University of the Philippines
COLLEGE OF LAW
Diliman, Quezon City
Constitutional Law II (2010-2011)
Prof. Marvic M.V.F. Leonen
Reading List
The Concept of Privacy and Autonomy
Constitutional Provisions
Preamble
Article II, sections 1, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12
Article III, Sections 1, 2, 3, 6, 17
Article XIII, section 1, 2, 17, 18, 19
Article XV
Readings
Olmstead v United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928)
Katz v United States, 389 US 347 (1967)
Griswold v Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)
Samel D. Warren and Louis D. Brandeis. “The Right to Privacy.” 4 Harvard Law Review 193 (1890)
Harvey Kalven, Jr., “Privacy in Tort Law—Were Warren and Brandeis Wrong?” 31 Law and Contemporary Problems 326 (1966)
Ruth Gavinson, Privacy and the Limits of Law, 89 Yale Law Journal 421 (1980)
Richard Parker, “A Definition of Privacy,” 27 Rutgers Law Review 275 (1974)
Shepherd, Lois, “Looking Forward with the Right of Privacy,” 49 Kan. L. Rev. 251 (2001)
Kanter, Stephen, “Griswold Diagrams: Toward a Unified Theory of Constitutional Rights,” 28 Cardozo L. Rev. 623 (2006)
Cases
Villaflor v Summers, G.R. No. 16444. September 8, 1920.
Stonehill v Diokno, G.R. No. L-19550. June 19, 1967.
Morfe v Mutuc No. L-20387, January 31, 1968, 22 SCRA 424
Lagunzad v Vda. De Gonzales, G.R. No. L-32066, August 6, 1979
Ayer Productions v Capulong, G.R. No. 82380. April 29, 1988.
Marcos v Manglapuz, G.R. No. 88211, September 15, 1989
People v Marti, G.R. No. 81561. January 18, 1991.
Ople v. Torres, 293 SCRA 141 (1998)
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2001.
KMU v Ermita, G.R. No. 167798, April 19, 2006
In Re: Petition for Habeas Corpus of Alejano, G.R. No. 160792, August 25, 2005
Mercado v Security Bank Corporation, G.R. No. 160445, February 16, 2006
Silahis International Hotel, Inc v Soluta, G.R. No. 163087
Miguel v Gordon, G.R. No. 174340. October 17, 2006.
SJS v Dangerous Drugs Board, G.R. No. 161658. November 3, 2008.
In re Anonymous Letter-Complaint against Atty. Miguel Morales, Clerk of Court, MTC et al, A.M. No. P-08-2519. November 19, 2008. (Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 05-2155-P)
White Light Corporation v City of Manila, G.R. No. 122846. January 20, 2009.
Police Superintendent Castillo et al v Cruz et al, G.R. No. 182165. November 25, 2009.
Romines v People, G.R. No. 182010. August 25, 2010.
In the Matter of the Petition for the Writ of Amparo and the Writ of Habeas Data in Favor of Melissa C. Roxas, G.R. No. 189155. September 7, 2010.
Meralco et al v Lim, G.R. No. 184769. October 5, 2010.
PART II
Section 1
Due Process
See Related Constitutional Provisions
In general
Philippine Blooming Mills Employees v. Philippine Blooming Mills, 50 SCRA 189 (1973)
Association of Small Landowners v. DAR, 175 SCRA
“No person”
Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, G.R. No. 14078. March 7, 1919
Cruz v. NCIP, G.R. No. 135385, December 6, 2000
Lao Gi v. CA, 180 SCRA 756 (1989)
“Shall be deprived”
Association of Small Landowers v. DAR, 175 SCRA
“Of life, liberty o property””
Sombong v. Court of Appeals, 252 SCRA 663, G.R. No. 111876 (1996)
Dizon v. Eduardo, 158 SCRA 470, G.R. No. 59118 (1988)
Ordonez v. Director of Prisons, 235 SCRA 152, G.R. No. 115576 (1994)
Carino v. Insular Government, 41 Phil
“without due process of law”
(procedural)
Banco Espanol Filipino v. Palanca, 37 Phil. 921 (1919)
Espeleta v. Avelino, 62 SCRA 395 (1975)
Ortigas v. Lufthansa, 64 SCRA 610 (1975)
Ang Tibay v. CIR, 69 Phil. 635 (1940)
American Tobacco Co. V. Director of Patents 67 SCRA 287 (1975)
Tropical Homes v. NHA, 152 SCRA 540 (1987)
Philcomsat v. Alcuaz, 180 SCRA 218 (1989)
