1. Procedural and Substantive Due Process

B. Due Process

1. Procedural and Substantive 2. Void-for-Vagueness 3. Judicial and Administrative Due Process

1987 CONST., art. III, sec. 1; art. XIII, sec. 1

> art. III, sec. 1 SECTION 1. 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.

> art. XIII, sec. 1

SECTION 1. The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic, and political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the common good.

To this end, the State shall regulate the acquisition, ownership, use, and disposition of property and its increments.

Concept

As to procedural due process, the requirement that no person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law simply requires that the procedure established by law be followed. If that procedure fully protects life, liberty and property of the citizens in the state, then it will be held to be due process of law. (U.S. v. Ocampo, G.R. No. L5527, Dec. 22, 1910)

This presupposes that the penal law being applied satisfies the substantive requirements of due process. (Bernas, The 1987 Philippine Constitution: A Comprehensive Reviewer, 2011)

In criminal proceedings then, due process is satisfied if the accused is "informed as to why he is proceeded against and what charge he has to meet, with his conviction being made to rest on evidence that is not tainted with falsity after full opportunity for him to rebut it and the sentence being imposed in accordance with a valid law. It is assumed, of course, that the court that rendered the decision is one of competent jurisdiction." (Nunez v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. L-50581-50617, Jan. 30, 1982)

Another aspect of due process is the right to be tried by an impartial judge (cold neutrality of an independent, wholly-free, disinterested and impartial tribunal). (Bernas, The 1987 Philippine Constitution: A Comprehensive Reviewer, 2011).

There must be allegation and proof that the judges have been unduly influenced, not simply that they might be, by the barrage of publicity because the subliminal effects of publicity are basically unbeknown and beyond knowing. (Bernas, The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, 2009)

Concept and Purpose

Due process of law means simply, first, that there shall be a law prescribed in harmony with the general powers of the legislative department of the Government; second, that this law shall be reasonable in its operation; third, that it shall be enforced according to the regular methods of procedure prescribed; and fourth, that it shall be applicable alike to all the citizens of the state or to all of a class. (Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, G.R. No. L-14078, March 7, 1919)

Due process evades a precise definition. The purpose of the guaranty is to prevent arbitrary governmental encroachment against the life, liberty and property of individuals. The due process guaranty serves as a protection against arbitrary regulation or seizure. Even corporations and partnerships are protected by the guaranty insofar as their property is concerned. (White Light Corporation v. City of Manila, G.R. No. 122846, Jan. 20, 2009)

Right to Appeal

The right to appeal is not a natural right or a part of due process; it is merely a statutory privilege, and may be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of law. (Manila Mining Corp. v. Amor, G.R. No. 182800, April 20, 2015)

Relativity

The concept of due process is not a static one. What is due process of law depends on circumstances. It varies with the subject-matter and necessities of the situation. (Rubi v. Provincial Board, citing Moyer vs. Peabody [1909], 212 U. S., 82)

PROCEDURAL

Procedural due process refers to the procedures that the government must follow before it deprives a person of life, liberty, or property. Procedural due process concerns itself with government action adhering to the established process when it makes an intrusion into the private sphere. (White Light Corporation v. City of Manila, G.R. No. 122846, Jan. 20, 2009)

Essence

The essence of procedural due process is embodied in the basic requirement of [1] notice and [2] a real opportunity to be heard. (Vivo v. PAGCOR, G.R. No. 187854, Nov. 12, 2013)

While it is true that the right to due process safeguards the opportunity to be heard and to submit any evidence one may have in support of his claim or defense, where the opportunity to be heard is accorded, and the party can “present its side” or “defend its interest in due course”, there is no denial of due process because what the law proscribes is the lack of opportunity to be heard. (Oca v Custodio, GR 199825, July 26, 2017)

Late Petitions

Rules of procedure are intended to ensure the orderly administration of justice and the protection of substantive rights in judicial and extrajudicial proceedings. It is a mistake to suppose that substantive law and adjective law are contradictory to each other or, as has often been suggested, that enforcement of procedural rules should never be permitted if it will result in prejudice to the substantive rights of the litigants. This is not exactly true; the concept is much misunderstood. As a matter of fact, the policy of the courts is to give effect to both kinds of law, as complementing each other, in the just and speedy resolution of the dispute between the parties. Observance of both substantive and procedural rights is equally guaranteed by due process, whatever the source of such rights, be it the Constitution itself or only a statute or a rule of court. (Tupas v. CA, G.R. No. 89571, Feb. 6, 1991)

A party having forfeited the right to appeal cannot claim that he/she has been denied due process. (Tupas v. CA, G.R. No. 89571, Feb. 6, 1991)

