Sections 15 – 18 of Art III_2

Sections 15 – 18 of the
Rights of the Accused

Prof. Jefferson B. Dungca
Constitutional Basis (Article III – Bill
of Rights)
Section 15. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in cases
of invasion or rebellion when the public safety requires it.
Section 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all
judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.
Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Section 18.
(1) No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.
(2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a crime
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.
1987 Constitution, Art. III, Section 15 Should be
read with Art. VII, Section 18
Section 18. The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the
Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent
or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the
public safety requires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of
the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law. Within
forty-eight hours from the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus, the President shall submit a report in person or in writing to the
Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its Members in
regular or special session, may revoke such proclamation or suspension, which revocation shall
not be set aside by the President. Upon the initiative of the President, the Congress may, in the
same manner, extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to be determined by the
Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it.
The Congress, if not in session, shall, within twenty-four hours following such proclamation or
suspension, convene in accordance with its rules without need of a call.
1987 Constitution, Art. III, Section
15 Should be read with Art. VII,
Section 18
The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen, the
sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or the extension thereof, and must promulgate its
decision thereon within thirty days from its filing.
A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor supplant the
functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of
jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to
function, nor automatically suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall apply only to persons
judicially charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in, or directly connected with, invasion.
During the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, any person thus
arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be
released.
Writ of Habeas Corpus
Definition - A writ issued by a court directed to a person detaining
another, commanding him to produce the body of the prisoner at a
designated time and place, with the day and cause of his caption and
detention, to do, to submit to, and to receive whatever the court or
judge awarding the writ shall consider in his behalf [Sombong v. CA,
G.R. No. 111876 (1990)].
Section 16 – Speedy Disposition of
Cases
The right to speedy disposition of cases is not limited to the accused in criminal
proceedings but extends to all parties in all cases, be it civil or administrative in
nature, as well as all proceedings, either judicial or quasi-judicial [Coscolluela v.
Sandiganbayan (First Division), G.R. No. 191411 (2013)].
While the right to speedy trial is invoked against courts of law, the right to speedy
disposition of cases may be invoked before quasi-judicial or administrative
tribunals in proceedings that are adversarial and may result in possible criminal
liability [Cagang v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 206438, 210141-42 (2018)].
Due regard must be given to the facts and circumstances surrounding each case.
What the Constitution prohibits are unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive delays
which render rights nugatory [Ombudsman v. Jurado, G.R. No. 154155 (2008)].
Section 16 – Speedy Disposition of
Cases
Dismissal based on violation of the right to speedy disposition of cases:
A criminal case may be dismissed for violation of a person’s right to

speedy disposition of cases [Coscolluela v. Sandiganbayan, supra].
Stems or derived from the constitutional doctrine of Efficient

Administration of Justice where in a democratic-republican state like
The Philippines values the rights of a person or an accused; especially
for the persons who cannot afford the right to bail (as it may rise from a
matter of right or a matter of discretion).
Section 17 – Right against self -
incrimination
Extent of the Right The right applies only to testimonial compulsion and production of documents,
papers, and chattels in court.
The right against self-incrimination secures to a witness, whether she/he is a party or not, the right to
refuse to answer any particular incrimination question. It prescribes an “option of refusal to answer
incrimination questions and not a prohibition of inquiry [People v. Ayson, G.R. No. 85215 (1989)].
The right against self-incrimination proscribes the use of physical or moral compulsion to extort
communications from the accused. If he/she chooses to remain silent, he/she suffers no penalty for
such silence.
Included in this right are:

1. To be exempt from being a witness against himself; and
2. To testify as witness in his own behalf [People v. Ang, G.R. No. 231854 (2020)].
When to invoke Section 17?
1. This right may only be invoked for that specific incriminating question and
cannot be claimed for any other time [Sabio v. Gordin, G.R. Nos. 174340,
174318 & 174177 (2006)].
2. It does not give a witness the right to disregard a subpoena and decline to
testify altogether. The witness must still take the stand, be sworn, and
answer questions. It is the duty of his/her counsel to advise him/her of
his/her right against selfincrimination [People v. Ayson, supra].
Note: The right against self-incrimination is not self- executing. It must be
claimed. If not claimed by or in behalf of the witness, the protection does not
come into play. It follows that the right may be waived, expressly, or impliedly,
as by a failure to claim it at the appropriate time [People v. Ayson, supra].
Section 18 - . Right against
Involuntary Servitude
• Involuntary Servitude Refers to a condition of enforced and compulsory service
induced by means of any scheme, plan or pattern, intended to cause a person
to believe that if he or she did not enter into or continue in such condition, he
or she or another person would suffer serious harm or other forms of abuse or
physical restraint, or threat of abuse or harm, or coercion including depriving
access to travel documents and withholding salaries, or the abuse or
threatened abuse of the legal process [R.A. No. 9208, as amended by R.A. No.
10364].
• Slavery and involuntary servitude, together with their corollary peonage, all
denote “a condition of enforced, compulsory service of one to another”
[Hodges v. U.S., 203 U.S. 1 (1906) in Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, supra]
The following are Not Involuntary
Servitude:
• a. Imprisonment as punishment is rendered valid for a crime after conviction
[Section 18, Article III, 1987 Constitution]
• b. In the interest of national defense, all citizens may be compelled by law to
render personal military or civil service [Section 4, Article II, 1987 Constitution]
• c. Return to work order. “So imperative is the order in fact that it is not even
considered violative of the right against involuntary servitude. A worker must obey
the order if he wants to retain his work even if his inclination is to strike.”
[Sarmiento et. al. v. Tuico, G.R. No. 75271-73 (1988)]
• d. Naval enlistment [Robertson v. Baldwin, 165 U.S. 275 (1897)]
• e. Posse comitatus - obligation of the individual to assist in the protection of the
peace and good order of his community. [Kaisahan ng Manggagawa sa Kahoy v.
Gotamco Sawmills, G.R. No. L-1573]

Sections 15 – 18 of Art III_2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sections 15 – 18 of Art III_2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sections 15 – 18 of Art III_2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sections 15 – 18 of the

Rights of the Accused

Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.

A criminal case may be dismissed for violation of a person’s right to

Stems or derived from the constitutional doctrine of Efficient

Included in this right are:

You might also like