Radio Communications v. NTC, 184 SCRA 517 (1990)
Non v. Judge Dames, 185 SCRA 523 (1990)
Lao Gi v. Court of Appeals, 180 SCRA 756 (1989)
People v. Nazario, 165 SCRA 186 (1988)
Roxas and Co. Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 321 SCRA 106 (1999)
PLDT v. NLRC, 175 SCRA 437 (1989)
Libres v. NLRC, 307 SCRA 675 (1999)
Tanada v. Tuvera, 136 SCRA 271; 146 SCRA 446
(substantive)
Ermita Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association v. City of Manila, 20 SCRA 849 (1967)
Ynot v. IAC, 148 SCRA 659 (1987)
Chruchill v. Rafferty, 32 Phil. 580 (1915)
People v. Fajardo, 100 Phil. 443 (1958)
ACCFA v. CUGCO, 30 SCRA 649 (1969)
Balacuit v. CFI, 163 SCRA 182 (1988)
Agustin v. Edu, 88 SCRA 195 (1979)
National Development Company and Agrix v. Phil. Veterans Bank, 192 SCRA 257 (1990)
Maranaw Hotel v. NLRC, 238 SCRA 190 (1999)
Magtajas v. Pryce Properties, 234 SCRA 255 (1994)
Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710-15, March 8, 2001
Estrada v. Desierto, G.r. Nos. 146738-15, April 3, 2001
Carlos Superdrug et al v DSWD et al, G.R. No. 166494. June 29, 2007
MMDA v Viron Transport et al, G.R. No. 170656. August 15, 2007
SJS v Atienza, G.R. No. 156052, March 7, 2007 and February 13, 2008
White Light Corporation et al v City of Manila, G.R. 122846, January 20, 2009
Equal Protection
People v. Cayat, 68 Phil. 12, 18 (1939)
Ichong v. Hernandez, 101 Phil 1155 (1957)
Dumlao v. COMELEC, 96 SCRA 392 (1980)
Sison Jr. v. Ancheta, 130 SCRA 654 (1984)
Tatad v. Secretary of DOE, 281 SCRA 330 (1997)
Tiu v. Court of Appeals, 301 SCRA 278 (1999)
International School Alliance of Educators (ISAE) v. Quisumbing, 333 SCRA 13 (2000)
People v. Jalosjos, 324 SCRA 689 (2000)
Section 9
Eminent Domain
Republic v. Vda. De Castellvi, G.R. No. L-20620. August 15, 1974
De Knecht v. Court of Appeals, 290 SCRA 223 (1998)
Republic v. Tagle, 299 SCRA 549 (1998)
National Power Corporation v. Henson, 300 SCRA 751 (1998)
Municipality of Paranaque v. VM Realty Corporation, 292 SCRA 678 (1998)
Section 19
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
People v. Echegaray, 267 SCRA, G.r. No. 117472 (1997)
Echegaray v. Secretary, G.R. No. 132601 (1998)
PART III
Freedom of Expression, Association and
Cognate Rights
Reading List
Relevant Constitutional Provisions
Freedom of Speech, Expression, Assembly
Article III, Sec. 4
Article XIV, Secs. 6, 7, 9
Freedom of Religion
Article III, Sec. 5
Culture
Article XIV, Secs. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18
Article XVI, Sec. 12
Article II, Sec. 17
Right to Information
Article II, Sec. 28
Article III, Sec. 7
Article XVI, Sec. 10, 11
Participation
Article II, Sec. 1
Article V, Sec. 1
Article VI, Sec. 1
Article XIII, Secs. 15, 16
Article XVII, Sec. 1, 2
Article II, Sec. 22
Right to Education
Article XIV, Secs. 1, 5 (3)
Right to Privacy
Article III, Secs. 2, 3
Due Process and Equality
Article III, Sec. 1
Article XIII, Sec. 1
Article II, Sec. 9, 10, 14
Purposes
Arrive at truth and debate on public issues
Orfanel v. People, 30 SCRA 819
In re. Emil (Emiliano) Jurado, A.M. 93-2-037 SC, April 6, 1995
Adiong v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 103956, March 31, 1992
In re Columns of Amado Macasaet, A.M. No. 07-09-13-SC (August 8, 2008)
Preserve Public Institutions
U.S. v. Bustos, 37 Phil. 731 (1918)
U.S. v. Perfecto, 43 Phil. 225 (1922)
Espuelas v. People of the Philippines, 90 Phil. 524 (1951) (see also dissent)
Planas v. Gil, 67 Phil 62 (1939)
Santiago v. Far Eastern Broadcasting, 73 Phil. 408 (1941)
Primicias v. Fugoso, 80 Phil. 71 (1943)
Gonzales v. COMELEC, L-27833, April 18, 1969
Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. 79690, February 1, 1989.
