WRIT OF HABEAS

DATA
A . M . N O. 0 8 - 1 - 1 6 - S C

WHAT IS THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA?

Section 1. Habeas Data. - The writ of habeas data is a

remedy available to any person whose right to

privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or
threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a
public official or employee, or of a private individual

or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or

storing of data or information regarding the
person, family, home and correspondence of
the aggrieved party.

A companion to the habeas corpus and amparo remedies is the writ

of habeas data based on a persons right to information about
himself/herself, whether the information is in the possession of the
government or a private entity. The right includes the right to modify (even
correct) or remove such information due to its sensitive, erroneous, biased,

or discriminatory nature.

 the writ of habeas data provides a judicial remedy to protect a

persons right to control information regarding oneself, particularly in

instances where such information is being collected through unlawful
means in order to achieve unlawful ends. As an independent and summary
remedy to protect the right to privacy especially the right to informational
privacy the proceedings for the issuance of the writ of habeas data does not

entail any finding of criminal, civil or administrative culpability. If the allegations

in the petition are proven through substantial evidence, then the Court may (a)
grant access to the database or information; (b) enjoin the act complained of; or

(c) in case the database or information contains erroneous data or information,

order its deletion, destruction or rectification. (Rodriguez v. Arroyo, 2011)

According to legal commentator Rene V. Sarmiento, the promulgation of the

Rule on the Writs of Habeas Data is a clear recognition of the inherent

dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human
family as the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.
Notable among these rights is the accord of respect for an
individuals privacy, especially as the State may seek to obtain

personal information which may be potentially damaging about its

citizens.

APPLICATION
Aside from giving individuals the right to find out what information is being kept about
them, the writ of habeas data seeks to protect the right to find out what use and for
what purpose such data are being collected. The petitioner is also given the opportunity

to question the data and demand their updating, rectification, or destruction.

The writ of habeas data was available to the families of the deceased in a case involving
extralegal killings and enforced disappearances. It gave the victims access to police and
military records otherwise closed to them. In essence, the decision established a right to
truth.

LIMITATIONS
In view of the heightening prevalence of extrajudicial killings and enforced
disappearances, the Rule on the Writ of Amparo was issued and took effect on October
24, 2007 which coincided with the celebration of United Nations Day and affirmed the
Courts commitment towards internationalization of human rights. More than three
months later or on February 2, 2008, the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data was
promulgated.
. the coverage of the writs (amparo and habeas data) is limited to the protection
of rights to life, liberty and security. And the writs cover not only actual but also
threats of unlawful acts or omissions (Castillo v. Cruz, 2009)

WHAT IS THE CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS OF

THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA?
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. (Article III Section 3, subsection
I).
2. The Supreme Court shall have the power to promulgate rules concerning
the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights. (Article VIII,

Section 5).

WHAT RULE GOVERNS PETITIONS FOR

AND THE ISSUANCE OF A WRIT OF
HABEAS DATA?
It is governed by The Rule on the Writ of Habeas
Data (A. M. No. 08-1-16-SC) which was approved by
the Supreme Court on 22 January 2008.

WHAT IS THE SUPREME COURTS

BASIS IN ISSUING THE RULE?
The Rule was drafted pursuant to the Supreme Courts constitutional power to

promulgate rules for the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights

(Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 5[5]):
Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of
constitutional

rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all

courts, the admission to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and
legal assistance to the underprivileged

WHO MAY FILE A PETITION FOR THE

ISSUANCE OF A WRIT OF HABEAS DATA?
Sec. 2. Who May File. ANY AGGRIEVED PARTY may file a petition for the writ
of habeas data. However, in cases of extralegal killings and enforced
disappearances, the petition may be filed by:
(a) Any member of the immediate family of the aggrieved party, namely: the spouse,

children and parents; or

(b) Any ascendant, descendant or collateral relative of the aggrieved party
within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity, in default of those

mentioned in the preceding paragraph; or

QUESTION
May an employee invoke the remedies available under such writ where an

employer decides to transfer her workplace on the basis of copies of an

anonymous letter posted therein imputing to her disloyalty to the company
and calling for her to leave, which imputation it investigated but fails to

inform her of the details thereof?

MERALCO V LIM (2010)

Facts:
An anonymous letter was posted at the door of the Metering
Office of the Administration building of MERALCO Plaridel,
Bulacan Sector, at which respondent is assigned, denouncing
respondent.
She was ordered to be transferred to Alabang due to
concerns over her safety. She complained under the premise
that the transfer was a denial of her due process claiming
that the punitive nature of the transfer amounted to a denial
of due process. Citing the grueling travel from her residence
in Pampanga to Alabang and back entails, and violation of
the provisions on job security of their Collective Bargaining
Agreement (CBA).

Cherry Lim:
MATAPOS MONG
LAMUNIN LAHAT
NG BIYAYA NG
MERALCO,
NGAYON NAMAN
AY GUSTO MONG
PALAMON ANG
BUONG
KUMPANYA
SA
MGA BUWAYA NG
GOBYERNO.
KAPAL
NG
MUKHA
MO,
LUMAYAS
KA
RITO,
WALANG
UTANG
NA
LOOB.

