Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Wk 3 Lecture 2 - The Bill of Rights.pdf, Lab Reports of Law

Wk 3 Lecture 2 - The Bill of Rights.pdf

Typology: Lab Reports

2023/2024

Uploaded on 09/13/2023

kheycee-maglaqui
kheycee-maglaqui 🇵🇭

5 documents

1 / 9

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
1
LATH SESSION 2
-
ARTICLE 111 BILL OF RIGHTS
Note:
There are some situational cases in this lecture, study and answer it. This will be
discussed later during the synchronous session.
The Bill of rights governs the relationship between the individual and the
state.
Its concern is not the relation between individuals, between a private
individual and other individual.
What the Bill of Rights does is to declare some forbidden zones in the
private sphere inaccessible to any power holder
The Bill of Rights is the limitation on the powers of the government.
Hence, it cannot be invoked if one who violated the same is a private
individual or entity. Use or invoke only the provisions of the Bill of rights
if the one who violated it is the government.
The purpose of the Bill of Rights is to protect the people against arbitrary
and discriminatory use of political power. This bundle of rights
guarantees the preservation of our natural rights which include personal
liberty and security against invasion by the government or any of its
branches or instrumentalities.
Case 1:
Yrasuegi vs. Philippine Airlines, G.R. No. 168081, October 17, 2008
Facts: Mr. X is an international flight steward of the Philippine Airlines Inc.
(PAL). He stands five feet and eight inches (5’8”) with a large body frame.
Under the Cabin and Crew Administration Manual of PAL, the weight to be
maintained by all employees shall be 166 pounds. During the time he was
hired, Mr. X met the weight requirement. However, after a couple of years,
Mr. X weighed 205 pounds which is beyond the 166 pounds limit. Mr. X was
given a chance to lose weight, but instead of losing his weight, he gained
more. Thereafter, Mr. X was terminated for violating the company rules. He
filed an illegal dismissal case against PAL. One of the arguments of Mr. X is
that the company rules are discriminatory, it is not fair. In other words, Mr. X
is invoking section 1 of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution.
Issue: 1 Is Mr. X correct in invoking section 1 of the Bill of Rights against
Philippine Airlines Inc. which is a private entity?
Issue 2: Was he validly dismissed?
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9

Partial preview of the text

Download Wk 3 Lecture 2 - The Bill of Rights.pdf and more Lab Reports Law in PDF only on Docsity!

ARTICLE 111 – BILL OF RIGHTS

Note: There are some situational cases in this lecture, study and answer it. This will be discussed later during the synchronous session.

