Due Process History of Due Process Origin traceable to the Magna Carta in England which was wrung by the

barons from Prince John in 1215. The thrust of the magna carta was centered mainly on the procedural aspect of due process. Concept of Due Process as enshrined in the Magna Carta says no man shall be taken or imprisoned or disseized or outlawed, or in any manner destroyed; nor shall we go upon him, nor send upon him, but by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land It is centered more on the implementation of the law which has something to do with the procedural aspect of the law. Concept was then exported to the US. Due process thus assumed another facet. It has now two aspects : the SUBSTANTIVE and the PROCEDURAL. What is due process? No particular definition on what due process is in the constitution. Is this a result of oversight or inadvertence in the part of the framers of the constitution? NO Or is this rather omission intentional? YES Framers deemed it prudent not to define the term due process otherwise there will be a tendency that the courts will be bound to that definition. (read page 100 of cruz) Can only describe, no exact definition. Justice Fernando described due process as responsiveness to the supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of justice. Justice Frankfurter said it is the embodiment of the sporting idea of fair play. Section 1 Article 3 of the 1987 Constitution No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.

To deprive is to take away forcibly, to prevent from possessing, enjoying or using something. As applied to due process, deprivation connotes denial of the right to life, liberty or property. How about if there is no taking of a property or a right? In that there is already an imposition of a prohibition in the exercise of ones right. There is only a prohibition in respect to the enjoyment of the thing owned by a person. Wouldnt it amount to deprivation within the purview of Sec. 1 Art 3 of the 1987 constitution? YES Deprivation does not only mean actual dispossession in that it would also include imposition of order or prohibition in the exercise of ones right. What is prohibited is deprivation of life, liberty or property without due process of law. If a person commits a crime and upon trial he was found guilty as charged then the court may deprive him of his liberty by sentencing him to suffer imprisonment. Is this allowed? YES Even if there was deprivation, what is important is that there is observance of due process. If ones property is taken for public use then upon payment of just compensation and for public purpose then the deprivation is deemed allowed. LIFE Not only refers to our physical or animal existence but also refers to our enjoyment of god-given faculties than can make his life worth living. Ex. You have talent to sing government cannot deprive you that. LIBERTY It means freedom. What is protected in Sec. 1 Article 3 is our freedom to do what is right. Ex. Although you have the freedom of speech, you cant insult or tell someone that he has a face that only his mother can love. You cannot use it to the detriment or prejudice of the rights of others. PROPERTY Sec. 1 Art. 3 also protects our property rights. Property refers to anything that is capable of ownership and be the subject of contract. It may be real properties like lands and buildings or personal property like laptops and cellphones, it may be an intangible property which cannot be perceived by our senses. What about public office? Is this protected by Sec. 1 Art. 3? Would it count in the purview of property as used in the law? NO Similarly, a license or a franchise cannot be considered as property as used in the law because these may be revoked by the state in the exercise of its police power.

PERSON Definition of person as used in the Sec. 1 Art. 3 Refers to natural persons like human beings including both citizen and alien. It includes not only property rights but as well as their right to life and liberty. Does it include juridical persons (corporations and partnerships)? YES, they are covered by the protection but only insofar as their property is concerned (property rights). DEPRIVATION What does it mean?

Due process has two aspects: SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS & PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS This has something to do with the intrinsic validity of a law. Focal point of the inquiry is not on the enforcement of the law but on the intrinsic validity thereof. Inquirys central point is the existence or absence of a valid governmental purpose such that if congress would enact a law then we can attack the same that it does not comply with the substantial aspect of due process if such law does not have a lawful subject. Ex. A law prohibiting a person from sleeping in his private room. PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS It has something to do with the manner by which the law is enforced. It is expressed in the immortal cry of Themistocles to Eurybiades: Strike, but hear me first! In one case, Daniel Webster said that the justice that procedural due process guarantees is the one which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgement only after trial. Twin Requirement of Procedural due process 1. Notice 2. Hearing Essential Elements of Procedural Due Process. Neither of these elements can be eliminated without running afoul of the constitutional guaranty. (case of Ynot vs.IAC) Requirement of procedural due process in judicial proceedings: 1. There must be an impartial court or tribunal clothed with judicial power to hear and determine the matter before it.

under rule 137. You cant see anything that can inhibit the judge (not related or no pecuniary interest etc.) so what should you do to move for inhibition? Pangita bikil with the judge so you have reason for inhibition 2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant and over the property which is the subject matter of the proceeding.

If it is a civil case, how can the court validly acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant where the action is an action in persona (collection of a sack of money), personal action? An Action in persona means that it only affects the private rights of the parties, it does not affect the right of the public or the whole world then jurisdiction is acquired by the court upon service of summons upon the person of the defendant. Or even without the formal summons but the defendant voluntarily submits himself to the jurisdiction of the court by filing an answer. But if the defendant filed a motion to dismiss because the court has no jurisdiction over me, then he is not said to have submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court. With regards to the plaintiff, when it files the complaint he validly subjects himself to the jurisdiction of the court. If the civil case is an action quasi in rem or something which affects the property or the right of the general public, then jurisdiction may be acquired by the court through publication of the complaint in the newspaper of general circulation. Ex. Nullity of marriage... summons may be had through publication in the newspaper of general circulation. Ex. Actions involving property rights, parcel of land. Summons through publication. What if the case is a penal case? How can the court acquire jurisdiction over the person of the accused? The court acquires jurisdiction as soon as the accused is placed under arrest (upon the arrest of the person) 3. The defendant must be given an opportunity to be heard.

