Narcotics Group obtained a search warrant but the name of person in the search warrant did not tally with the address stated. Eventually, the person with the same name was found but in a different address. The occupant resisted but the public officer insisted on the search. Drugs were found and seized and occupant was prosecuted and convicted by the trial court. The Supreme Court acquitted him because the public officers are required to follow the search warrant to the letter. They have no discretion on the matter. Plain view doctrine
is inapplicable since it presupposes that the officer was legally entitled to be in the place where the effects where found. Since the entry was illegal, plain view doctrine does not apply.
(3) When the public officer employs
unnecessary or excessive severity in the implementation of the search warrant. The search warrant is not a license to commit destruction.
(4) Owner of dwelling or any member of the family was absent, or two witnesses residing within the same locality were not present during the search.
Article 131. Prohibition, Interruption, and Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings Elements
1.
Offender is a public officer or employee;2.
He performs any of the following acts:(a) prohibiting or by interrupting, without legal ground, the holding of a peaceful meeting, or by dissolving the same; (b) hindering any person from joining any
lawful association, or attending any of its meetings;
(c) prohibiting or hindering any person from addressing, either alone or together with others, any petition to the authorities for the correction of abuses or redress of grievances.
The government has a right to require a permit before any gathering could be made. Any meeting without a permit is a proceeding in violation of the law. That being true, a meeting may be prohibited, interrupted, or dissolved without violating Article 131 of the Revised Penal Code.
But the requiring of the permit shall be in exercise only of the government’s regulatory powers and not really to prevent peaceful assemblies as the public may desire. Permit is only necessary to regulate the peace so as not to inconvenience the public. The permit should state the day, time and the place where the gathering may be held. This requirement is, therefore, legal as long as it is not being exercised in as a prohibitory power.
If the permit is denied arbitrarily, Article 131 is violated. If the officer would not give the permit unless the meeting is held in a particular place which he dictates defeats the exercise of the right to peaceably assemble, Article 131 is violated.
At the beginning, it may happen that the assembly is lawful and peaceful. If in the course of the assembly the participants commit illegal acts like oral defamation or inciting to sedition, a public officer or law enforcer can stop or dissolve the meeting. The permit given is not a license to commit a crime.
There are two criteria to determine whether Article 131 would be violated:
(1) Dangerous tendency rule – applicable in times of national unrest such as to prevent coup d’etat.
(2) Clear and present danger rule – applied in times of peace. Stricter rule.
Distinctions between prohibition, interruption, or dissolution of peaceful meetings under Article 131, and tumults and other disturbances, under Article 153
(1) As to the participation of the public officer In Article 131, the public officer is not a participant. As far as the gathering is concerned, the public officer is a third party. If the public officer is a participant of the assembly and he prohibits, interrupts, or dissolves the same, Article 153 is violated if the same is conducted in a public place. (2) As to the essence of the crime
In Article 131, the offender must be a public officer and, without any legal ground, he prohibits, interrupts, or dissolves a peaceful meeting or assembly to prevent the offended party from exercising his freedom of speech and that of the assembly to petition a grievance against the government.
In Article 153, the offender need not be a public officer. The essence of the crime is that of creating a serious disturbance of any sort in a public office, public building or even
E l m e r P . B r a b a n t e C R I M I N A L L A W R E V I E W f o r t h e 2 0 1 1 B a r
E x a m s
Page 110
a private place where a public function is being held.
Article 132. Interruption of Religious Worship Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee; 2. Religious ceremonies or manifestations of
any religious are about to take place or are
going on;
3. Offender prevents or disturbs the same. Qualified if committed by violence or threat. Article 133. Offending the Religious Feelings
Elements
1. Acts complained of were performed in a place devoted to religious worship, or during the celebration of any religious ceremony;
2. The acts must be notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful.
There must be deliberate intent to hurt the feelings of the faithful.
HUMAN SECURITY ACT OF 2007 (R.A. 9372) Period of detention
Period of Detention Without Judicial Warrant of Arrest. - The provisions of Article 125 of the
Revised Penal Code to the contrary
notwithstanding, any police or law enforcement personnel, who, having been duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council has taken custody of a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism shall, without incurring any criminal liability for delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities, deliver said charged or suspected person to the proper judicial authority within a period of three days counted from the moment the said charged or suspected person has been apprehended or arrested, detained, and taken into custody by the said police, or law enforcement personnel: Provided, That the arrest of those suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism must result from the surveillance under Section 7 and examination of bank deposits under Section 27 of this Act.
The police or law enforcement personnel concerned shall, before detaining the person suspected of the crime of terrorism, present him or her before any judge at the latter's residence or office nearest the place where the arrest took place at any time of the day or night. It shall be the duty of the judge, among other things, to ascertain the identity of the police or law enforcement personnel and the person or persons they have arrested and presented before him or her, to inquire of them the reasons why they have arrested the person and determine by questioning and personal
observation whether or not the suspect has been
subjected to any physical, moral or
psychological torture by whom and why. The judge shall then submit a written report of what he/she had observed when the subject was brought before him to the proper court that has jurisdiction over the case of the person thus arrested. The judge shall forthwith submit his/her report within three calendar days from the time the suspect was brought to his/her residence or office.
Immediately after taking custody of a person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, the police or law enforcement personnel shall notify in writing the judge of the court nearest the place of apprehension or arrest: Provided ,That where the arrest is made during Saturdays, Sundays, holidays or after office hours, the written notice shall be served at the residence of the judge nearest the place where the accused was arrested.
The penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment shall be imposed upon the police or law enforcement personnel who fails to notify and judge as
Provided in the preceding paragraph (Sec. 18).
Period of Detention in the Event of an Actual or Imminent Terrorist Attack. -- In the event of an actual or imminent terrorist attack, suspects may not be detained for more than three (3) days without the written approval of a municipal, city, provincial or regional official of the Human Rights Commission or judge of the municipal, regional trial court, Sandiganbayan or a justice of the Court of Appeals nearest the place of the arrest. If the arrest is made during Saturdays,