Corona vs United Harbour Pilot Gr No 127980 Case Digest

CORONA VS UNITED HARBOUR PILOT GR NO 127980 CASE DIGEST

TO ENJOY THEIR PROFESSION BEFORE THEIR COMPULSORY

and intimidation, slander, noise barrage and other acts showing disdain

FACTS: : IN ISSUING ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 04-92 (PPA-AO NO.

RETIREMENT

for and defiance of University authority. The pending civil case for

04-92), LIMITING THE TERM OF APPOINTMENT OF HARBOR PILOTS TO

damages and a criminal case for malicious mischief against petitioner

ONE YEAR SUBJECT TO YEARLY RENEWAL OR CANCELLATION ON AUGUST 12, 1992, RESPONDENTS UNITED HARBOUR PILOTS ASSOCIATION AND THE MANILA PILOTS ASSOCIATION, THROUGH CAPT.

Guzman, cannot, without more, furnish sufficient warrant for his Diosdado Guzman vs. National University Facts:

ALBERTO C. COMPAS, QUESTIONED PPA-AO NO. 04-92 ON DECEMBER 23, 1992, THE OP ISSUED AN ORDER DIRECTING THE PPA TO HOLD IN ABEYANCE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PPA-AO NO. 0492ON MARCH 17, 1993, THE OP, THROUGH THEN ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE

expulsion or debarment from re-enrollment. Also, apparent is the omission of respondents to cite this Court to any duly published rule of theirs by which students may be expelled or refused re-enrollment for

Petitioners Diosdado Guzman, Ulysses Urbiztondo and Ariel Ramacula,

poor scholastic standing.

students of respondent National University, seek relief from what they described as their school's "continued and persistent refusal to allow them to enrol."

To satisfy the demands of procedural due process, the following requisites must be met:

SECRETARY FOR LEGAL AFFAIRS RENATO C. CORONA, DISMISSED THE APPEAL/PETITION AND LIFTED THE RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED EARLIER RESPONDENTS FILED A PETITION FOR CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION AND INJUNCTION WITH PRAYER FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND DAMAGES, BEFORE BRANCH 6 OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

ISSUE: WON PPA-AO-04-92 IS CONSTITUTIONAL

HELD: THE COURT IS CONVINCED THAT PPA-AO NO. 04-92 WAS ISSUED IN STARK DISREGARD OF RESPONDENTS' RIGHT AGAINST DEPRIVATION OF PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW. THE SUPREME COURT SAID THAT IN ORDER TO FALL WITHIN THE AEGIS OF THIS PROVISION,

1. In their petition on August 7, 1984 for extraordinary legal and equitable

PROPER OBSERVANCE OF DUE PROCESS. AS A GENERAL RULE, NOTICE

nature and cause of any accusation against them;

remedies with prayer for preliminary mandatory injunction, they 2.

alleged that they were denied due to the fact that they were active

they shag have the right to answer the charges

against them, with the assistance of counsel, if desired;

participation in peaceful mass actions within the premises of the University.

3.

The respondents on the other hand claimed that the petitioners’ failure

them;

to enroll for the first semester of the school year 1984-1985 is due to

4.

their own fault and not because of their alleged exercise of their

their own behalf; and

constitutional and human rights. As regards to Guzman, his academic

5.

showing was poor due to his activities in leading boycotts of classes.

investigating committee or official designated by the school

They said that Guzman is facing criminal charges for malicious mischief

authorities to hear and decide the case.

before the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila in connection with the

they shall be informed of the evidence against

they shall have the right to adduce evidence in

the evidence must be duly considered by the

RULING:

destruction of properties of respondent University.

TWO CONDITIONS MUST CONCUR, NAMELY, THAT THERE IS A DEPRIVATION AND THAT SUCH DEPRIVATION IS DONE WITHOUT

the students must be informed in writing of the

The petition was granted wherein the respondents are directed to The petitioners have failures in their records, and are not of good scholastic standing.

allow the petitioners (students) to re-enrol without prejudice to any disciplinary proceedings.

AND HEARING, AS THE FUNDAMENTAL REQUIREMENTS OF PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS, ARE ESSENTIAL ONLY WHEN AN

Issue:

ADMINISTRATIVE BODY EXERCISES ITS QUASI-JUDICIAL FUNCTION. IN THE PERFORMANCE OF ITS EXECUTIVE OR LEGISLATIVE FUNCTIONS,

Whether or Not there is violation of the due process clause.

