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

a. movie censorship

b. judicial prior restraint = injunction against publication

c. license taxes based on gross receipts for the privilege of engaging in the business of advertising in any newspaper

d. flat license fees for the privilege of selling religious books

When prohibition does not apply

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

b. 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.

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

3. Even truthful and lawful commercial speech may be regulated if:

a. Government has a substantial interest to protect;

b. The regulation directly advances that interest; and
c. 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. LIBEL

A. 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.

B. 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.

2. OBSCENITY

A. Test for obscenity (Miller v. California)

i. Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the pruriest interest.
ii. Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct, specifically defined by law.
iii. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

B. Procedure for seizure of allegedly obscene publications

i. Authorities must apply for issuance of search warrant.

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

Overview of Freedom of Expression, Prior Restraint and Subsequent Punishment

Freedom of expression is the foundation of a free, open and democratic society. Freedom of expression is an indispensable condition to the exercise of
almost all other civil and political rights. Freedom of expression allows citizens to expose and check abuses of public officials. Freedom of expression
allows citizens to make informed choices of candidates for public office.

Thus, the rule is that expression is not subject to any prior restraint or censorship because the Constitution commands that freedom of
expression shall not be abridged. Over time, however, courts have carved out narrow and well defined exceptions to this rule out of necessity.

The exceptions, when expression may be subject to prior restraint, apply in this jurisdiction to only four categories of expression, namely:

1. pornography,
2. false or misleading advertisement,
3. advocacy of imminent lawless action, and
4. danger to national security.

All other expression is not subject to prior restraint.

Expression not subject to prior restraint is protected expression or high-value expression. Any content-based prior restraint on protected expression is
unconstitutional without exception. A protected expression means what it says – it is absolutely protected from censorship. Thus, there can be no
prior restraint on public debates on the amendment or repeal of existing laws, on the ratification of treaties, on the imposition of new tax measures, or on
proposed amendments to the Constitution.

If the prior restraint is not aimed at the message or idea of the expression, it is content-neutral even if it burdens expression. A content-neutral restraint is
a restraint which regulates the time, place or manner of the expression in public places without any restraint on the content of the expression. Courts will
subject content-neutral restraints to intermediate scrutiny. An example of a content-neutral restraint is a permit specifying the date, time and route of a
rally passing through busy public streets. A content-neutral prior restraint on protected expression which does not touch on the content of the expression
enjoys the presumption of validity and is thus enforceable subject to appeal to the courts.

Expression that may be subject to prior restraint is unprotected expression or low-value expression. By definition, prior restraint on unprotected
expression is content-based since the restraint is imposed because of the content itself. In this jurisdiction, there are currently only four categories of
unprotected expression that may be subject to prior restraint. This Court recognized false or misleading advertisement as unprotected expression only in
October 2007.

Only unprotected expression may be subject to prior restraint. However, any such prior restraint on unprotected expression must hurdle a high barrier.
First, such prior restraint is presumed unconstitutional. Second, the government bears a heavy burden of proving the constitutionality of the prior
restraint.

Prior restraint is a more severe restriction on freedom of expression than subsequent punishment. Although subsequent punishment also deters
expression, still the ideas are disseminated to the public. Prior restraint prevents even the dissemination of ideas to the public.

While there can be no prior restraint on protected expression, such expression may be subject to subsequent punishment, either civilly or
criminally. Similarly, if the unprotected expression does not warrant prior restraint, the same expression may still be subject to subsequent
punishment, civilly or criminally. Libel falls under this class of unprotected expression.

However, if the expression cannot be subject to the lesser restriction of subsequent punishment, logically it cannot also be subject to the more severe
restriction of prior restraint. Thus, since profane language or “hate speech” against a religious minority is not subject to subsequent punishment in this
jurisdiction, such expression cannot be subject to prior restraint.

If the unprotected expression warrants prior restraint, necessarily the same expression is subject to subsequent punishment. There must be a law
punishing criminally the unprotected expression before prior restraint on such expression can be justified.

The prevailing test in this jurisdiction to determine the constitutionality of government action imposing prior restraint on three categories of unprotected
expression – pornography, advocacy of imminent lawless action, and danger to national security – is the clear and present danger test. The expression
restrained must present a clear and present danger of bringing about a substantive evil that the State has a right and duty to prevent, and such danger must
be grave and imminent.

Prior restraint on unprotected expression takes many forms – it may be a law, administrative regulation, or impermissible pressures like threats
of revoking licenses or withholding of benefits. The impermissible pressures need not be embodied in a government agency regulation, but may
emanate from policies, advisories or conduct of officials of government agencies.

Right of Assembly and Petition

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

2. Rules on assembly in public places:

i. Applicant should inform the licensing authority of the date, the public place where and the time when the assembly will take place.

ii. 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.

iii. 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.

iv. 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.

3. Rules on assembly in private properties:

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

Art 3, Sec. 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

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.

LIBERTY OF ABODE AND RIGHT TO TRAVEL

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)
RIGHT TO INFORMATION and ACCESS TO OFFICIAL RECORDS

Section 7. The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized.

Rights guaranteed under Section 7

1. Right to information on matters of public concern

2. Right of access to official records and documents

Persons entitled to the above rights - Only Filipino citizens

Discretion of government :
The government has discretion with respect to the authority to determine what matters are of public concern and the authority to
determine the manner of access to them.

Recognized restrictions on the right of the people to information:

1. National security matters

2. Intelligence information

3. Trade secrets

4. Banking transactions

5. Diplomatic correspondence

6. Executive sessions
7. Closed door cabinet meetings

8. Supreme Court deliberations

RIGHT TO FORM ASSOCIATIONS

Section 8. The right of the people, including those employed in the public and private sectors, to form unions, associations, or
societies for purposes not contrary to law, shall not be abridged

The right to form associations shall not be impaired without due process of law and is thus an aspect of the right of liberty. It is also an aspect of
the freedom of contract. In addition, insofar as the associations may have for their object the advancement of beliefs and ideas, the freedom of
association is an aspect of the freedom of speech and expression, subject to the same limitation.

The right also covers the right not to join an association.

Government employees have the right to form unions. They also have the right to strike, unless there is a statutory ban on them.