1

RULE 102: HABEAS CORPUS BAR MATTER 2023

CERTIORARI HABEAS CORPUS GENERAL RULE: Writ of Habeas Corpus shall NOT issue if the restraint is
PROHIBITION voluntary. (Sombong v. CA, G.R. No. 111876, 1996)
AND MANDAMUS
Special civil action under Rule 65. Special proceeding EXCEPTION: Writ of Habeas Corpus is a proper remedy to enable parents to regain
Reaches the record; concerned with errors Reaches the body but not the record; custody of a minor, even if the minor is in the custody of a 3rd person of his own free will.
committed by a court inquiry on the legality of the detention (Sombong v. CA, G.R. No. 111876, 1996) Rationale: Custody cases involving minors are
Direct attack Collateral attack prosecuted to determine custody rights over a child.
Failure of respondent to file comment will Failure to file return constitutes contempt
not be punished by contempt and will not (indirect) Errors of Fact or Law – not correctible by Habeas Corpus
even be declared in default Mere errors of fact or law, which did not have the effect of depriving the trial court of its
Court and prevailing party are named as Respondent is the detainer. jurisdiction over the case and the person of the defendant, are not correctible in a petition
respondents. for the issuance of the writ of habeas corpus; if at all, these errors must be corrected on
certiorari or on appeal, in the form and manner prescribed by law.
Section 1. To what habeas corpus extends.
WHEN OTHER REMEDIES ARE AVAILABLE
1. cases of illegal confinement detention by which a person is deprived of his
liberty(RESTRAINT IN LIBERTY); and
The inquiry in a habeas corpus proceeding is addressed to the question of whether the
2. cases by which the rightful custody of the person is withheld from the person entitled
proceedings and the assailed order are, for any reason, null and void. The writ is not
thereto.
ordinarily granted where the law provides for other remedies in the regular course, and in
the absence of exceptional circumstances.
NOTE: Actual physical restraint not required; any restraint which will prejudice freedom
Moreover, habeas corpus should not be granted in advance of trial. The orderly course of
of action is sufficient.
trial must be pursued and the usual remedies exhausted before resorting to the writ where
exceptional circumstances are extant. In another case, it was held that habeas corpus
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS – is a writ directed to the person detaining another an
cannot be issued as a writ of error or as a means of reviewing errors of law and
commanding him to produce the body of the prisoner at a certain time and place, with the
irregularities not involving the questions of jurisdiction occurring during the course of the
day and the cause of his caption and detention, to do submit to, and receive whatsoever the
trial, subject to the caveat that constitutional safeguards of human life and liberty must be
court or judge awarding the writ shall consider to that behalf.
preserved, and not destroyed. (Mangila v. Judge Pangilinan, G.R. no. 160739, 2013)
WHEN AVAILED OF (as a consequence of a judicial proceeding
EXCEPTION:
1. there has been deprivation of a constitutional right resulting in the restraint of a person;
It does not, however, follow that if certiorari is available, an application for a writ of
2. the court had no jurisdiction to impose the sentence
habeas corpus will absolutely be barred. Writ of Habeas Corpus may, nevertheless, be
3. an excess penalty has been imposed, as such sentence is void as to such excess;
available in EXCEPTIONAL CASES, for the writ should not be considered subservient to
4. where the law is amended, as when he penalty is lowered.
procedural limitations which glorify form over substance. It must be kept in mind that
although the question most often considered in both habeas corpus and certiorari
NATURE:Petitioner for habeas corpus is LIKE A PROCEEDING IN REM because it is
proceedings is whether an inferior court has exceeded its jurisdiction, the former involves a
an inquisition by the government, at the suggestion and instance of an individual, most
collateral attack on the judgment and reaches the body but not the record, while the latter
probably, but still in the name and capacity of the sovereign. It is also instituted for the
assails directly the judgment and reaches the record but not the body. (Velasco v. Court of
purpose of fixing the status of a person and that there can be no judgment entered against
Appeals, G.R. No. 118644, 1995)
anybody since there is no real plaintiff and defendant. (Alimpos vs. CA, 106 SCRA 159)
4blue 95 Note: Void Judgment of Conviction In a case where there is a conviction but a
PURPOSE:The essential object and purpose of the writ of habeas corpus is to inquire into
violation of right against self-incrimination is indeed violated, the Writ of Habeas Corpus
all manner of involuntary restraint as distinguished from voluntary, and to relieve a person
shall issue. Said void judgment of conviction may be challenged by an attack through
therefrom if such restraint is illegal.
Habeas Corpus. This writ may issue even if another remedy which is less effective may be
availed of by the defendant. Thus, failure by the accused to appeal does not preclude a
And any further rights of the parties are left untouched by decision on the writ, whose
recourse to the writ. The writ may be granted upon a judgment already final. (Chavez v.
principal purpose is to set the individual at liberty. (Villavicencio vs. Lukban, 39 PHIL
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-29169, 1968)
778)