Facts:

SUCH AS ISSUING RULES AND REGULATIONS, AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY NEED NOT COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF NOTICE AND

Held: Petitioner Joseph Estrada who was prosecuted to An Act Defining and

HEARING

THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT PILOTAGE AS A APROFESSION HAS TAKEN ON THE NATURE OF A PROPERTY RIGHT. IT IS READILY APPARENT THAT PPA-AO NO. 04-92 UNDULY RESTRICTS THE RIGHT OF HARBOR PILOTS

ESTRADA v SANDIGANBAYAN

Immediately apparent from a reading of respondents' comment and

Penalizing the Crime of Plunder, assailed that law is so defectively

memorandum is the fact that they had never conducted proceedings of

fashioned that it crosses that thin but distinct line which divides the

any sort to determine whether or not petitioners-students had indeed

valid from the constitutionally infirm.

led or participated in activities within the university premises, conducted without prior permit from school authorities, that disturbed

His contentions are mainly based on the effects of the said law that it

or disrupted classes therein or perpetrated acts of vandalism, coercion

suffers from the vice of vagueness; it dispenses with the "reasonable

doubt" standard in criminal prosecutions; and it abolishes the element

constitutional will not be heard to attack the statute on the ground that

ISAE filed a notice of strike. Due to the failure to reach a compromise in

of mens rea in crimes already punishable under The Revised Penal Code

impliedly it might also be taken as applying to other persons or other

the NCMB, the matter reached the DOLE which favored the School.

saying that it violates the fundamental rights of the accused.

situations in which its application might be unconstitutional. On its face

Hence this petition.

invalidation of statues results in striking them down entirely on the The focal point of the case is the alleged “vagueness” of the law in the

ground that they might be applied to parties not before the Court

terms it uses. Particularly, this terms are: combination, series and

whose activities are constitutionally protected. It is evident that the

unwarranted. Because of this, the petitioner uses the facial challenge

purported ambiguity of the Plunder Law is more imagined than real.

ISSUE:

on the validity of the mentioned law.

The crime of plunder as a malum in se is deemed to have been resolve

Whether the foreign-hires should be included in bargaining unit of

in the Congress’ decision to include it among the heinous crime Issue:

local- hires.

punishable by reclusion perpetua to death. Supreme Court holds the plunder law constitutional and petition is dismissed for lacking merit.

Whether or Not the petitioner possesses the locus standi to attack the

RULING:

validity of the law using the facial challenge. G.R. No. 128845, June 1, 2000 Held: FACTS: On how the law uses the terms combination and series does not

NO. The Constitution, Article XIII, Section 3, specifically provides that labor is entitled to “humane conditions of work.” These conditions are not restricted to the physical workplace – the factory, the office or the field – but include as well the manner by which employers treat their employees.

constitute vagueness. The petitioner’s contention that it would not give

Private respondent International School, Inc. (School), pursuant to PD

a fair warning and sufficient notice of what the law seeks to penalize

732, is a domestic educational institution established primarily for

cannot be plausibly argued. Void-for-vagueness doctrine is manifestly

dependents of foreign diplomatic personnel and other temporary

misplaced under the petitioner’s reliance since ordinary intelligence can

residents. The decree authorizes the School to employ its own teaching

understand what conduct is prohibited by the statute. It can only be

and management personnel selected by it either locally or abroad, from

invoked against that specie of legislation that is utterly vague on its

Philippine or other nationalities, such personnel being exempt from

face, wherein clarification by a saving clause or construction cannot be

otherwise applicable laws and regulations attending their employment,

The Constitution enjoins the State to “protect the rights of workers and

invoked. Said doctrine may not invoked in this case since the statute is

except laws that have been or will be enacted for the protection of

promote their welfare, In Section 18, Article II of the constitution

clear and free from ambiguity. Vagueness doctrine merely requires a

employees. School hires both foreign and local teachers as members of

mandates “to afford labor full protection”. The State has the right and

reasonable degree of certainty for the statute to be upheld, not

its faculty, classifying the same into two: (1) foreign-hires and (2) local-

duty to regulate the relations between labor and capital. These

absolute precision or mathematical exactitude. On the other hand, over

hires.

relations are not merely contractual but are so impressed with public

breadth doctrine decrees that governmental purpose may not be

Discrimination, particularly in terms of wages, is frowned upon by the Labor Code. Article 248 declares it an unfair labor practice for an employer to discriminate in regard to wages in order to encourage or discourage membership in any labor organization.

