top of page
Photo Supreme Court in Session.webp

RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS

Section 1, Article III (Bill of Rights) 
 
“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.”
​Key Elements of Due Process:
 
There are two kinds of due process recognized in the Philippines:
 
1. Substantive Due Process: This refers to the protection from arbitrary governmental actions affecting a person’s life, liberty, or property. It requires that any law or government action must have a legitimate public interest and must not be unreasonable, oppressive, or arbitrary.
 
Jurisprudence: In Makalintal v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 263590, June 27, 2023), the Supreme Court ruled that concerning substantive due process, it requires the concurrence of two requisites, namely:
  1. the interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular class, require the interference of the State, referred to as the lawful subject; and
  2. the means employed are reasonably necessary for the attainment of the object sought to be accomplished and not unduly arbitrary or oppressive upon individuals, referred to as the lawful method.139
 
In the determination of whether the two requisites of substantial due process exist, case law has developed three levels of scrutiny depending on the rights affected, including the level of constitutional protection accorded thereby and the degree of the law's interference with said rights, and the gravity of the governmental objective sought through the law. These are the strict scrutiny, the intermediate scrutiny, and rational basis tests.
 
Notably pervading these levels of scrutiny are the basic requirements of legitimate government interest or purpose and reasonable necessity of the means employed to attain the government interest.
 
These requisites correspond to the lawful subject and lawful means requisites of the substantive aspect of the due process clause and therefore form the core of any valid legislative enactment. Regardless of the level of scrutiny employed, the absence of either or both of these requisites renders a statute unconstitutional for violation of the due process clause.

​
2. Procedural Due Process: This ensures that when a person’s life, liberty, or property is at stake, they are entitled to be heard and informed of the charges against them and have an opportunity to present their case before a fair tribunal.
 
Jurisprudence: In Villarete v. COA (G.R. No. 243818, April 26, 2022):
Procedural due process is met when one is given notice and the opportunity to be heard and explain their side. It gives a party the chance to seek reconsideration of an action or ruling unfavorable to them. 
A party is denied the opportunity to avail of the reliefs available to them if they are not notified of a decision involving them, especially one where they stand to lose their life, liberty, or property. Such is a violation of their due process.
 
the Court laid down the requirements of procedural due process, including the right to a fair and impartial tribunal, the right to present evidence, and the right to cross-examine witnesses.
 
Basic Requirements of Procedural Due Process:
 
1. Notice: The person affected must be informed of the legal action or decision that could affect their rights.
2. Hearing: They must be given an opportunity to be heard before a decision is made.
3. Decision: The judgment must be based on substantial evidence presented in the hearing.
 
Due Process in Administrative Proceedings:
​
 Ang Tibay v. CIR (G.R. No. L-46496, February 27, 1940) – The decision in Ang Tibay v. CIR became a landmark case because it laid out the standards of due process in administrative proceedings.
 
Key Points on Due Process:
The Court, through Justice Jose P. Laurel, emphasized that while administrative bodies like the CIR are not bound by the strict rules of evidence and procedure applicable to courts of law, they must still observe the basic requirements of fairness and due process. The Court identified seven fundamental requisites for due process in administrative proceedings:
  1. The right to a hearing: The parties must be given the opportunity to present their case and to refute evidence presented against them. This does not necessarily mean a trial-type hearing but ensures that the parties are heard in a fair manner.
  2. Consideration of the evidence presented: The decision-makers must evaluate the evidence submitted by both sides. A decision cannot be based on partiality or without regard to the evidence.
  3. Decision based on substantial evidence: The decision must be supported by substantial evidence. This means there must be sufficient relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support the conclusion.
  4. The tribunal must act on its own independent consideration of the law and facts of the controversy: The administrative body cannot merely accept the findings of other parties or be influenced by external factors; it must make its own impartial assessment.
  5. The decision must be rendered in such a manner that the parties to the proceedings can know the various issues involved and the reasons for the decision: There must be clarity in the reasoning behind the decision so that the parties understand the basis of the ruling and can evaluate if it was fair and justified.
  6. Impartiality of the tribunal: The decision-makers must be neutral and free from bias, ensuring that the proceedings are fair to both parties.
  7. The tribunal must, in all controversial questions, render its decision in such a manner that the parties to the proceeding may know the issues involved and the reasons for the decision: The decision must be clear, comprehensive, and grounded in the evidence and arguments presented.
 
Due Process in Judicial Proceedings:

People v. Judge Leviste, G.R. No. 189122, March 17, 2010:
​
  1. Impartiality of the Tribunal:
    The Court explained that a judge is presumed to be impartial unless proven otherwise. To prove judicial bias, there must be a clear showing that the judge acted with actual bias or prejudice that affected the fairness of the trial. In this case, Leviste failed to substantiate his claims of bias. The Supreme Court ruled that the judge’s remarks were within the bounds of judicial discretion and did not amount to bias that violated due process.
  2. Right to Fair Trial:
    Due process ensures that every individual is entitled to a fair trial, which includes the opportunity to be heard and to present evidence. The Court noted that Leviste was given every opportunity to present his defense, and his legal counsel was able to actively participate in the trial. The evidence presented by both sides was thoroughly examined, and the court made its ruling based on the facts and the law.
  3. Judicial Rulings as Basis for Bias:
    The Supreme Court clarified that adverse rulings or comments by a judge do not automatically imply bias. The trial court’s adverse rulings on certain motions by Leviste were made in accordance with procedural rules and did not show any predisposition against him.
​
Key Takeaways on Due Process:
  1. Due process in judicial proceedings demands that a person be given a fair and reasonable opportunity to defend themselves in an impartial court.
  2. Judges are presumed to be impartial, and mere adverse rulings do not constitute bias.
  3. Procedural due process is satisfied when the accused is given proper notice, the chance to present evidence, and the right to appeal, even if the outcome is unfavorable.

 
bottom of page