What is required is only an opportunity to be heard. It is enough that the court affords someone a chance to be heard such that the person goes away with the chance given, then it amount to have waived the chance to be heard. In civil cases, after service of summons, the defendant did not file an answer, then the court may declare the defendant in default and can now render judgement by default. Actual hearing is not necessary. Trial type hearing is not always necessary or required. In criminal cases this is always required but in labor cases, it is not a requirement. It may be decided on the basis of the position papers of both parties ( ejectment cases also.)

In our legal system, the jurisdiction of the courts is defined by law such that not all cases can be heard by the municipal trial court. If the judge is bias or he or his immediate family has pecuniary interest or has some relation by fourth degree consanguinity or affinity to any of the parties, he must inhibit himself from the case (137 of the rules of court). (refer to cruz) If also the judge happens to be the guardian, trustee or executor of an estate and the case is pending in his sala, he must inhibit himself. What is your recourse if you already perceived that the judge is already biased? Then the situation is not covered by the provision

Are there instances where the requisite of notice and hearing is validly dispensed with without violation of due process? EXCEPTION Cancellation of passport of a person sought for the commission of a crime Preventive suspension of a civil servant facing administrative charges Distraint of properties for tax delinquency Padlocking or restaurants found to be insanitary or of theatres showing obscene movies Abatement of nuisance per se (represents immediate danger to the welfare of the community When administrative agencies are exercising their quasi-legislative functions (see reviewer, 9)

If you pass petition for certiorari, the SC will send out a 1 page resolution called minute resolution. How about the publication requirement, is it required for procedural due process? YES How about appeal in a given case, is this part of procedural due process or within the constitution? It depends, as a rule, appeal is not a constitutional right. It is only a statutory right. Meaning you can only file an appeal if there is a law or a rule allowing you to pursue the remedy of an appeal. Conversely, where the law does not allow you to file an appeal, then you cannot invoke denial of due process. It is not an integral part of procedural due process. Ex. Collection suit where the amount is less than 100K, court renders judgement and makes them pay...(administrative circular 8-8-7 of SC) cannot apply remedy of appeal for defendant. Section 2 Article 8 of the 1987 Constitution The Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe, and apportion the jurisdiction of the various courts but may not deprive the SC of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in section 5 thereof. Appeal may be afforded by congress through enactment of law, conversely can also pass a law denying a person appeal. But it should not deprive SC of its appellate jurisdiction over the cases enumerated in section 5 article 8. (refer to Sec. 5 Art. 8 for the cases) ____________________________________________ Why is publication required? To give notice to the public of the existence of such law. APPEAL The right to appeal is not essential to the right to a hearing. Except when guaranteed by the Constitution, appeal may be allowed or denied by the legislature in its discretion. EXCEPTION SECTION 5(2) ARTICLE 8 OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION 1. All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question. All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty imposed in relation thereto. All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue.

What if the case involves a case with a public official and that during the pendency of the case, that person is place under preventive suspension for 30 days? Is the preventive suspension violative of procedural due process? NO. It is an exception to the rule. Similarly the issuance of temporary restraining order is valid. If it appears in the complaint that a grave or irreparable damage will be suffered by the applicant before the matter could be heard on notice, the court may issue such without prior hearing a TRO. Also the cancellation of the issuance of passport who is sought in the commission on offense may be had even without the opportunity to controvert the charges. Also, issuance of warrant of arrest is valid. Also, attachment of property for tax delinquency is valid. Closure of restaurants which was found unsanitary is valid. 4. Judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing.

Section 14 Article 8 of the 1987 Constitution No Decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based. No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a decision of the court shall be refused due course or denied without stating the legal basis thereof. Means that the decision should mention or particularize the facts obtaining in a given case, the evidence presented as well as the law relied upon by the court in coming up with a particular decision. What about the minute resolution issued by the supreme court? YES it is valid because.

2.

3.

4. 5.

All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher. All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved.