interest that labor contracts, collective bargaining agreements included,

achieved by means which sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby

The School grants foreign-hires certain benefits not accorded local-

invade the area of protected freedoms. Doctrine of strict scrutiny holds

hires. Foreign-hires are also paid a salary rate 25% more than local-

that a facial challenge is allowed to be made to vague statute and to

hires.

one which is overbroad because of possible chilling effect upon

must yield to the common good. However, foreign-hires do not belong to the same bargaining unit as the local-hires.

protected speech. Furthermore, in the area of criminal law, the law

When negotiations for a new CBA were held on June 1995, petitioner

cannot take chances as in the area of free speech. A facial challenge to

ISAE, a legitimate labor union and the collective bargaining

A bargaining unit is a group of employees of a given employer,

legislative acts is the most difficult challenge to mount successfully

representative of all faculty members of the School, contested the

comprised of all or less than all of the entire body of employees,

since the challenger must establish that no set of circumstances exists.

difference in salary rates between foreign and local-hires. This issue, as

consistent with equity to the employer indicate to be the best suited to

Doctrines mentioned are analytical tools developed for facial challenge

well as the question of whether foreign-hires should be included in the

serve the reciprocal rights and duties of the parties under the collective

of a statute in free speech cases. With respect to such statue, the

appropriate bargaining unit, eventually caused a deadlock between the

bargaining provisions of the law.

established rule is that one to who application of a statute is

parties.

The factors in determining the appropriate collective bargaining unit

investigation would already disqualify them from office. In general,

But, in the case of a 65-year old elective local official (Dumalo), who has

are (1) the will of the employees (Globe Doctrine); (2) affinity and unity

Dumlao invoked equal protection in the eye of the law.

retired from a provincial, city or municipal office, there is reason to

of the employees’ interest, such as substantial similarity of work and

ISSUE: Whether or not the there is cause of action.

disqualify him from running for the same office from which he had

duties, or similarity of compensation and working conditions

HELD: The SC pointed out the procedural lapses of this case for this

retired, as provided for in the challenged provision.

(Substantial Mutual Interests Rule); (3) prior collective bargaining

case would never have been merged. Dumlao’s cause is different from

history; and (4) similarity of employment status. The basic test of an

Igot’s. They have separate issues. Further, this case does not meet all

asserted bargaining unit’s acceptability is whether or not it is

the requisites so that it’d be eligible for judicial review. There are

fundamentally the combination which will best assure to all employees

standards that have to be followed in the exercise of the function of

the exercise of their collective bargaining rights.

judicial review, namely: (1) the existence of an appropriate case; (2) an

FACTS: Milagros assail unconstitutionality of section 18 PD 1146 being

GSIS v. MONTESCLAROS

interest personal and substantial by the party raising the constitutional

violative of due process and equal protection clause. When her

In the case at bar, it does not appear that foreign-hires have indicated

question; (3) the plea that the function be exercised at the earliest

husband died, she filed in GSIS for claim for survivorship pension. GSIS

their intention to be grouped together with local-hires for purposes of

opportunity; and (4) the necessity that the constitutional question be

denied claim, it said surviving spouse has no right of survivorship

collective bargaining. The collective bargaining history in the School

passed upon in order to decide the case. In this case, only the

pension if the surviving spouse contracted the marriage with the

also shows that these groups were always treated separately. Foreign-

3rd requisite was met. The SC ruled however that the provision barring

pensioner within three years before the pensioner qualified for the

hires have limited tenure; local-hires enjoy security of tenure. Although

persons charged for crimes may not run for public office and that the

pension.

foreign-hires perform similar functions under the same working

filing of complaints against them and after preliminary investigation

conditions as the local-hires, foreign-hires are accorded certain benefits

would already disqualify them from office as null and void.

not granted to local-hires such as housing, transportation, shipping

The assertion that Sec 4 of BP 52 is contrary to the safeguard of equal

costs, taxes and home leave travel allowances. These benefits are

protection is neither well taken. The constitutional guarantee of equal

reasonably related to their status as foreign-hires, and justify the

protection of the laws is subject to rational classification. If the

exclusion of the former from the latter. To include foreign-hires in a

groupings are based on reasonable and real differentiations, one class

bargaining unit with local-hires would not assure either group the

can be treated and regulated differently from another class. For

exercise of their respective collective bargaining rights.

