constitutional rights due process equal protection notes

8/3/2019 Constitutional Rights Due Process Equal Protection Notes

1/4

C O N S T I T U T I O N A L R I G H T S & P R I V I L E G E SArt. III, 1987 Constitution

A. Nature of Provisions

B. Against whom enforceable

People vs Domasian

As for the allegation that the seizure of the documents used for comparison with the ransom notewas made without a search warrant, it suffices to say that such documents were taken by Agrahimself and not by the NBI agents or other police authorities. We held in the case ofPeople vs.

Andre Marti,20that the Bill of Rights cannot be invoked against acts of private individuals,being directed only against the government and its law-enforcement agencies and limitation onofficial action.

D U E P R O C E S S O F L A W

A. In General

US vs Ling Su Fan

"Due process of law" is process or proceedings according to the law of the land. "Dueprocess of law" is not that the law shall be according to the wishes of all the inhabitants ofthe state, but simply

First. That there shall be a law (authority) prescribed in harmony with the generalpowers of the legislative department of the Government;

Second. That this law shall be reasonable in its operation;

Third. That it shall be enforced according to the regular methods of procedure prescribed;and

Fourth. That it shall be applicable alike to all the citizens of the state or to all of a class.

When a person is deprived of his life or liberty or property, therefore, under a lawprescribed by the proper lawmaking body of the state and such law is within the power ofsaid department to make and is reasonable, and is then enforced according to the regularmethods of procedure prescribed, and is applicable alike to all the citizens or to allcitizens of a particular class within the state, such person is not deprived of his property

or of his life, or of his liberty without due process of law. When life, liberty, and propertyare in question there must be in every instance judicial proceedings, and that therequirement implies a written accusation and hearing before an impartial tribunal withproper jurisdiction, an opportunity to defend and a conviction and a judgment beforepunishment can be inflicted, depriving one of his life, liberty or property. (Story on theConstitution, 5th ed., secs. 1943-1946; Principles of Constitutional Law, Cooley, 434).

B. Procedural Aspect


2/4

B.1. Judicial Proceedings

Lorenzana vs Cayetano

It cannot be said that the constitutional requirements of due process were sufficientlycomplied with because the respondent had been duly heard. Indeed, respondent washeard but simply hearing her did not fulfill the basic conditions of procedural due processin courts. When respondent appeared before the court to protect and preserve herproperty, the Court had not lawfully acquired jurisdiction over the property of therespondent because the premises of the respondent was not included in the ejectmentcases and the judgment in said cases could not affect her property, much less demolishthe same. In the leading case ofEl Banco-Espa;ol-Filipino v. Palanca3 citedin Macabingkil v. Yatco, et al., 4 We laid down the court's constitutional requirements ofdue process, thus -

As applied to judicial proceedings. . . it may be laid down with certainty thatthe requirements of due process is satisfied if the following conditions arepresent namely: (1) There must be a court or tribunal clothed with judicial power

to hear and determine the matter before itJURISDICTION; (2) jurisdictionmust be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant or over the property

which is the subject of the proceedingsNOTICE & HEARING: (3) the

defendant must be given an opportunity to be heardNEUTRALITY OF ANIMPARTIAL JUDGE; and (4) judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing.

B.2. Administrative Proceedings

B.3. Academic Due Process

C. Substantive Aspect

Ynot vs Intermediate Appellate Court

Petitioner: The thrust of his petition is that the executive order is unconstitutional insofaras it authorizes outright confiscation of the carabao or carabeef being transported acrossprovincial boundaries. His claim is that the penalty is invalid because it is imposedwithout according the owner a right to be heard before a competent and impartialcourt as guaranteed by due process. He complains that the measure should nothave been presumed, and so sustained, as constitutional. There is also a challengeto the improper exercise of the legislative power by the former President underAmendment No. 6 of the 1973 Constitution.

D. Scope of Guaranty; persons protected

Serrano vs NLRC

Lack of Notice Only Makes Termination Ineffectual

Not all notice requirements are requirements of due process. Some are simply partof a procedure to be followed before a right granted to a party can be exercised.


3/4

Others are simply an application of the Justinian precept, embodied in the Civil Code,33toact with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith toward one'sfellowmen. Such is the notice requirement in Arts. 282-283. The consequence of thefailure either of the employer or the employee to live up to this precept is to make himliable in damages, not to render his act (dismissal or resignation, as the case may be)void. The measure of damages is the amount of wages the employee should havereceived were it not for the termination of his employment without prior notice. Ifwarranted, nominal and moral damages may also be awarded.

We hold, therefore, that, with respect to Art. 283 of the Labor Code, the employer's failureto comply with the notice requirement does not constitute a denial of due process but amere failure to observe a procedure for the termination of employment which makes thetermination of employment merely ineffectual.

Indeed, under the Labor Code, only the absence of a just cause for the termination ofemployment can make the dismissal of an employee illegal. This is clear from Art.279 which provides:

Security of Tenure. In cases of regular employment, the employer shall not terminatethe services of an employee except for a just cause or when authorized by this Title. An

employee who is unjustly dismissedfrom work shall be entitled to reinstatement withoutloss of seniority rights and other privileges and to his full backwages, inclusive ofallowances, and to his other benefits or their monetary equivalent computed from thetime his compensation was withheld from him up to the time of his actual reinstatement.37

Lao Gi vs Court of Appeals

Hence, the charge against an alien must specify the acts or omissions complainedof which must be stated in ordinary and concise language to enable a person ofcommon understanding to know on what ground he is intended to be deported andenable the CID to pronounce a proper judgment.

E Q U A L P R O T E C T I O N O F L A W S

A. Guaranty of equal protection, Generally

Phil. Judges Assoc. vs Prado

The equal protection of the laws is embraced in the concept of due process, as everyunfair discrimination offends the requirements of justice and fair play. It has nonethelessbeen embodied in a separate clause in Article III Sec. 1., of the Constitution to provide fora more, specific guaranty against any form of undue favoritism or hostility from the

government. Arbitrariness in general may be challenged on the basis of the due processclause. But if the particular act assailed partakes of an unwarranted partiality or prejudice,the sharper weapon to cut it down is the equal protection clause.

equal protection simply requires that all persons or things similarly situated shouldbe treated alike, both as to rights conferred and responsibilities imposed(definition)

B. Classification
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2000/jan2000/gr_117040_2000.html#fnthttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2000/jan2000/gr_117040_2000.html#fnthttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2000/jan2000/gr_117040_2000.html#fnthttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2000/jan2000/gr_117040_2000.html#fnthttp://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2000/jan2000/gr_117040_2000.html#fnt


4/4

People vs Cayat

It is an established principle of constitutional law that the guaranty of the equal protectionof the laws is not equal protection of the laws is not violated by a legislation based onreasonable classification. And the classification, to be reasonable, (1) must rest onsubstantial distinctions; (2) must be germane (relevant/connected) to the purposes

of the law; (3) must not be limited to existing conditions only; and (4) must applyequally to all members of the same class.

constitutional rights due process equal protection notes

Documents