Right as a public political figure
Osmena v. Pendatun, 109 Phil 863 (1960)
Ayer Productions Pty. Ltd. v. Capulong, G.R. No. L-82380, April 29, 1988.
Borjal v Court of Appeals G.R. No. 126466, 301 SCRA 1 (January 14, 1999)
Tulfo v People, G.R. No. 161032 (September 16, 2008)
Ortiz, Daniel R., “The Engaged and the Inert: Theorizing Political Personality Under the First Amendment,” 81 Virginia L. Rev. 1 (1995).
Relationships between private persons
De Leon v. National Labor Union, 100 Phil. 789 (1957).
Free Telephone Workers Union v. PLDT, 199 Phil. 137, April 27, 1982.
Arreza v. Gregorio Araneta University Foundation, G.R. No. L- 62297, June 19, 1985.
Non v. Dames II, G.R. No. 89317, May 20, 1990.
Ayer Productions Pty. Ltd. v. Capulong, G.R. No. L-82380, April 29, 1988. (see also dissent in Enrile v. Capulong, May 18, 1990.)
Filipinas Broadcasting v Ago Medical et al, G.R. No. 141994 (January 17, 2005)
Individual Enhancement
Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Organization v. Philippine Blooming Mills, G.R. L-31195, June 5, 1973.
To equalize opportunities
Badoy v. Ferrer, G.R. No. L- 32546, October 17, 1970
National Press Club v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 102653, 207 SCRA 1, March 5, 1992.
Philippine Press Institute v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L-119694, May 22, 1995.
No limitation based on content or on the characteristics of the speaker
BAYAN v Ermita, G.R. No. 169838 (April 25, 2006)
Reyes v. Bagatsing, G.R. No. L-65366, 125 SCRA 533, 210 Phil 457, November 9, 1983
Gonzalez v. Katigbak, G.R. No. L-69500, July 22, 1985.
In re Letter of Atty. Noel Sorreda, A.M. No. 05-3-04-SC (July 22, 2005)
Chemerinsky, Erwin, “The First Amendment: When the Government Must Make Content Based Choices,” 42 Clevland State L. Rev. 199 (1994).
Bork, Robert H. “Neutral Principles and Some First Amendment Problems,” 47 Indiana L. J. 1 (1971).
Not to be used as condition for exercise or enjoyment of another constitutional right.
Ebranilag v. Superintendent of Schools of Cebu, G.R. Nos. L-95770, 95887, March 1, 1993.
Type of Expression
Thought, Speech, Act and Advocacy Distinction
People v. Ferrer, G.R. No. L-32613-14, December 27, 1972
Forms
Political and Public Interest
Ayer Productions Pty. Ltd. v. Capulong, G.R. No. L-82380, April 29, 1988.
David v Macapagal Arroyo G.R. No. 171396 (May 3, 2006)
Bronitt, Simon and Williams, George, “Political Freedom as an Outlaw: Republican Theory and Political Protest,”18 Adelaide L. Rev. 289 (1996).
Publications and Freedom of the Press
Planas v. Gil, 67 Phil. 62 (1939)
Santiago v. Far Eastern Broadcasting, 73 Phil. 408 (1941)
Babst v. National Intelligence Board, G.R. No. L-62992, September 28, 1984
People v. Godoy, March 29, 1995.
In re. Emil (Emiliano) Jurado, A.M. 93-2-037 SC, April 6, 1995
Labor Picketing and other actions
De Leon v. National Labor Union, 100 Phil. 789 (1957)
Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Organization v. Philippine Blooming Mills, G.R. L-31195, June 5, 1973.
Biflex v Fiflex Industrial, G.R. No. 155679 (December 19, 2006)
GSIS and Garcia v Kapisanan ng mga Manggagawa sa GSIS, G.R. No. 170132 (December 6, 2006)
Exercise of Freedom of Conscience
Ebranilag v. Superintendent of Schools of Cebu, G.R. Nos. L-95770, 95887, March 1, 1993.
Campaign paraphernalia
Adiong v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 103956, March 31, 1992
Art
Gonzalez v. Katigbak, G.R. No. L-69500, July 22, 1985.
