Consti Reviewer Bill of Rights
Consti Reviewer Bill of Rights
Consti Reviewer Bill of Rights
Bill of Rights
The Bill of Rights governs the relationship between the individual and the State.
Its concern is not the relation between individuals or between the private individual
and other individuals. What the Bill of Rights does is to declare some forbidden zones
in the private sphere inaccessible to any power holder. (Sponsorship Speech of
Commissioner Bernas)
The principle that the Bill of Rights applies only to actions taken by state officials
does not necessarily mean that a private individual cannot violate the liberty of another.
Violation of the Bill of Rights precisely as a constitutional guarantee can be done only by
public officials. But almost all these liberties are also guaranteed by Article 32 of the
Civil Code, thus making private violations actionable even if the violation does not have
a constitutional consequence. (Bernas, commentary)
Even in the absence of implementing legislation, the guarantees in the Bill of Rights
are self-implementing, whereas the guarantees regarding social justice and human rights,
require implementing legislation.
Hierarchy of Rights
Due process is a guaranty against any arbitrariness on the part of the government,
whether committed by the legislative, the executive or the judiciary.
It is a law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and
renders judgment only after trial. (Dartmouth v Woodward)
Right to Life – The Right to Life is not merely a right to the preservation of life but also
the security of the limbs and organs of the human body against any unlawful harm.
Right to Liberty – Liberty refers to something which is more than mere freedom from
physical restraint or the bounds of a prison. It means freedom to go where one may
choose, and to act in such manner, not inconsistent with the equal rights of others, as his
judgment may dictate for the promotion of his happiness; to pursue such callings and
advocacies as may be most suitable to develop his capacities, and give them their highest
enjoyment, within the bounds of law. (Munn v Illinois)
Right to Property – Right over property i.e., to enjoy its use and possession. Property
refers to things which are susceptible of appropriation and which are already possessed
and found in the possession of man.
a. Substantive
b. Procedural
i. Judicial
The court or tribunal trying the case is clothed with judicial power to hear and
determine the matter before it
Jurisdiction is lawful acquired over the person of the accused
The accused is given opportunity to be heard and
Judgment is rendered only upon lawful hearing (Marquez v Sandiganbayan)
ii. Administrative
Right to HEARING
The tribunal must consider the Evidence presented
Evidence presented must be substantial, which means relevant evidence as a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion
The decision must have something to support itself
The decision must be based on evidence presented during hearing or at least
contained in the record and disclosed by the parties
The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its own independent
consideration of the law and facts of the controversy
The decision must be rendered in a manner that the parties know the various
issued involved and the reason for the decision rendered.
It may be stated as a general rule that notice and hearing are note essential to the
validity of administrative action where the administrative body acts in the exercise of
executive or administrative or legislative functions; but where a public administrative
body acts in a judicial or quasi-judicial matter, and its acts are particular and immediate
rather than general and prospective, the person whose rights or property may be affected
by the action entitled to notice and hearing. (Philippine Communications Satelite Corp. v
Cloribel)
c. Levels of scrutiny
The government must show that the challenged classification serves an important
state interestand that the classification is at least substantially related to serving that
interest. (Biraogo v Phil Truth Commission)
Strict scrutiny refers to the standard for determining the quality and the amount of
governmental interest brought to justify the regulation of fundamental freedoms. Strict
scrutiny is used today to test the validity of laws dealing with the regulation of speech,
gender, or race as well as other fundamental rights as expansion from its earlier
applications to equal protection. (Separate Opinion of Justice Leone; Spark v Quezon
City)