Due Process of Law

Question 1

Philippine Constitution, whose Bill of Rights was patterned after the American Constitution. Hence, as in the United States, due process of law in our country also has a dual aspect: ____________ & ____________

Answer 1

procedural and substantive

Question 2

Article III Section 1

Answer 2

No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, and property without due process of law nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws

Question 3

what is due process?

Answer 3

is a safeguard against arbitrary act of gov’t

=================
[book]
- “responsiveness to the supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of justice.
- the embodiment of the sporting idea of fair play.

Question 4

an example of denying the protection of due process

Answer 4

an unreasonable pre-condition/requirement to the exercise of a particular right

Question 5

Chinese Hiu Chong, an alien was admitted to the Philippines. he sought work but the company needed him to secure a work permit from the mayor before employment due to the ordinance. Is this valid?

Answer 5

No.

In the case of Villegas v. Hiu Chong, the SC annulled a city ordinance requiring aliens to obtain work permit from the mayor and SC held that once an alien is admitted to the Philippines, they are not to be deprived of life without due process of law–which includes livelihood

The pre-condition of securing a work permit violated Hiu Chong’s rights

therefore, the ordinance is not valid

Question 6

can juan, a rapist, be sentence to death with due process of law?

Answer 6

No.

it is not permissible for the gov’t to deprive juan of any part of his body even if it be punishment for a crime.

Question 7

Define the word ‘property’ in the bill of rights

Answer 7

anything that can be under (a) right of ownership and (b) subject of contract

Question 8

Juan is appointed to a public office by the government, and the terms of his appointment, including his salary, are defined by statute. Juan performs his duties diligently, and his monthly salary is part of his compensation for the work he has done.

(a) legislature abolishes his office even when his term has not expired. Juan contends that it is a violation of his due process. Is his contention correct?

Answer 8

No.

Public office is not a vested right. Legislature can, at any time, abolish the office Juan holds even when his term has not expired.

=============================
[gpt]
In the context of legal and property rights, the term “vested” refers to a right that is fixed, complete, and not contingent on any future events.

One cannot have a vested right to a public office. This is because public offices are created by statute (law

Question 9

Juan is appointed to a public office by the government, and the terms of his appointment, including his salary, are defined by statute. Juan performs his duties diligently, and his monthly salary is part of his compensation for the work he has done.

(b) legislature passes a law that reduces salaries of all public officeholders, including Juan, due to financial constraints by the gov’t. Juan contends that is a violative of due process. Is his contention correct?

Answer 9

No.

Salary attached to public office may be reduced or withdrawn by legislature without violating due process as it is not considered a vested right

The exception is when Juan has already earned the monthly salary thus is his property and if such law would have a retroactive effect to reduce/withdraw such, will be a violation to due process.

===========================
[gpt]
In the context of legal and property rights, the term “vested” refers to a right that is fixed, complete, and not contingent on any future events.

One cannot have a vested right to a public office. This is because public offices are created by statute (law)

Question 10

Pedro had been operating a cockpit under a license granted by the legislature for several years. The legislature subsequently passed a new law revoking all licenses for cockpit operations, citing concerns about public safety and morality. Pedro contends that the revocation of his license is a violation of his due process rights because he had invested time and resources into the business, and the revocation has adversely affected his livelihood.

Is his contention tenable

LB

Answer 10

No

In the case of Pedro v. Prov. Board of Rizal, it was held that privileges such as license to operate a cockpit are not property rights and therefore revocable at will.

=================================
[book]
Likewise, one does not have a vested property right in the continued operation of a law, which may be repealed or amended at will by the legislature, or in the maintenance of a judicial doctrine, which may be modified or reversed in
the discretion of the Supreme Court. Such changes may be validly made regardless of adverse consequences upon any person who may have previously acted thereunder.

Question 11

knowledge check: what is a privilege?

Answer 11

a privilege is a special advantage, immunity, or permission granted to a particular person, group, or class. It confers a right or benefit that may not be extended to everyone and allows the holder to do something that others may not have the authority or liberty to do.

Question 12

________________ requires the intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with the rights of the person to his life, liberty or property.

Answer 12

substantive due process

Question 13

when is substantive due process proper?

Answer 13

• valid governmental objective
• pursued in a lawful manner
  (not unduly oppressive)

Question 14

Chinese Kwong Sing challenged a municipal ordinance requiring all laundry establishments to issue their receipts in English & Spanish, he cites the case of Villegas v. Hiu Chong stating that as an alien, his due process must not be violated and such ordinance will cause added expense to him. Will his contention prosper?

Answer 14

No.

In the case of Kwong Sing v. City of Manila, the SC ruled, for the reason of public welfare, upheld the ordinance to prevent deception & misunderstanding of chinese characters

This ordinance required English & Spanish however does not prohibit the use of others as in the case of Yu Cong Eng

Question 15

Petitioners, Filipino citizens engaged in various retail trade businesses, challenged the constitutionality of the Retail Trade Nationalization Law. They contended that the law, by restricting their participation in the retail trade sector, deprived them of a legitimate means of livelihood, thus violating their right to due process. Is this tenable?

retail trade - buy from manufacturers and sell to individual consumers

Answer 15

No.

In the case of Ichong v. Hernandez, the SC held that the law is a valid exercise of police power and the law was enacted for the Philippines to be economically independent and not be dominated by foreign businesses

Question 16

the justice that _______________ guarantees is the one “which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgment only after trial.”