In a case of falsification of public documents, the accused claimed that his constitutional rights were violated when the Sandiganbayan denied his motion for new trial and motion to allow him to present additional witnesses. The Court ruled that his right to due process was not violated. The accused had 4 years to present evidence yet he only asked for the opportunity to present additional evidence via a motion for reconsideration after the Sandiganbayan had already admitted all the formal offers of evidence of the accused. Further, he failed to present the witness through the compulsory process of subpoena, during all the time that he testified for his defense for a period of six (6) months. Moreover, his motion to present additional witness was denied due to his failure to comply with Sections 4-5 of Rule 15. In addition, the evidence he seeks to present is not a newly discovered evidence since it was already presented by the other parties. All this points out to the conclusion that he was given ample opportunity to be heard. (Escobar v. People. G.R. No. 205576, Nov. 20, 2017)

SUBSTANTIVE

If due process were confined solely to its procedural aspects, there would arise absurd situation of arbitrary government action, provided the proper formalities are followed. Substantive due process completes the protection envisioned by the due process clause. It inquires whether the government has sufficient justification for depriving a person of life, liberty, or property. (White Light Corporation v. City of Manila, G.R. No. 122846, January 20, 2009)

Substantive due process requires that laws be [1] grounded on reason and [2] be free from arbitrariness. The government must have sufficient justification for depriving a person of life, liberty, or property. Essentially, substantive due process is satisfied if the deprivation is done in the exercise of the police power of the State. (Provincial Bus Operators Association of the Philippines v. DOLE, G.R. No. 202275, July 17, 2018)

Requisites

Laws which interfere with life, liberty, and property satisfy substantive due process when there is:

• Lawful Subject – The interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular class, require such interference; and
• Lawful Means – The means are reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose, and not unduly oppressive upon individuals.

The legislature may not, under the guise of protecting the public interests, arbitrarily interfere with private business, or impose unusual and unnecessary restrictions upon lawful occupations. In other words, its determination as to what is a proper exercise of its police powers is not final or conclusive, but is subject to the supervision of the court. (US v. Toribio, G.R. No. L-5060, Jan. 26, 1910)

Publication

Due process, which is a rule of fairness, requires that those who must obey a command must first know the command. Thus, under Art. 2 of the Civil Code, laws take effect 15 days after completion of publication, unless a different effectivity date is provided; publication remains required.

The omission of publication of laws would offend due process insofar as it would deny the public knowledge of the laws that are supposed to govern it. The term "laws" should refer to all laws and not only to those of general application, but including those of local application and private laws. Covered by this rule are presidential decrees and executive orders promulgated by the President. Administrative rules and regulations must also be published if their purpose is to enforce or implement existing law pursuant also to a valid delegation. However, no publication is required for internal regulations issued by administrative agencies. Publication must be in full or it is no publication at all since its purpose is to inform the public of the contents of the laws. (Tañada v. Tuvera, G.R. No. L-63915, Dec. 29, 1986)

VOID-FOR-VAGUENESS

Testimony Must Not be Based on Mere Hearsay

The testimony must be within the personal knowledge of the complainant or the witnesses he may produce and not based on mere hearsay. (Nala v. Barroso, G.R. No. 153087, Aug. 7, 2003)

CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY DUE PROCESS

What is often said about statutory due process is a procedure created by law, which upholds the constitutional right of a person to due process.

Dismissal of Employees

To be sure, the Due Process Clause in Article III, Sec. 1 of the Constitution embodies a system of rights based on moral principles so deeply imbedded in the traditions and feelings of our people as to be deemed fundamental to a civilized society as conceived by our entire history. Due process is that which comports with the deepest notions of what is fair and right and just. It is a constitutional restraint on the legislative as well as on the executive and judicial powers of the government provided by the Bill of Rights.

Due process under the Labor Code, like constitutional due process, has two aspects: substantive, (i.e., the valid and authorized causes of employment termination under the Labor Code) and procedural, (i.e., the manner of dismissal). Procedural due process requirements for dismissal are found in the Implementing Rules of P.D. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines in Book VI, Rule I, Sec. 2, as amended by Department Order Nos. 9 and 10. Breaches of these due process requirements violate the Labor Code. Therefore, statutory due process should be differentiated from failure to comply with constitutional due process.

Constitutional due process protects the individual from the government and assures him of his rights in criminal, civil or administrative proceedings; while statutory due process found in the Labor Code and Implementing Rules protects employees from being unjustly terminated without just cause after notice and hearing.