purposes of public service, employees 65 years of age, have been validly classified differently from younger employees. Employees

WHEREFORE, the petition is GIVEN DUE COURSE. The petition is hereby GRANTED IN PART.

attaining that age are subject to compulsory retirement, while those of younger ages are not so compulsorily retirable. In respect of election to provincial, city, or municipal positions, to

“Equal Protection” – Eligibility to Office after Being 65 Dumlao was the former governor of Nueva Vizcaya. He has retired from his office and he has been receiving retirement benefits therefrom. He filed for reelection to the same office for the 1980 local elections. On the other hand, BP 52 was passed (par 1 thereof) providing disqualification for the likes of Dumlao. Dumlao assailed the BP averring that it is class legislation hence unconstitutional. His petition was joined by Atty. Igot and Salapantan Jr. These two however have different issues. The suits of Igot and Salapantan are more of a taxpayer’s suit assailing the other provisions of BP 52 regarding the term of office of the elected officials, the length of the campaign and the provision barring persons charged for crimes may not run for public office and that the filing of complaints against them and after preliminary

require that candidates should not be more than 65 years of age at the time they assume office, if applicable to everyone, might or might not be a reasonable classification although, as the Solicitor General has intimated, a good policy of the law should be to promote the emergence of younger blood in our political elective echelons. On the other hand, it might be that persons more than 65 years old may also be good elective local officials. Retirement from government service may or may not be a reasonable disqualification for elective local officials. For one thing, there can also be retirees from government service at ages, say below 65. It may neither be reasonable to disqualify retirees, aged 65, for a 65-year old retiree could be a good local official just like one, aged 65, who is not a retiree.

HELD: There is denial of due process when it outrightly denies the claim for survivorship. There is outright confiscation of benefits due the surviving spouse without giving her an opportunity to be heard. There is also violation of equal protection. A proviso requiring certain number of years of togetherness in marriage before the employee’s death is valid to prevent sham marriages contracted for monetary gains. Here, it is 3 years before pensioner qualified for the pension. Under this, even if the dependent spouse married the pensioner more than 3 years before the pensioner’s death, the dependent spouse would still not receive survivorship pension if the marriage took place within 3 years before the pensioner qualified for pension. The object of prohibition is vague. There is no reasonable connection between the means employed and the purpose intended.

Eastern Broadcasting Corp (DYRE) v. Dans Jr.

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

Borjal v Court of Appeals 301 SCRA 1 January 14, 1999

L-59329

(4) Evidence must be substantial (reasonable evidence that is adequate

Facts: A civil action for damages based on libel was filed before

July 19, 1985

to support conclusion)

the court against Borjal and Soliven for writing and publishing articles

137 SCRA 628

that are allegedly derogatory and offensive against Francisco Facts: A petition was filed to reopen the Radio Station DYRE. DYRE was

(5) Decision must be based on the evidence presented at hearing

“summarily closed” on grounds of national security. The radio station

Wenceslao, attacking among others the solicitation letters he send to support a conference to be launch concerning resolving matters on

was allegedly used to incite people to sedition. Petitioner, DYRE

(6) The tribunal body must act on its own independent consideration of

transportation crisis that is tainted with anomalous activities.

contends that they were denied due process. There was no hearing to

law and facts and not simply accept subordinate’s views

Wenceslao however was never named in any of the articles nor was the

establish factual evidence for the closure. Furthermore, the closure of

conference he was organizing. The lower court ordered petitioners to

the radio station violates freedom of expression. Before the court could

(7) Court must render decision in such a manner that the proceeding can

indemnify the private respondent for damages which was affirmed by

even promulgate a decision upon the Issue raised, Petitioner, through

know the various issued involved and reasons for decisions rendered.

the Court of Appeals. A petition for review was filed before the SC

its president Mr. Rene Espina, filed a motion to withdraw the petition.

contending that private respondent was not sufficiently identified to be

The rights of the station were sold to a new owner, Manuel Pastrana;

The court stresses that while there is no controlling and precise

the subject of the published articles.

who is no longer interested in pursuing the case. Despite the case

definition of Due Process, it gives an unavoidable standard that

becoming moot and academic, (because there are no longer interested

government actions must conform in order that deprivation of life,

Issue: Whether or not there are sufficient grounds to constitute guilt of

parties, thus the dismissal of the case) the Supreme Court still finds that

liberty and property is valid.

petitioners for libel.

