Section 4.

No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the

press, or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for
redress of grievances.

What are considered protected speech:

Protected speech includes every form of expression, whether oral, written, tape or disc
recorded. It includes motion pictures as well as what is known as symbolic speech such as the
wearing of an armband as a symbol of protest. Peaceful picketing has also been included
within the meaning of speech.

Prohibitions under Section 4

1. Prohibition against PRIOR RESTRAINT
2. Prohibition against SUBSEQUENT PUNISHMENT

Prohibition against prior restraint

1. Prior restraint means official governmental restrictions on the press or other forms of
expression in advance of actual publication or dissemination.

2. Examples/forms of prior restraint

1. movie censorship
2. judicial prior restraint = injunction against publication
3. license taxes based on gross receipts for the privilege of engaging in the business of
advertising in any newspaper
4. flat license fees for the privilege of selling religious books

When prohibition does not apply

1. During a war. Ex. Government can prevent publication about the number/locations of its
troops (Near v. Minnesota, 238 US 697)
2. Obscene publications.

Standards for allowable subsequent punishment

TEST CRITERION

1. Dangerous Tendency Test There should be a RATIONAL CONNECTION

between the speech and the evil
apprehended.

2. Clear and Present Danger Test There should be a clear and present danger
that the words when used under such
circumstances are of such a nature as to
 create a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER
that they will bring about the substantive evils
that the State has a right to prevent.

3. Balancing of Interests Test The courts should BALANCE the PUBLIC

INTEREST served by legislation on one hand
and the FREEDOM OF SPEECH (or any
other constitutional right) on the other. The
courts will then decide where the greater
weight should be placed.

Freedom of Speech

The doctrine on freedom of speech was formulated primarily for the protection of “core” speech,
i.e. speech which communicates political, social or religious ideas. These enjoy the same
degree of protection. Commercial speech, however, does not.

Commercial Speech

1. A communication which no more than proposes a commercial transaction.

To enjoy protection:
1. It must not be false or misleading; and
2. It should not propose an illegal transaction.

Even truthful and lawful commercial speech may be regulated if:

1. Government has a substantial interest to protect;
2. The regulation directly advances that interest; and
3. It is not more extensive than is necessary to protect that interest. (Central Hudson Gas and
Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission of NY, 447 US 557)

Unprotected Speech

1. 1. LIBEL
1. FAIR COMMENT (U.S. Rule). These are statements of OPINION, not of fact, and are not
considered actionable, even if the words used are neither mild nor temperate. What is
important is that the opinion is the true and honest opinion of the person. The statements are
not used to attack personalities but to give one’s opinion on decisions and actions.

1. OPINIONS. With respect to public personalities (politicians, actors, anyone with a connection
to a newsworthy event), opinions can be aired regarding their public actuations. Comment on
their private lives, if not germane to their public personae, are not protected.

1. 2. OBSCENITY
1. Test for obscenity (Miller v. California)
1. Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that
the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest.
2. Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct,
specifically defined by law.
3. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

2.Procedure for seizure of allegedly obscene publications

1.Authorities must apply for issuance of search warrant.

2.Court must be convinced that the materials are obscene. Apply clear and present danger test.
3.Judge will determine whether they are in fact “obscene”.
4.Judge will issue a search warrant.
5. Proper action should be filed under Art. 201 of the RPC.
6. Conviction is subject to appeal.

Right of Assembly and Petition

The standards for allowable impairment of speech and press also apply to the right of assembly
and petition.

Rules on assembly in public places:

1. Applicant should inform the licensing authority of the date, the public place where and the
time when the assembly will take place.
2. The application should be filed ahead of time to enable the public official concerned to
appraise whether there are valid objections to the grant of the permit or to its grant, but in
another public place. The grant or refusal should be based on the application of the Clear and
Present Danger Test.
3. If the public authority is of the view that there is an imminent and grave danger of a
substantive evil, the applicants must be heard on the matter.
4. The decision of the public authority, whether favorable or adverse, must be transmitted to the
applicants at the earliest opportunity so that they may, if they so desire, have recourse to the
proper judicial authority.

Rules on assembly in private properties:

Only the consent of the owner of the property or person entitled to possession thereof is
required.

Section 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without
discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the
exercise of civil or political rights.
Clauses under Section 5

1. Non-establishment clause
2. Free exercise of Religion

Distinction between the clauses (School District v. Schempp, 374 US 203)

1. The non-establishment clause does not depend upon any showing of direct governmental
compulsion. It is violated by the enactment of laws which establish an official religion whether
those laws operate directly to coerce non-observing individuals or not. The test of compliance
with the non-establishment clause can be stated as follows: What are the purposes and primary
effect of the enactment? If either is the advancement or inhibition of religion, the law violates
the non-establishment clause. Thus, in order for a law to comply with the non-establishment
clause, two requisites must be met. First, it has a secular legislative purpose. Second, its
primary effect neither advances nor inhibits religion.

2. The free exercise of religion clause withdraws from legislative power the exertion of any
restraint on the free exercise of religion. In order to show a violation of this clause, the person
affected must show the coercive effect of the legislation as it operates against him in the
practice of his religion. While the freedom to believe (non-establishment) is absolute, the
moment such belief flows over into action, it becomes subject to government regulation.

Requisites for government aid to be allowable:

1. It must have a secular legislative purpose;

2. It must have a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion;
3. It must not require excessive entanglement with recipient institutions.

Section 6. The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law
shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be
impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety or public health, as may be
provided by law.

Rights guaranteed under Section 6:

1. Freedom to choose and change one’s place of abode.

2. Freedom to travel within the country and outside.
Curtailment of rights:
RIGHT MANNER OF CURTAILMENT

1. Liberty of abode Lawful order of the court and within the limits prescribed by
law.

2. Right to travel May be curtailed even by administrative officers (ex.

passport officers) in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may be
provided by law.

Note: The right to travel and the liberty of abode are distinct from the right to return to one’s
country, as shown by the fact that the Declaration of Human Rights and the Covenant on
Human Rights have separate guarantees for these. Hence, the right to return to one’s country
is not covered by the specific right to travel and liberty of abode. (Marcos v. Manglapus)