She asked for deferment thereafter. Since the company didnt respond, she filed for a
writ of habeas data in the Bulacan RTC alleging that the unlawful act and omission

consisting of their [MERALCO] continued failure and refusal to provide her with details or
information about the alleged report which MERALCO purportedly received concerning
threats to her safety and security amount to a violation of her right to privacy in life,

liberty and security. Thus, she prayed for the issuance of a writ commanding petitioners
to file a written return containing the following:
a) full disclosure of the data or information about respondent in relation to the report
purportedly received by petitioners on the alleged threat to her safety and security;
the nature of such data and the purpose for its collection;
b) the measures taken by petitioners to ensure the confidentiality of such data or
information; and
c) the currency and accuracy of such data or information obtained.

Petitioners moved for the dismissal of the petition and recall of the TRO on the grounds
that, inter alia, resort to a petition for writ of habeas data was not in order; and the RTC
lacked jurisdiction over the case which properly belongs to the National Labor Relations
Commission (NLRC).

The Trial Court rendered a decision in Lims favor.

In the SC, Petitioners point out that the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data directs the
issuance of the writ only against public officials or employees, or private individuals or
entities engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information regarding
an aggrieved partys person, family or home; and that MERALCO (or its officers) is
clearly not engaged in such activities.

ISSUE: WON HABEAS DATA IS THE

RIGHT REMEDY FOR LIM?
RULING: NO!

It bears reiteration that like the writ of amparo, habeas data was conceived as a
response, given the lack of effective and available remedies, to address the
extraordinary rise in the number of killings and enforced disappearances. Its

intent is to address violations of or threats to the rights to life, liberty or

security as a remedy independently from those provided under prevailing
Rules.

Castillo v. Cruz underscores the emphasis laid down in Tapuz v. del Rosario

that the writs of amparo and habeas data will NOT issue to protect
purely property or commercial concerns nor when the grounds invoked
in support of the petitions therefor are vague or doubtful. Employment

constitutes a property right under the context of the due process

clause of the Constitution. It is evident that respondents reservations on
the real reasons for her transfer are what prompted her to adopt the
extraordinary remedy of habeas data. Jurisdiction over such concerns is
inarguably lodged by law with the NLRC and the Labor Arbiters.

WHERE CAN THE PETITION BE FILED?

a. Regional Trial Court where the petitioner or respondent resides, or that

which has jurisdiction over the place where the data or information is gathered,
collected or stored, at the option of the petitioner.
b. Supreme Court;
c. Court of Appeals; or
d. Sandiganbayan.

when the action

concerns public data
files of government
offices

WHERE RETURNABLE? WHERE

ENFORCEABLE?
Sec. 4.

When the writ is issued by a Regional Trial Court or any judge thereof, it shall be
returnable before such court or judge.
When issued by the Court of Appeals or the Sandiganbayan or any of its
justices, it may be returnable before such court or any justice thereof, or to any
Regional Trial Court of the place where the petitioner or respondent resides, or
that which has jurisdiction over the place where the data or information is
gathered, collected or stored.

When issued by the Supreme Court or any of its justices, it may be returnable before
such Court or any justice thereof, or before the Court of Appeals or the Sandiganbayan
or any of its justices, or to any Regional Trial Court of the place where the petitioner or
respondent resides, or that which has jurisdiction over the place where the data or
information is gathered, collected or stored.

The writ of habeas data shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines.

HOW MUCH IS THE DOCKET OR

FILING FEES FOR THE PETITION?
Sec. 5. Docket Fees. - No docket and other lawful fees shall be required from an

indigent petitioner. The petition of the indigent shall be docked and acted upon
immediately, without prejudice to subsequent submission of proof of indigency not later
than fifteen (15) days from the filing of the petition.

WHAT ARE THE REQUIRED CONTENTS

OF THE PETITION?
Sec. 6. Petition. - A verified written petition for a writ of habeas data should contain:

a) The personal circumstances of the petitioner and the respondent;

b) The manner the right to privacy is violated or threatened and how it affects the
right to life, liberty or security of the aggrieved party;

c)

The actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to secure the data or information;

d) The location of the files, registers or databases, the government office, and the
person in charge, in possession or in control of the data or information, if known;
e) The reliefs prayed for, which may include the updating, rectification, suppression or
destruction of the database or information or files kept by the respondent. In case of
threats, the relief may include a prayer for an order enjoining the act complained of;
and
f)

Such other relevant reliefs as are just and equitable.

WHEN IS THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA

ISSUED?
Sec. 7. Issuance of the Writ. - Upon the filing of the petition, the court, justice or

judge shall immediately order the issuance of the writ if on its face it ought to
issue. The clerk of court shall issue the writ under the seal of the court and cause it to
be served within three (3) days from the issuance; or, in case of urgent necessity, the

justice or judge may issue the writ under his or her own hand, and may deputize any
officer or person serve it.
The writ shall also set the date and time for summary hearing of the petition which shall

not be later than ten (10) work days from the date of its issuance.

