objections to the validity of the ordinance.

The ordinance is void because: Void, because it constitutes taking of property without just compensation Void, because the determination of what constitutes just compensation is a judicial function Valid, because the purpose of the expropriation is to convert the property for public use Valid, because the ordinance authorized payment of just compensation 2004, No. 9: The City of San Rafael passed an ordinance authorizing the city Mayor, assisted by the police, to remove all advertising signs displaced or exposed to public view in the main city street, for being offensive to sight or otherwise a nuisance. AM, whose advertising agency owns and rents out many of the billboards ordered removed by the City Mayor, claims that the City should pay for the destroyed billboards at their current market value since the City has appropriated them for the public purpose of city beautification. The Mayor refuses to pay, so AM is suing the City and the Mayor for damages arising from the taking of his property without due process nor just compensation. Will AMs suit prosper?

It must be based on an ordinance, not a resolution; VM Realty, Saguitan There is no need to secure DAR clearance even if property is converted to non-agricultural [Province of Camarines] Provincial board cannot disapprove on the ground of lack of necessity. [Monday] CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II Section 9: Eminent Domain Police Power and Eminent Domain: Domain: 1 . If the property is taken in the exercise of eminent domain, the owner is entitled to compensation, but in police power, he is not . 2. In eminent domain, property is taken for public use, but in police power, it is destroyed in the interest of public health, safety, morals or public welfare .

a. yes, because the city is depriving X of property without due process of law and should pay damage b. yes, because the city is exercising its power of eminent domain and taking private property without just compensation c. no, because the city is exercising its police power of abating a nuisance d. no, because the right to property is not absolute and may be restricted by law 1989, No. 16: A law provides that in the event of expropriation, the amount to be paid to a landowner as compensation shall be either the sworn valuation made by the owner or the official assessment thereof, whichever is lower. Can the landowner successfully challenge the law in court? Discuss briefly your answer.

1996, 4: The City of Pasig initiated expropriation proceedings on a one ehctare lot which is part of a 10-hectare parcel of land devoted to the growing of vegetables. The purpose of the expropriation is to sue the land as a relocation site for 200 families squatting along the Pasig river. 1. Can the owner of the property oppose the expropriation on the ground that only 200 out of the more than 10,000 squatter families in Pasig will benefit from the expropriation? 2. Can DAR require the city to first secure and authority before converting the use of the land from agricultural to housing? 1987, No. 16: Pasay City filed an expropriation proceedings against several landowners for the construction of an aqueduct for flood control on a barangay. Clearly, only the residents of that barangay would be benefited by the project. Is the expropriation proper? 1992, No. 11: The PCO, a government agency, wishes to establish a direct computer and fax linkup with trading centers in the US. The advanced technology of a private company, PCT, is necessary for that purpose but negotiations between the parties have failed. The Republic, in behalf of the PCO, files suit to compel the telecommunications company to execute a contract with PCO for PCOs access and use of the companys facilities. Decide. If the case will not prosper, what alternative will you propose to the Republic? 2008, No. 4: The Congress passed a law authorizing the authorizing the NHAto expropirate or acquire private property for the redevelopment of slum areas, as well as to lease or resell the property to private developers to carry out the redevelopment plan. Pursuant to the law, the NHA acquired all the properties within a targeted badly blighted areas in San Nicolas, manila, except a well-maintained drug and convenience store that poses no blight or health problem itself. Thereafter, NHA sold the properties it has thus far acquired to a private realty company for redevelopment. Thus, the NHA initiated expropriation proceedings against the store owner who protested that his property could not be taken because it is not residential or slum housing. He also contended that his property is being condemned for a private purpose, not a public one, noting the NHAs sale of the entire area except his property to a private party. If you were the judge, how would you decide the case? III, 2009 The Municipality of Bulalakaw, Leyte, passed Ordinance No. 1234, authorizing the expropriation of two parcels of land situated in the poblacion as the site of a freedom park, and appropriating the funds needed therefor. Upon review, the |Sangguniang |Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Leyte disapproved the ordinance because the municipality has an existing freedom park which, though smaller in size, is still suitable for the purpose, and to pursue expropriation would be needless expenditure of the people's money. Is the

disapproval of the ordinance correct? Explain your answer. (2%) 2009, XVII Filipinas Computer Corporation (FCC), a local manufacturer of computers and computer parts, owns a sprawling plant in a 5,000-square meter lot in Pasig City. To remedy the city's acute housing shortage, compounded by a burgeoning population, the Sangguniang Panglungsod authorized the City Mayor to negotiate for the purchase of the lot. The Sanggunian intends to subdivide the property into small residential lots to be distributed at cost to qualified city residents. But FCC refused to sell the lot. Hard pressed to find a suitable property to house its homeless residents, the City filed a complaint for eminent domain against FCC. If FCC hires you as lawyer, what defense or defenses would you set up in order to resist the expropriation of the property? Explain. (5%) If the Court grants the City's prayer for expropriation, but the City delays payment of the amount determined by the court as just compensation, can FCC recover the property from Pasig City? Explain. (2%) Suppose the expropriation succeeds, but the City decides to abandon its plan to subdivide the property for residential purposes having found a much bigger lot, can FCC legally demand that it be allowed to repurchase the property from the City of Pasig? Why or why not? (2%)

2010, XIII True or False. A valid and definite offer to buy a property is a prerequisite to expropriation initiated by a local government unit. (0.5%) Re-classification of land by a local government unit may be done through a resolution. Section 10: Impairment of Contracts No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be enacted. A law impairs the obligations of contracts when it changes the terms of the contract: 1 . In time or mode of performance; 2. Imposes new conditions; 3. Dispenses with those expressed; 4. Authorizes for its satisfaction something different . Basic Principles Police power, eminent domain and taxation are superior to non-impairment Freedom of religion is superior Can be invoked only against statutes, ordinances, but not against quasi-judicial acts [BPI Case rehabilitation] Usual answers/cases There is no contract to speak of [Gonzalo, Picop (TLA also IFMA), Lim v. Pacquing]

10

Police power, etc.. is superior [Caleon v. Agus (subleasing), La Insular, Beltran [United BF Homeowners v. Mayor] Contract was not impaired [Siska (notice or rescission), Hontanosas] Law is not retroactive [Banat/Serrano] Bar Q: No. 18, 2001:: Pedro bought a parcel of land from Smart Corp., a realty firm engaged in developing and selling lots to the public. One of the restrictions in the deed of sale which was annotated in the title is that the lot shall be used by the buyer exclusively for residential purposes. A main highway having been constructed across the subdivision, the area became commercial in nature. The municipality later passed a zoning ordinance declaring the area as commercial. Pedro constructed a commercial bank building on his lot. Smart Corp went to court to stop him because he is violating the restriction imposed on the contract and title. The corporation contends that the zonign ordinance cannot nullify the contractual obligation assumed by the buyer. Decide.

The ordinance is void because it impaired a contract The ordinance is valid because the contract has been consummated and no longer exists between Smart Corp and Pedro The ordinance is valid because, being an exercise of police power by the municipality, it is superior to the non-impairment clause of the Constitution The ordinance is valid because it did not impair the terms of the contract between Smart Corp and Pedro

Sec. 11. Free access to the courts [and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal assistance] shall not be denied to any person by reason of poverty.

11