Adler, Amy, “What’s Left?: Hate Speech, Pornography, and the Problem for Artistic Expression, 84 California L. Rev. No. 6, 1499 (1996).
Commercial Speech
Pharmaceutical and Health Care Association of the Philippines v Duque III et al., G.R. NO. 173034 (October 9, 2007)
Punzal v ICTSI, G.R. Nos. 170384-85 (March 9, 2007)
See Rep. Act No. 9211
Jeruchimowitz, Howard K., “Tobacco Advertisements and Commercial Speech Balancing: A Potential Cancer to Truthful, Nonmisleading Advertisements of Lawful Products,” 82 Cornell L. Rev. 432 (1997).
“Symbolic” Speech
Ely, John Hart, “Flag Desecration: A Case Study in the Roles of Categorization and Balancing in First Amendment Analysis,” 88 Harvard L. Rev. 1482 (1975).
Judicial actions
Concerned Trial Lawyers v Veneracion, A.M. No. RTJ-05-1920 (April 26, 2006)
What is outside
Pornography/Obscenity
People v. Kottinger, 45 Phil. 352 (1923)
People v. Padan, 101 Phil. 749 (1957)
Gonzalez v. Katigbak, G.R. No. L-69500, July 22, 1985.
Pita v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-80806, October 5, 1989.
UP v. Catungal, G.R. No. 121863, May 5, 1997
Fernando v Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 159751 (December 6, 2006)
Baker, C. Edwin, “Of Course, More than Words,” 61 University of Chicago L. Rev. 1181 (1994).
Hate Speech
R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 112 S. Ct. 2538 (1992).
O’ Callaghan, Jerome, “Free Speech by the Light of a Burning Cross,” 42 Cleveland State L. Rev. 215 (1994).
Karst, Kenneth L. “Boundaries and Reasons: Freedom of Expression and the Subordination of Groups,” 1990 University of Illinois L. Review No. 1 95 (1990).
Type of Limitations
No content based limitations
Reyes v. Bagatsing, G.R. No. L-65366, 125 SCRA 533, 210 Phil 457, November 9, 1983
Osmeña v. COMELEC, 351 Phil. 692 (1998).
Adiong v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 103456, 207 SCRA 712 (March 31, 1992)
Prior Restraint/Consequent Punishment
Prior restraint
Chavez v Francisco, G.R. No. 168338 (February 15, 2008)
MTRCB v ABSCBN and Loren Legarda, G.R. No. 155282 (January 17, 2005)
David v Macapagal Arroyo G.R. No. 171396 (May 3, 2006)
ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp. v. COMELEC, 380 Phil. 780, 795 (2000)
Social Weather Stations v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 147571, May 5, 2001, 357 SCRA 496
Burden of unconstitutionality
Iglesia ni Kristo v. CA, 259 SCRA 529 (July 26, 1996)
Standards
Clear and Present Danger
Gonzales v. COMELEC, L-27833, April 18, 1969.
Ruiz v. Gordon, G.R. No. L-63695, 211 Phil. 411, December 19, 1983
Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 79690, February 1, 1989.
Dangerous Tendency
Cabansag v. Fernandez, 102 Phil 152 (1957)
“Balancing of Interest” Test
Badoy v. Ferrer, G.R. No. L- 32546, October 17, 1970
Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 79690, February 1, 1989.
Requirement of good faith
German v. Barangan, G.R. No. L-68828, March 27, 1985
Forms of restraint
Fees and Taxes
American Bible Society v. City of Manila, 101 Phi. 386 (1957)
Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, G.R. No. 115455, 235 SCRA 630, August 25, 1994.
Moral compulsion
Babst v. National Intelligence Board, G.R. No. L-62992, September 28, 1984
Time and Place
J.B.L. Reyes v. Bagatsing, 210 Phil. 457 (1983)
Navarro v. Villegas, G.R. No. L-31687, February 18, 1970, 31 SCRA 730;
Ignacio v. Ela, 99 Phil. 346 (1956)
Primicias v. Fugosa, 80 Phil. 71 (1948)
Arbitrary actions due to national security
Eastern Broadcasting Corporation v. Dans, G.R. No. L-59329, July 19, 1985
Restraint on exercise of another right
Ebranilag v. Superintendent of Schools of Cebu, G.R. Nos. L-95770, 95887, March 1, 1993.
Villar v. Technological Institute of the Philippines, G.R. No. L-69198, April 17, 1985.
Non v. Dames II, G.R. No. 89317, May 20, 1990.