Question 17

the essential requirement of procedural due process:

Answer 17

• notice
• hearing

Question 18

page 110 cut and skipped to page 112

Question 19

⚠️⚠️⚠️

The government initiated land registration proceedings to address the ownership status of a valuable parcel of land. The land, currently registered in the name of Ms. Rodriguez, had a certificate of title issued several decades ago. The government sought to rectify possible discrepancies in ownership claims and to update the land registry.

In the course of the proceedings, the court issued a decision annulling Ms. Rodriguez’s certificate of title, citing irregularities in the initial registration. However, Ms. Rodriguez was not made a party to the proceedings, and she only learned of the annulment after the fact. Ms. Rodriguez now challenges the decision, arguing that her due process rights were violated.

LB

Answer 19

Yes. her contention is tenable.

in actions in rem & quasi-in rem, although jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is not required, and summons through mere publication is sufficient to satisfy DUE PROCESS, in the case of DBP v. Bautista, the SC ruled that a person who is [not made a party] to a certificate to a piece of land is [not binding] as this is the denial of their right to be heard.

[book]
In one case, a person’s certificate of title to a piece of land was annulled although she was not made a party to the proceeding. The Supreme Court declared that the decision could not in any way bind her because of the denial from her of the right to be heard.

“If it were otherwise,” the Supreme Court declared, “then the cardinal requirement that no party should be
made to suffer in person or property without being given a
hearing would be brushed aside. The doctrine consistently adhered to by this Court when such a question arises … is that a denial of due process suffices to cast on the official act taken by whatever branch of the government the impress of nullity.”

Question 20

Enumerate instances where hearing is omitted without a violation of due process

Answer 20

• padlocking of theaters showing obscene movies
• padlocking of restaurants that are insanitary
• abatement of nuisances per se
• cancellation of passport of person sought for commission for a crime
• preventive suspension of civil servant w/ administrative charges
• distraint of properties for tax delinquency

[gpt]
Abatement of nuisances per se –involves the removal or elimination of a nuisance that poses an immediate and inherent threat to public health, safety, or welfare. A nuisance per se is one that, by its nature, is considered injurious or offensive. Government authorities may take actions to abate or eliminate such nuisances without extensive legal proceedings

Question 21

A ____________ is objectionable under any and all circumstances because it presents an immediate danger to the welfare of the community. This kind of nuisance may be abated summarily, that is, without the necessity of judicial authorization

Answer 21

[gpt]
objectionable - nature of the nuisance is such that it is immediately and inherently harmful or offensive under any and all circumstances.

Question 22

[a] type of nuisance where it is objectionable only under some but not all circumstances, there being situations when it is perfectly legitimate and acceptable. It has been described as “the right thing in the wrong place,” like a patis factory in a residential area.

[b]
how is hearing without violating due process done in this type?

Answer 22

[a] nuisance per accidens

[b]
GEN
only abated upon judicial authorization

EXC
Lawton v. Steele, where legislature authorized summary abatement if nuisance per accidens is of insignificant value

abate - of something perceived as hostile, threatening, or negative) become less intense or widespread.

Question 23

Would a statutory presumption deny the right to a hearing insofar as the person affected is precluded (prevent) from introducing evidence to rebut the presumption?

Answer 23

[book]
The accepted view is that it would not, provided there is a rational or natural connection between the fact proved and
the fact ultimately presumed from such fact. As long as the presumption is based on human experience, as where
a child born within one hundred eighty days of the marriage is presumed legitimate if the husband, before such
marriage, knew of the pregnancy of the wife,46 it will be deemed not violative of due process.

[gpt]
t’s important to note that the passage doesn’t mean that a law can completely prevent someone from bringing evidence to challenge it. Rather, it suggests that limitations on the right to introduce evidence may be acceptable if there is a rational connection between the facts. The balancing act involves protecting the right to a hearing while recognizing that certain logical connections between facts may justify restrictions on the introduction of evidence.

a child born during the early days of a marriage is presumed to be the legitimate child of the husband and wife.

Challenging the Presumption: Despite the presumption, individuals can still challenge the legitimacy of the heir. The presumption creates a starting point, but it doesn’t prevent someone from introducing evidence to contest the legitimacy.

Question 24

In administrative proceedings, the requisites of procedural due process are the following

Answer 24

1. right to a hearing
2. tribunal consider evidence presented
3. decision is supported
4. evidence is substantial
5. decision based on evidence or record & disclosed to parties
6. tribunal, judge, or body must act in its own independence in arriving to a decision
7. body/tribunal, in all controversial questions, render decision so parties can know the issues and reasons for decision

[book]
(1) The right to a hearing, which includes the right to present one’s case and submit evidence in support thereof.

(2) The tribunal must consider the evidence presented.

(3) The decision must have something to support itself.

(4) The evidence must be substantial.

(5) 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.

(6) 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.

(7) 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 in
volved, and the reason for the decision rendered.

Question 25

a decision rendered by the Director of Mines was appealed to the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources. The Director of Mines was later promoted to Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources and in this capacity reviewed and, not surprisingly, affirmed his
own decision. The Supreme Court annulled the proceedings, calling them “a mockery of justice.”

Answer 25

Zambales Chromite v. CA

Question 26

when the respondent, as presidential executive assistant, affirmed his own decision as chairman of the Civil Service Commission when it was appealed to Malacanang. The Supreme Court also withheld its approval.

Answer 26

Anzaldo v. Clave