The closure of the radio station is like wise a violation of the

Held: In order to maintain a libel suit, it is essential that the victim be

constitutional right of freedom of speech and expression. The court

identifiable although it is not necessary that he be named. It is also not

stresses that all forms of media, whether print or broadcast are entitled

sufficient that the offended party recognized himself as the person

to this constitutional right. Although the government still has the right

attacked or defamed, but it must be shown that at least a third person

to be protected against broadcasts which incite the listeners to

could identify him as the object of the libelous publication. These

there is need to pass a “RESOLUTION” for the guidance of inferior courts and administrative tribunals in matters as this case.

Issue:

Whether or not due process was exercised in the case of DYRE.

violently overthrow it. The test for the limitation of freedom of

requisites have not been complied with in the case at bar. The element

Whether or not the closure of DYRE is a violation of the Constitutional

expression is the “clear and present danger” rule. If in the

of identifiability was not met since it was Wenceslaso who revealed he

Right of Freedom of Expression.

circumstances that the media is used in such nature as to create this

was the organizer of said conference and had he not done so the public

danger that will bring in such evils, then the law has the right to prevent

would not have known.

Held: The court finds that the closure of the Radio Station in 1980 as

it. However, Radio and television may not be used to organize a

null and void. The absence of a hearing is a violation of Constitutional

rebellion or signal a start of widespread uprising. The freedom to

The concept of privileged communications is implicit in the freedom of

Rights. The primary requirements in administrative proceedings are laid

comment on public affairs is essential to the vitality of a representative

the press and that privileged communications must be protective of

down in the case of Ang Tibay v. Court of Industrial Relation (69

democracy. The people continues to have the right to be informed on

public opinion. Fair commentaries on matters of public interest are

Phil.635). The Ang Tibay Doctrine should be followed before any

public affairs and broadcast media continues to have the pervasive

privileged and constitute a valid defense in an action for libel or

broadcast station may be closed. The Ang Tibay Doctrine provides the

influence to the people being the most accessible form of media.

slander. The doctrine of fair comment means that while in general

following requirements:

Therefore, broadcast stations deserve the the special protection given

every discreditable imputation publicly made is deemed false, because

to all forms of media by the due process and freedom of expression

every man is presumed innocent until his guilt is judicially proved, and

clauses of the Constitution.

every false imputation is deemed malicious, nevertheless, when the

(1) The right to hearing, includes the right to present one’s case and submit evidence presented.

discreditable imputation is directed against a public person in his public capacity, it is not necessarily actionable. In order that such discreditable

(2) The tribunal must consider the evidence presented

imputation to a public official may be actionable, it must either be a false allegation of fact or a comment based on a false supposition. If the

comment is an expression of opinion, based on established facts, then

sidewalks, magazines,publications and other reading materials believed

charged as being obscene may fall." Another is whether it shocks the

it is immaterial that the opinion happens to be mistaken, as long as it

to be obscene, pornographic and indecent and later burned the seized

ordinary and common sense of men as an indecency. Ultimately

might reasonably be inferred from the facts.

materials in public at the University belt along C.M. Recto Avenue,

"whether a picture is obscene or indecent must depend upon the

Manila, in the presence of Mayor Bagatsing and several officers and

circumstances of the case and that the question is to be decided by the

members

"judgment of the aggregate sense of the community reached by it." The

The questioned article dealt with matters of public interest as the

of

various

student

organizations.

declared objective of the conference, the composition of its members

government authorities in the instant case have not shown the required

and participants, and the manner by which it was intended to be

Among the publications seized, and later burned, was "Pinoy

proof to justify a ban and to warrant confiscation of the literature First

funded no doubt lend to its activities as being genuinely imbued with

Playboy"magazines published and co-edited by plaintiff Leo Pita.

of all, they were not possessed of a lawful court order: (1) finding the

public interest. Respondent is also deemed to be a public figure and

said materials to be pornography, and (2) authorizing them to carry out

even otherwise is involved in a public issue. The court held that

Plaintiff filed a case for injunction with prayer for issuance of the writ

a search and seizure, by way of a search warrant. The court provides

freedom of expression is constitutionally guaranteed and protected

of preliminary injunction against Mayor Bagatsing and Narcisco

that the authorities must apply for the issuance of a search warrant

with the reminder among media members to practice highest ethical

Cabrera, as superintendent of Western Police District of the City

from a judge, if in their opinion an obscenity seizure is in order and

standards in the exercise thereof.