Censorship
Gonzalez v. Katigbak, G.R. No. L-69500, July 22, 1985.
Pita v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-80806, October 5, 1989.
Regulation of the Forum
Ballard, Ian Matheson, “See No Evil, Hear No Evil: Television Violence and the First Amendment,” 81 Virginia L. Rev. 175 (1995).
To accord due process
Webb v. de Leon, G.R. No. L- 121234, August 23, 1995
Consequent Punishment
Laws
Sedition/ Inciting to Sedition
Espuelas v. People, 90 Phil. 524 (1951)
U.S. v. Perfecto, 43 Phil 58 (1922)
Libel
U.S. v. Bustos, 37 Phil. 731 (1981)
Orfanel v. People, 30 SCRA 819.
GMA Network v Bustos et al, G.R. No. 146848 (October 17, 2006)
Flor v People, G.R. No. 139987 (March 31, 2005)
Guingguing v Court of Appeals and People, G.R. No. 128959 (September 30, 2005)
Philippine Journalists Inc et al v Thoenen, G.R. No. 143372 (December 13, 2005)
Contempt
In re. Emil (Emiliano) Jurado, A.M. 93-2-037 SC, April 6, 1995
Forum
Rallies
Primicias v. Fugoso, 80 Phil 71 (1943)
Reyes v. Bagatsing, G.R. No. L-65366, 125 SCRA 533, 210 Phil 457, November 9, 1983
Ruiz v. Gordon, G.R. No. L-63695, 211 Phil. 411, December 19, 1983
German v. Barangan, G.R. No. L-68828, March 27, 1985
Media
Santiago v. Far Eastern Broadcasting, 73 Phil. 408 (1941)
Eastern Broadcasting Corporation v. Dans, G.R. No. L-59329, July 19, 1985.
Gonzalez v. Katigbak, G.R. No. L-69500, July 22, 1985.
Ayer Productions Pty. Ltd. v. Capulong, G.R. No. L-82380, April 29, 1988.
UNIDO v. Comelec, April 3, 1981
Political Campaigns
Santaigo v. Far Eastern Broadcasting, 73 Phil. 408 (1941)
Gonzales v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L- 27833, April 18, 1969.
UNIDO v. COMELEC, April 3, 1981
National Press Club v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 102653, 207 SCRA 1, March 5, 1992.
Adiong v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 103956, March 31, 1992
Philippine Press Institute v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L-119694, May 22, 1995.
Other Interests
Freedom of Information
Adiong v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 103956, March 31, 1992
Senate v Ermita, G.R. No. 169777 (April 20, 2006 and July 14, 2006)
Neri v Senate, G.R. No. 180643 (March 25, 2008 and September 4, 2008)
Judicial Integrity/Contempt
Cabansag v. Fernandez, 102 Phil. 152 (1957)
Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 79690, February 1, 1989.
People v. Godoy, March 29, 1995.
In re. Emil (Emiliano) Jurado, A.M. 93-2-037 SC, April 6, 1995
Private Property
Adiong v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 103956, March 31, 1992
Philippine Press Institute v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L-119694, May 22, 1995.
Punzal v ITCSI, G.R. Nos. 170384-85 (March 9, 2007)
Privacy
Due Process
Webb v. de Leon, G.R. No. L- 121234, August 23, 1995
Freedom of Religion
American Bible Society v. City of Manila, 101 Phil. 386
Victoriano v. Elizalde Rope Workers Union, 59 SCRA 54.
German v. Barangan, L-68828, March 27, 1985
Ebranilag v. Superintendent of Schools of Cebu, G.R. Nos. L-95770, 95887, March 1, 1993.
In Re: Request of Muslim Employees in Different Courts, A.M. No. 02-2-10-SC (December 14, 2005)
Iglesia ni Kristo v. CA, G.R. No. 119673, 259 SCRA 529 (July 26, 1996).
Estrada v Escritor, A.M. No. A.M. No. P-02-1651 (June 22, 2006)
Freedom to Associate
Gonzales v. COMELEC, G. R. No. L-27833, April 18, 1969.
Academic Freedom
Non v. Dames II, G.R. No. 89317, May 20, 1990.
Other Considerations
Overbreath/ “Void for Vagueness” doctrine
Gonzales v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L-27833, April 18, 1969.
Chilling effect doctrine
Chavez v Francisco, G.R. No. 168338 (February 15, 2008)
David v Macapagal Arroyo G.R. No. 171396 (May 3, 2006)
Comments