c. Suspension of Privilege of Writ of Habeas Corpus

Grounds For The Suspension Of The Privilege Of The Writ Of Habeas Corpus And Declaration Of Martial Law

• Actual rebellion or invasion (not imminent)
• Public safety requires it

Duty to Report to Congress

Section 18, Article VII, requires the President to report his actions to Congress, in person or in writing, within 48 hours of such proclamation or suspension. In turn, if Congress is not in session, it is required to convene without need of a call within 24 hours following the Presidents proclamation or suspension. Clearly, the Constitution calls for quick action on the part of the Congress. Whatever form that action takes, therefore, should give the Court sufficient time to fulfill its own mandate to review the factual basis of the proclamation or suspension within 30 days of its issuance. (Fortun v. Arroyo, G.R. No. 190293, March 20, 2012)

As to what facts must be stated in the proclamation and the written Report is up to the President. As Commander-in-Chief, he has sole discretion to determine what to include and what not to include in the proclamation and the written Report taking into account the urgency of the situation as well as national security. (Lagman v. Medialdea, G.R. No. 231658, July 4, 2017)

Updated: If Congress is not in session, it must convene within 24 hours without need of a call, but Article VII, Section 18 does not require automatic joint convening of the two Houses (Padilla v. Congress of the Philippines, G.R. No. 231671, 25 July 2017).

Effects of the Suspension of the Privilege:

• The suspension of the privilege of the writ applies only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly connected with invasion [Section 18, par. 5, Article VII, 1987 Constitution].
• Such persons suspected of the above can be arrested and detained without warrant of arrest.
• The suspension of the privilege does not make the arrest without warrant legal. The suspension does not foreclose a challenge to detention outside its constitutional scope or a claim for damages for an illegal arrest.
• The arrest without warrant is justified by the emergency situation and the difficulty in applying for a warrant considering the time and the number of persons to be arrested.
• The crime for which he is arrested must be one related to rebellion or invasion. As to others, the suspension of the privilege does not apply.
• During the suspension of the privilege of the writ, any person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within 3 days, or otherwise he shall be released [Section 18(6), Article VII, 1987 Constitution].
• Suspension does not by itself authorize a warrantless arrest or generally extend detention periods. A person arrested or detained for a covered offense must be judicially charged within 3 days or released.
• What happens if he is not judicially charged nor released after 72 hours? This violates Section 18, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution. Liability under RPC Article 125 for "delay in the delivery of detained persons," or under another applicable offense, must be assessed according to its elements.
• The right to bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required [Section 13, Article III, 1987 Constitution].

The suspension of the privilege does not destroy petitioners' right and cause of action for damages for illegal arrest and detention and other violations of their constitutional rights [Aberca v. Ver, G.R. No. L-69866 (1988)].

The President may exercise the power to call out the Armed Forces independently of the power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus and to declare martial law, although, of course, it may also be a prelude to a possible future exercise of the latter powers, as in this case [Lagman v. Medialdea, supra].