ofManila, seeking to enjoin said defendants and their agents from

that;

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

confiscating plaintiff’s magazines or from preventing the sale or

------------

circulation thereof claiming that the magazine is a decent, artistic and

1. The authorities must convince the court that the materials sought to

A privileged communication may be either:

educational magazine which is not per se obscene, and that the

be seized are obscene and pose a clear and present danger of an evil

publication is protected by the Constitutional guarantees of freedom of

substantive enough to warrant State interference and action;

1. Absolutely privileged communication à those which are not

speech and of the press. Plaintiff also filed an Urgent Motion for

2. The judge must determine whether or not the same are indeed

actionable even if the author has acted in bad faith. An example is

issuance of a temporary restraining order against indiscriminate

obscene. The question is to be resolved on a case-to-case basis and

found in Sec. 11, Art.VI, of the 1987 Constitution which exempts a

seizure,

on the judge’s sound discretion;

member of Congress from liability for any speech or debate in the

Playboy"Magazines,

Congress or in any Committee thereof.

for preliminary injunction. The Court granted the temporary restraining

confiscation

and pending

burning

of

hearing

plaintiff's on

the

"Pinoy petition

order. The case was set for trial upon the lapse of the TRO. RTC ruled 2.

Qualifiedly

privileged

communications à those

containing

that the seizure was valid. This was affirmed by the CA.

defamatory imputations are not actionable unless found to have been made without good intention justifiable motive. To this genre belong "private communications" and "fair and true report without any

Issue: Whether or Not the seizure violative of the freedom of

comments or remarks."

expression

of

the

petitioner.

Held: Freedom of the press is not without restraint as the state has the PITA VS. COURT OF APPEALS [178 SCRA 362; G.R. NO.80806; 5 OCT

right to protect society from pornographic literature that is offensive to

1989]

public morals, as indeed we have laws punishing the author, publishers and sellers of obscene publications. However, It is easier said than done

Facts: On December 1 and 3, 1983, pursuing an Anti-Smut Campaign

to say, that if the pictures here in question were used not exactly for

initiated by the Mayor of the City of Manila, Ramon D. Bagatsing,

art's sake but rather for commercial purposes, the pictures are not

elements of the Special Anti-Narcotics Group, Auxilliary Services

entitled to any constitutional protection. Using the Kottinger rule: the

Bureau, Western Police District, INP of the Metropolitan Police Force of

test of obscenity is "whether the tendency of the matter charged as

Manila, seized and confiscated from dealers, distributors, newsstand

obscene, is to deprave or corrupt those whose minds are open to such

owners

immoral influences and into whose hands a publication or other article

and

peddlers

along

Manila

MTRCB

v.

GR

ABS-CBN

and

No.

Loren

155282

Legarda (2005)

FACTS:

allegedly hosted a party; and six unnamed justices of this Court who IN RE Emil (Emiliano) P. JURADO Ex Rel.: Philippine Long Distance

reportedly spent a prepaid vacation in Hong Kong with their families.

Telephone Company (PLDT) Posted on June 20, 2013 by winnieclaire

The Chief Justice issued an administrative order “Creating an Ad Hoc Committee to Investigate Reports of Corruption in the Judiciary,” to S

An episode of “The Inside Story” entitled “Prosti-tuition,” produced by

tandard

investigate the said reports of corruption in the judiciary. A letter

Loren Legarda was aired by ABS-CBN depicting female students

Facts: Jurado, a journalist who writes in a newspaper of general

affidavit was also received from the public utility, denying the

moonlighting as prostitutes to enable them to pay for their tuition fees.

circulation, the “Manila Standard.” He describes himself as a columnist,

allegations in Jurado’s column. The Supreme Court then issued a

Philippine Women’s University (PWU) was named as the school of some

who “incidentally happens to be a lawyer,”, had been writing about

resolution ordering that the matter dealt with in the letter and affidavit

of the students involved. MTRCB alleged that the episode besmirched

alleged improperties and irregularities in the judiciary over several

of the public utility company be docketed and acted upon as an official

the name of the PWU and respondents did not submit “The Inside

months (from about October, 1992 to March, 1993). Other journalists

Court proceeding for the determination of whether or not the

Story” to MTRCB for review and exhibited the same without its

had also been making reports or comments on the same subject. At the

allegations made by Jurado are true.