  • The Bill of rights governs the relationship between the individual and the state.
  • Its concern is not the relation between individuals, between a private individual and other individual.
  • What the Bill of Rights does is to declare some forbidden zones in the private sphere inaccessible to any power holder
  • The Bill of Rights is the limitation on the powers of the government. Hence, it cannot be invoked if one who violated the same is a private individual or entity. Use or invoke only the provisions of the Bill of rights if the one who violated it is the government.
  • The purpose of the Bill of Rights is to protect the people against arbitrary and discriminatory use of political power. This bundle of rights guarantees the preservation of our natural rights which include personal liberty and security against invasion by the government or any of its branches or instrumentalities. Case 1: Yrasuegi vs. Philippine Airlines, G.R. No. 168081, October 17, 2008 Facts: Mr. X is an international flight steward of the Philippine Airlines Inc. (PAL). He stands five feet and eight inches (5’8”) with a large body frame. Under the Cabin and Crew Administration Manual of PAL, the weight to be maintained by all employees shall be 166 pounds. During the time he was hired, Mr. X met the weight requirement. However, after a couple of years, Mr. X weighed 205 pounds which is beyond the 166 pounds limit. Mr. X was given a chance to lose weight, but instead of losing his weight, he gained more. Thereafter, Mr. X was terminated for violating the company rules. He filed an illegal dismissal case against PAL. One of the arguments of Mr. X is that the company rules are discriminatory, it is not fair. In other words, Mr. X is invoking section 1 of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. Issue: 1 Is Mr. X correct in invoking section 1 of the Bill of Rights against Philippine Airlines Inc. which is a private entity? Issue 2: Was he validly dismissed?
  • Article 3, Section1: No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. There are two rights that are guaranteed by the above provision, namely: 1. The Right to Due Process 2. The Right to Equal Protection of the Law Two Kinds of Person in Law 1. Natural Person 2. Juridical Person - The “person” in the above section may refer either to natural or juridical person Concept of Due Process of aw in its Procedural Aspect By “due process of law’, we mean “a law which hears before it condemns; which proceeds upon inquiry, and renders judgment only after trial” Due Process of Law contemplates notice and opportunity to be heard before judgment is rendered, affecting one’s person or property. Ruling 1: Ruling 2:
  • Question: Does extra-judicial killing exercise due process of law? Three Areas Protected by Section 1
  1. Life
  2. Liberty – freedom to do right and never wrong; it is ever guided by reason and the upright and honorable conscience of the individual
  3. Property – may refer to personal, immovable or movable objects like land buildings, car, etc. Thus if Ms. X owns a land, it cannot be taken by the government without due process. Included in property is employment. Employment is not merely a contractual relationship; it has assumed the nature of property right Equal Protection Clause The 2nd^ sentence of Article 3 section 1 is called Equal Protection Clause. It means people of the same class shall be treated alike, under like circumstances and conditions both as to the privileges conferred and liabilities enforced. It does not mean absolute equality, for otherwise there would be injustice. the Ermita-Malate area or convert said businesses to other kinds of business such as antique shop, coffee shop, flower shop or restaurant. Malate Tourist Development Corporation questioned the said ordinance for being violative of the Due process requirement. Issue: Is there a violation of Due process? Ruling: Yes, there was a violation of due process. The order of the ordinance to close or cease the operation of the business or convert the hotels and inns to coffee shop, etc. is a form of confiscation, taking, seizure or destruction without any trial or hearing.
  • Article 3 Section 3 (1) The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law. Essence of Right to Privacy It simply means the right to be let alone. This means that the government or any agencies cannot intrude with the private affairs of an individual. The Privacy of Communication Any communication given in confidence cannot be intercepted by the government. Speeches delivered in public places, mass media and the like are not covered by the privacy of communication simply because the same was made in the public. The Privacy of Letters Correspondence made in writing is treated with confidentiality. Example, all information recorded in the registration book of the hotel may not be inquired into by the police officer because they are strictly confidential. However, if there is a court order such as search warrant, then it can be taken by the police. Open letters or letters posted in social media are not protected by the right to privacy. The right to privacy is considered a fundamental right but it is not absolute. If there is a lawful order of the court or when public safety or order requires otherwise, then the right to privacy may be impaired or diminished. Doctrine of the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree (Section 3) (2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding. RA 4200, Anti-Wiretapping Law It shall be unlawful for any person, not being authorized by all the parties, to tap any wire or cable or by using any device to secretly overhear, intercept or record such communication or spoken word by using a device commonly known as Dictaphone or dictograph, walkie-talkie or tape recorder.
  • Example: Mr. X has a scheduled business meeting in Isabela, Basilan on December 15,2014. However, the Provincial Government issued an ordinance banning all citizens to go there because of the on-going armed conflict between the terrorist group and the Armed Forces of the Philippines, effective December 13,2014 until after the conflict ceases. Mr. X was very angry because he will lose millions of pesos if he will not appear in the meeting. He questioned the ordinance for being violative of his right to travel. Issue: Is the ordinance banning the citizens to go to Isabela Basilan Unconstitutional? Answer: The Right to Travel Travelling from one place to another is also a guaranteed right. However, there are cases wherein this right can be impaired or restricted by the government. Under the bill of rights to travel can be impaired if any of the following circumstances are present, to wit:
  1. Interest of National Security;
  2. Public Safety; and
  3. Public Health. Example 2: XXX travel and tour were engaged by YYY University to tour their students in Ilocos Norte on December 15, 2014. However, the provincial government of the said province issued an ordinance banning all the citizens to go there effective December 15, 2014 because of Ebola Virus that already killed 20 persons. Thus, the tour was suspended. Issue: Was the ban Unconstitutional? In this time of the global pandemic, our Right to Travel was impaired. Why?

All your answers in the cases

stated in this lesson, include it in

the Session 2 Recap File

Continue to the last topic of this

session,

Article 4 – Citizenship