If there is a law prohibiting the distribution and sale of these magazines even to adult persons, it would be unfair and would result to inequality. Universal application is not required. Such that equal protection of the law is served when there is already equality among equals. In other words, there is already observance of equality under the law if persons or things belonging to the same class must be treated alike both as to the rights conferred and the obligations or responsibilities imposed. The equal protection of the law would permit a valid classification but peripheral or superficial distinctions is not a valid ground or requirement in order to have a valid classification. There is already valid observance of equal protection of the law if the distinction is based upon substantial differences. And far more important is that substantive equality is not enough. Such that even if the law appear on its face to be valid or fair, the same law will be declared as invalid if in the application thereof, there is inequality. It is important that the law must be applied and enforced equally. According to Cruz, the law may be invalidated if it is administered with an evil eye and uneven hand, so as to unjustly benefit some and prejudice others. Yick Wo v. Hopkins Ordinance giving license to establishment of laundries in an American city was annulled by the U.S. Supreme Court. SC said law is valid but not in the implementation. I allowed further classification. Only Chinese is discriminated. (see also People vs. Vera: in the implementation thereof there is a valid inequality) Equal protection of the law does not mean universal application of the law. It simply means that all persons or things must be treated right both as to the right conferred and responsibilities imposed. But generally, superficial difference is not a valid ground for any classification such that there yet not be a valid classification on the basis of once skin color or on the basis on the color of hair or forehead. There are instances where physical difference may be a valid ground for differentiation. Ex. Women prohibited to be hired as porters. Joining the armed forces with height requirement.. Beauty contest

Preliminary investigation Is this an integral part of procedural due process? It depends... If penalty imposable is imprisonment ranging from 4 yrs 2 months and 1 day.... this is a matter of right. ADMINISTRATIVE DUE PROCESS REQUISITES: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The right to hearing, which includes the right to present ones case and submit evidence in support thereof. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented The decision must have something to support itself. The evidence must be substantial. The decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing, or at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its or his own independent consideration of the law and facts of the controversy and not simply accept the views of a subordinate in arriving at a decision. The board or body should, in all controversial questions, render its decision in such a manner that the parties to the proceeding can know the various issues involved, and the reason for the decision rendered.

6.

7.

EQUAL PROTECTION PERSONS PROTECTED Includes or is available to all natural persons as well as juridical (partnerships or corporation). Artificial persons are entitled to the protection only insofar as their property is concerned. As to natural persons, it includes the citizens as well as the foreigners. Generally, foreigners are accorded with the equal protection of the law in the same manner as the citizens. Term equal protection like due process is not particularly defined in the constitution. The purpose of the intentional ambiguity is to provide for more adjustability to the swiftly moving facts of our changing society. Equal protection of the law does not mean that laws should be given a universal application or laws must be equally applied to all persons. If there is universal application of law, it would result to inequality. Ex. Distribution of matured magazines (FHM, Playboy, etc)

Classification MUST, as an INDESPENSABLE requisite, NOT BE ARBITRARY. Equal protection of the law allows classification provided that the requirements are met: 1. Must be based upon substantial distinctions

violation because it was but limited to the present condition. Would not apply to new companies. Luz v araneta, held imposition for rehab of sugar industry. Imposed on all those engaged in sugar industry.

Ex. Differentiation bet. Men and women for purposes of prohibiting women from being employed as porters, then it is valid. Differentiate alien from citizen. Citizen has more solicitude for the national interest. Alien allegiance to local state is merely transient. (see Quinto vs. COMELEC, there is a valid differentiation between an elected public official and an appointed public official. Appointed public officials are deemed ipso facto resign upon (wa nkoooo kaintindi ni galleon!! Nganu mani siya mustorya oi!!! Read case nala!! Duhers!) SC said that appointed officials are deemed ipso facto resign upon filing of their certificate of candidacy while elected officials are not.) 1987 admin code, prohibition on appointed official may not engage on partisan activity Lagman vs. Ochoa SC said there is no substantial difference or distinction bet. Arroyo admin vis-a-vis past admin. Arroyo admin may not be treated as a class on its own. School alliance vs quisumbing Stipulation giving higher salaries to foreign bases instructors and housing allowances. Not valid classification bet. foreign and local teachers. Not better. Must be based on substantial distinction. 2. Must be germane to the purpose of the law

4.

Must apply equally to all members of the class

While it true that there is valid a classification bet. imported vis a vis local cigarettes, law still invalid if between the same there is a distinction. Ex. Higher tax rate on champion, lower tax rate on hope, invalid. Law invalid because rule states that all persons or things belonging to the same class shall be treated alike, must be equally applied. Lagman v ochoa Arroyo was singled out. Cannot be treated any differently to past admins.

Yecho v hopkins Sc: law is valid but in the implementation it is invalid. I allowed further classification. Only chinese is discriminated. Tata v doe Validity of ra 8180 oil proce law. Sec 5, amount equivalent to . Violative. Prejudicial to new players.

Must have some relevance to the purpose of the law or objective to be accomplished. Ex. Women law percentage in bar exam whereas men have higher. Not germane to the law. No showing men are more intelligent. Dumlao v comelec Law prohibiting official who retired from service, 65, from seeking elective post. Sc: valid classification. Relevant of purpose of law that is geared towards having new blood in governance. The youth can perform better than oldies in providing public service. 3. Must not be limited to existing conditions only

Where does equal protection originated?

Ormoc v municipal treasurer (violative) Imposing tax on ormoc sugar. Invalid cause it was limited to present condition. Under ordinance, name was specifically mentioned thereby if there is new sugar company, it will not be assessed by the ordinance because there was a name (ormoc sugar inc.) There was