permission, violating Sec. 7 of PD 1986, Sec. 3, Chapter III and Sec. 7,

same time, anonymous communications were being extensively

Chapter

circulated, by hand and through the mail, about alleged venality and

HELD: Jurado’s actuations, in the context in which they were done,

corruption in the courts. And all these were being repeatedly and

demonstrate gross irresponsibility, and indifference to factual accuracy

MTRCB declared that all subsequent programs of the “The Inside Story”

insistently adverted to by certain sectors of society. Events Directly

and the injury that he might cause to the name and reputation of those

and all other programs of the ABS-CBN Ch. 2 of the same category shall

Giving Rise to the Proceeding at Bar.

of whom he wrote. They constitute contempt of court, directly tending

IV

of

MTRCB

Rules

and

Regulations.

as they do to degrade or abase the administration of justice and the

be submitted to the Board of Review and Approval before showing. On appeal, RTC ruled that Sections 3 (c) (d), 4, 7 and 11 of P. D. No. 1986 and Sections 3, 7 and 28 (a) of the MTRCB Rules and Regulations are unconstitutional for violating the freedom of expression and of the press

guaranteed

by

the

Constitution

The seed of the proceeding at bar was sown by the decision

judges engaged in that function. By doing them, he has placed himself

promulgated by this Court on August 27, 1992, in the so-called

beyond the circle of reputable, decent and responsible journalists who

“controversial case” of “Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company

live by their Code or the “Golden Rule” and who strive at all times to

v. Eastern Telephone Philippines, Inc. (ETPI),” G.R. No, 94374. In that

maintain the prestige and nobility of their calling.

decision the Court was sharply divided; the vote was 9 to 4, in favor of ISSUE : Whether or not there is compliance with the legal requisites for judicial inquiry so as to proceed with the issue on constitutionality.

RULING: NO. There is no need to resolve whether certain provisions of PD 1986 and MTRCB Rules and Regulations contravene the Constitution. No question involving the constitutionality or validity of a law or governmental act may be heard and decided by the court unless there is compliance with the legal requisites for judicial inquiry: 1) proper party 2)actual case or controversy 3) question raised at the earliest possible opportunity and 4) that the decision on the constitutional or legal question must be necessary to the determination of the case itself. The fourth requisite is wanting. MTRCB did not disapprove or ban the showing of the program nor did it cancel respondents’ permit. The latter was merely penalized for their failure to submit the program to MTRCB for its review and approval. Therefore, the issue of constitutionality is not necessary to the determination of the case itself.

the petitioner PLDT. Mr. Justice Hugo E. Gutierrez, Jr., wrote the

Although honest utterances, even if inaccurate, may further the fruitful

opinion for the majority.

exercise of the right of free speech, it does not follow that the lie,

In connection with this case, G.R. No. 94374, the “Philippine Daily

knowingly and deliberately published about a public official, should

Inquirer” and one or two other newspapers published, on January 28,

enjoy a like immunity. The knowingly false statement and the false

1993, a report of the purported affidavit of a Mr. David Miles Yerkes, an

statement made with reckless disregard of the truth, do not enjoy

alleged expert in linguistics. This gentleman, it appears, had been

constitutional protection.

commissioned by one of the parties in the case, Eastern Telephone Philippines, Inc. (ETPI), to examine and analyze the decision of Justice Gutierrez in relation to a few of his prior ponencias and the writings of one of the lawyers of PLDT, Mr. Eliseo Alampay, to ascertain if the decision had been written, in whole or in part, by the latter. Yerkes proffered the conclusion that the Gutierrez decision “looks, reads and sounds like the writing of the PLDT’s counsel,” Thus, he speaks of the “Magnificent Seven,” by merely referring to undisclosed regional trial court judges in Makati; the “Magnificent Seven” in the Supreme Court, as some undesignated justices who supposedly vote as one; the “Dirty Dozen,” as unidentified trial judges in Makati and three other cities. He adverts to an anonymous group of justices and judges for whom a bank

The Civil Code, in its Article 19 lays down the norm for the proper exercise of any right, constitutional or otherwise, viz.: “ARTICLE 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.” The provision is reflective of the universally accepted precept of “abuse of rights,” “one of the most dominant principles which must be deemed always implied in any system of law.” Requirement to exercise bona fide care in ascertaining the truth of the statements when publishing statements which are clearly defamatory to identifiable judges or other public officials.