Where the dismissal is for a just cause, the lack of statutory due process should not nullify the dismissal, or render it illegal, or ineffectual. However, the employer should indemnify the employee for the violation of his statutory rights. (Agabon v. NLRC, G.R. No. 158693, Nov. 17, 2004)

Although the closure was done in good faith and for valid reasons, we find that ITC did not comply with the notice requirement. While an employer is under no obligation to conduct hearings before effecting termination of employment due to authorized cause, however, the law requires that it must notify the DOLE and its employees at least one month before the intended date of closure. (Industrial Timber Corporation v. Ababon, G.R. No. 164518, Jan. 25, 2006)

Preliminary Investigation

The purpose of a preliminary investigation is to secure the innocent against hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecution, and to protect him from an open and public accusation of crime, from the trouble, expense and anxiety of a public trial, and also to protect the State from useless and expensive trials. The right to a preliminary investigation is statutory. Denial of that right does not, by itself, violate constitutional due process, although the statutory defect must be addressed through the appropriate remedy. However, in order to satisfy the due process clause, it is not enough that the preliminary investigation is conducted in the sense of making sure that a transgressor shall not escape with impunity. A preliminary investigation serves not only the purposes of the State. More importantly, it is a part of the guarantees of freedom and fair play, which are birthrights of all who live in our country. (Salonga v. Paño, G.R. No. L-59524, Feb. 18, 1985)

UP NOTES

Definition

Due process furnishes a standard to which the governmental action should conform in order that deprivation of life, liberty or property, in each appropriate case, be valid [Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association v. City of Manila, G.R. No. L-24693 (1967)].

Due process is a guaranty against any arbitrariness on the part of the government, whether committed by the legislature, the executive or the judiciary [Cruz].

The test or standard, as always, is reason. The police power legislation must be firmly grounded on public interest and welfare, and a reasonable relation must exist between purposes and means [Ichong v. Hernandez, supra].

[Agabon v. NLRC, G.R. No. 158693 (2004)]

Procedural and substantive

Substantive Due Process

Substantive due process “requires that the law itself, not merely the procedures by which the law would be enforced, is fair, reasonable, and just.” It requires the intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with life, liberty and property and a guarantee against exercise of arbitrary power [Rama v. Moises, G.R. No. 197146 (2016)].

Substantive due process inquires whether the government has sufficient justification for depriving a person of life, liberty, or property [White Light Corporation v. City of Manila, G.R. No. 122846 (2009)]

Requisites of Substantive Due Process:

Due process of law simply means that:

• That there shall be a law prescribed in harmony with the general powers of the legislative department of the Government;
• That this law shall be reasonable in its operation;
• That it shall be enforced according to the regular methods of procedure prescribed;
• That it shall be applicable alike to all the citizens of the state or to all of a class [Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, supra]

Substantive due process requires that the means employed in depriving persons of property must not be unduly oppressive [SJS v. Atienza Jr., G.R. No. 156051 (2007)].

Expanded test of substantive due process

• Is there public interest, public purpose, public welfare involved?
• Is the act reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the legislature‘s purpose?
• Is it not unreasonable, arbitrary, or oppressive?
• Is there sufficient foundation or reason in connection with the manner involved or has there been capricious use of legislative power?
• Can the aims conceived be achieved by the means used, or is it not merely and unjustified interference? [Ichong v. Hernandez, supra]

Procedural Due Process

Procedural due process refers to the procedures that the government must follow before it deprives a person of life, liberty, or property. It concerns itself with government action adhering to the established process when it makes an intrusion into the private sphere [White Light Corporation v. City of Manila, supra].

Procedural due process is that aspect of due process which serves as a restriction on actions of judicial and quasi-judicial agencies of the government. It refers to the method of manner by which a law is enforced [Bernas].

General Rule: The minimum requirements of due process are notice and hearing.

Exceptions: However, notice and hearing are not required in every case, for there are an admitted number of exceptions in view of the nature of the property involved or the urgency of the need to protect the general welfare from a clear and present danger.

Instances when the need for expeditious action will justify omission of these requisites, (e.g. summary abatement of a nuisance per se like a mad dog on the loose, which may be killed on sight) because of the immediate danger it poses to the safety and lives of the people.

In Criminal Proceedings

Criminal due process requires that the procedure established by law or the rules be followed to assure that the State makes no mistake in taking the life or liberty except that of the guilty. All the necessary measures must be taken to guarantee procedural due process throughout all stages of a criminal prosecution from the inception of custodial investigation until rendition of judgment [Atty. Labay v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 235937-40 (2018)].

Requisites of criminal due process [Section 14(2), Article III, 1987 Constitution]

• Accused is heard by a court of competent jurisdiction;
• Accused is proceeded against under the orderly process of law;
• Accused is given notice and opportunity to be heard;
• Judgment rendered is within the authority of a constitutional law [Mejia v. Pamaran, G.R. No. L-56741-42 (1988)].

Provisions indirectly affecting taxation

• Due process

SECTION 1, ARTICLE III. 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.

Substantive Due Process – An act is done under the authority of a valid law or the Constitution itself.

Procedural Due Process – An act is done after compliance with fair and reasonable methods or procedures prescribed by law.