IS THERE ANY PENALTY IN CASE OF

REFUSAL TO ISSUE OR SERVE THE
WRIT?
Yes. A clerk of court who refuses to issue the writ after its allowance, or a deputized
person who refuses to serve the same, shall be punished by the court, justice or judge
for contempt without prejudice to other disciplinary actions.

HOW IS THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA

SERVED?
The writ shall be served upon the respondent by the officer or person

deputized by the court, justice or judge who shall retain a copy on which to
make a return of service. In case the writ cannot be served personally on the
respondent, the rules on substituted service shall apply.

AFTER THE WRIT IS SERVED, WHAT

SHOULD THE RESPONDENT DO?
The respondent shall file a verified written return together with supporting

affidavits within five (5) work days from service of the writ, which period may
be reasonably extended by the Court for justifiable reasons.

WHAT ARE THE CONTENTS OF THE

WRITTEN RETURN?
(a) The lawful defenses such as national security, state secrets, privileged
communication, confidentiality of the source of information of media and others;

(b) In case of respondent in charge, in possession or in control of the data or

information subject of the petition:
(i) a disclosure of the data or information about the petitioner, the nature of
such data or information, and the purpose for its collection;

(ii) the steps or actions taken by the respondent to ensure the security and
confidentiality of the data or information; and
(iii) the currency and accuracy of the data or information held; and

(c) Other allegations relevant to the resolution of the proceeding.

A general denial of the allegations in the petition shall not be allowed.

CONTEMPT
The court, justice or judge may punish with imprisonment or fine a respondent who
commits contempt by making a false return, or refusing to make a return; or any
person who otherwise disobeys or resist a lawful process or order of the
court.

INSTEAD OF HAVING THE HEARING IN

OPEN COURT, CAN IT BE DONE IN
CHAMBERS?
YES. It can be done when the respondent invokes the defense that the release of the
data or information in question shall compromise national security or state secrets, or
when the data or information cannot be divulged to the public due to its nature or
privileged character.

PROHIBITED PLEADINGS AND

MOTIONS
a) Motion to dismiss;
b) Motion for extension of time to
file return, opposition, affidavit,
position
paper
and
other
pleadings;
c) Dilatory
motion
for
postponement;

h) Motion to declare respondent in

default;
i) Intervention;
j) Memorandum;
k) Motion for reconsideration of
interlocutory orders or interim
relief orders; and

d) Motion for a bill of particulars;

e) Counterclaim or cross-claim;
f) Third-party complaint;

l) Petition for certiorari, mandamus

or prohibition against any
interlocutory order.

g) Reply;

WHEN RESPONDENT FAILS TO FILE A

RETURN
The court, justice or judge shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte, granting the

petitioner such relief as the petition may warrant unless the court in its discretion
requires the petitioner to submit evidence.

HOW LONG DOES THE COURT HAVE IN

DECIDING THE PETITION?
The court shall render judgment within ten (10) days from the time the petition is

submitted for decision. If the allegations in the petition are proven by substantial
evidence, the court shall enjoin the act complained of, or order the deletion, destruction,
or rectification of the erroneous data or information and grant other relevant reliefs as

may be just and equitable; otherwise, the privilege of the writ shall be denied.

WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THE FINALITY

OF THE JUDGMENT?
The judgment shall be enforced by the sheriff or any lawful officer as may be designated
by the court, justice or judge within five (5) work days.

The officer who executed the final judgment shall, within three (3) days from its
enforcement, make a verified return to the court. The return shall contain a full
statement of the proceedings under the writ and a complete inventory of the database

or information, or documents and articles inspected, updated, rectified, or deleted, with

copies served on the petitioner and the respondent.
The officer shall state in the return how the judgment was enforced and complied with
by the respondent, as well as all objections of the parties regarding the manner and
regularity of the service of the writ.

NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING

Sec. 15. Summary Hearing. - The hearing on the petition shall be summary. However,
the court, justice or judge may call for a preliminary conference to simplify the issues

and determine the possibility of obtaining stipulations and admissions from the parties.

DOES THE FILING OF THE PETITION PRECLUDE

THE FILING OF SEPARATE CRIMINAL, CIVIL OR
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS?
No. However, when a criminal action has been commenced, no separate petition for the
writ shall be filed, but the reliefs under the writ shall be available by motion in the

criminal case, and the procedure under this Rule shall govern the disposition of the
reliefs available under the writ of habeas data. (Sec. 22.)
When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to a petition for a
writ of habeas data, the petition shall be consolidated with the criminal action. After
consolidation, the procedure under this Rule shall continue to govern the disposition of
the reliefs in the petition. (Sec. 21.)

APPEAL
Sec. 19. Appeal. - Any party may appeal from the final judgment or order to the
Supreme Court under Rule 45. The appeal may raise questions of fact or law or both.
The period of appeal shall be five (5) working days from the date of notice of the
judgment or final order.

The appeal shall be given the same priority as in habeas corpus and amparo cases.

SOURCES
A. M. No. 08-1-16-SC, Writ of Habeas Data
Castillo v. Cruz, G.R. No. 182165, (2009)

Manila Electric Company v. Lim, G.R. No. 184769, (2010)

Rodriguez v. Arroyo, G.R. No. 191805, (2011)