Judges, by becoming such, are rightly regarded as voluntarily subjecting

Convention is a restatement of the generally accepted principles of

free speech in school is not always absolute. The court upheld the right

themselves to norms of conduct which embody more stringent

international law. But the same cannot be invoked as defense to the

of students for the freedom of expression but it does not rule out

standards of honesty, integrity, and competence than are commonly

primacy of the Philippine Constitution which upholds and guarantees

disciplinary actions of the school on the conduct of their students.

required from private persons. Nevertheless, persons who seek or

the rights to free speech and peacable assembly. At the same time, the

Further, Sec. 7 of the of the Campus Journalism Act provides that the

accept appointment to the Judiciary cannot reasonably be regarded as

City Ordinance issued by respondent mayor cannot be invoked if the

school cannot suspend or expel a student solely on the basis of the

having forfeited any right to private honor and reputation. For to so

application thereof would collide with a constitutionally guaranteed

articles they write EXCEPT when such article materially disrupts class

rule will be to discourage all save those who feel no need to maintain

right/s.

work of involve substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others.

their self-respect from becoming judges. The public interest involved in

Therefore the court ruled that the power of the school to investigate is

freedom of speech and the individual interest of judges (and for that

an adjunct of its power to suspend or expel. It is a necessary corollary

matter, all other public officials) in the maintenance of private honor

Miriam College Foundation, Inc. v CA 348 SCRA 265 December 15, 2000

and reputation need to be accommodated one to the other. And the

to the enforcement of rules and regulations and the maintenance of a safe and orderly educational environment conducive tolearning. That

point of adjustment or accommodation between these two legitimate

Facts: The members of the editorial board of the Miriam College

power, like the power to suspend or expel, is an inherent part of the

interests is precisely found in the norm which requires those who,

Foundation’s school paper were subjected to disciplinary sanction by

academic freedom of institutions of higher learning guaranteed by the

invoking freedom of speech, publish statements which are clearly

the College Discipline Committee after letters of complaint were filed

Constitution. The court held that Miriam College has the authority to

defamatory to identifiable judges or other public officials to exercise

before the Board following the publication of the school paper that

hear and decide the cases filed against respondent students.

bona fide care in ascertaining the truth of the statements they publish.

contains obscene, vulgar, and sexually explicit contents. Prior to the

The norm does not require that a journalist guarantee the truth of what

disciplinary sanction to the defendants they were required to submit a

he says or publishes. But the norm does prohibit the reckless disregard

written statement to answer the complaints against them to the

of private reputation by publishing or circulating defamatory

Discipline Committee but the defendants, instead of doing so wrote to

statements without any bona fide effort to ascertain the truth thereof.

the Committee to transfer the case to the DECS which they alleged to have the jurisdiction over the issue. Pushing through with the investigation ex parte the Committee found the defendants guilty and imposed upon them disciplinary sanctions. Defendants filed before the court for prohibition with preliminary injunction on said decision of the

Reyes v Bagatsing

Committee questioning the jurisdiction of said Discipline Board over the defendants.

Retired Justice Reyes in behalf of the members of the Anti-Bases Coalition sought a permit to rally from Luneta Park until the front gate

Issue: WON the Discipline Board of Miriam College has jurisdiction over

of the US embassy which is less than two blocks apart. The permit has

the defendants.

been denied by then Manila mayor Bagatsing. The mayor claimed that there have been intelligence reports that indicated that the rally would

Held: The court resolved the issue before it by looking through the

be infiltrated by lawless elements. He also issued City Ordinance No.

power of DECS and the Disciplinary Committee in imposing sanctions

7295 to prohibit the staging of rallies within the 500 meter radius of the

upon the defendants. Section 5 (2), Article XIV of the Constitution

US embassy. Bagatsing pointed out that it was his intention to provide

guarantees all institutions of higher learning academic freedom. This

protection to the US embassy from such lawless elements in pursuant

institutional academic freedom includes the right of the school or

to Art 22 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. And that

college to decide for itself, its aims and objectives, and how best to

under our constitution we “adhere to generally accepted principles of

attain them free from outside coercion or interference save possibly

international law”. ISSUE: Whether or not a constitutional right is being

when the overriding public welfare calls for some restraint. Such duty

violated by the mayor’s ordinance.

gives the institution the right to discipline its students and inculcate

HELD: Indeed, the receiving state is tasked for the protection of foreign

upon them good values, ideals and attitude. The right of students to

diplomats from any lawless element. And indeed the Vienna