Moncupa vs. Ponce Enrile:The petitioner was arrested and detained but subsequently
4blue 95:the moment a case is filed against you (or warrant is issued on you) then, habeas
released on several conditions. One is that she has to regularly report to the Ministry of
corpus is moot and academic.
Defense. Second: she could not give interviews to local and foreign media without the
approval of the Ministry of national Defense. Third: she could not change residence
4blue 95:writ of amparo is a writ use for enforcement of a constitutional right as against an
without the approval of the Ministry. She filed a petition for Habeas Corpus.
invalid government act.
Respondents argued that she’s no longer detained; she has been released.
SC said, it is not limited to physical incarceration. A release from detention with
4blue 95:if person is out in bail, he is not entitled to writ since his detention is legal and
condition, is a form of involuntary restraint on the freedom of action or locomotion. That
technical and not actual restraint. Exception, in immigration cases, an immigrant under
can be inquired into by a writ of habeas corpus.
bond may contest an adverse decision of the immigration commissioner by means of a
petition for habeas corpus (Choa Fun v Sec of labor)
GROUNDS FOR SUSPENSION OF THE WRIT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION
1. Invasion, when public safety requires it;
2. rebellion, when public safety requires it. IN CASES OF ILLEGAL CONFINEMENT OR DETENTION
GENERAL RULE: The release, whether permanent or temporary, of a detained person
renders the petition for habeas corpus moot and academic.
Effects when the privilege is suspended: EXCEPTION: When there are restraint attached to his release which precludes freedom
of action, in which case the court can still inquire into the nature of his involuntary
1. Even if the privilege is suspended, the writ is still issued upon application if the restraint. (Villavicencio vs. Lukban, supra)
petition is sufficient in form and in substance.

Meaning, even if there is a suspension of the privilege and the person is detained, you DISTINGUISH PEREMPTORY WRIT FROM PRELIMINARY CITATION
apply for a writ, the judge will issue the writ. The only thing that will happen is that, if the
person detained is detained for an offense covered by the suspension (rebellion and PEREMPTORY WRIT
offenses inherent in invasion), the detention becomes valid. But if otherwise, he should be A peremptory writ is a a written document unconditionally commanding the respondent to
released, the detention being invalid. have the body of the detained person before the court at a time and place specified therein.
Issued if the cause of the detention appears to be patently illegal. Noncompliance with this
2. The right to bail shall not be affected. The accused can still apply for bail. is punishable.
3. If you are detained for a covered offense, it legitimizes the detention only for three PRELIMINARY CITATION
days. A writ of preliminary citation requires the respondent to appear and show cause why the
The periods under Art. 172 on Arbitrary detention are extended. From the peremptory should not issue. If the person is detained under governmental authority and
12-18-36 hours, for slight- less grave- less grave felonies, if the offense is the illegality of his detention is not patent from the petition for the writ, the court issues the
covered by the suspension, it is extended to three days (72 hours). citation to the government officer having custody to show cause why the habeas corpus
Under Art. VII, Sec. 18, even if the privilege has been suspended and you are writ should not issue.
arrested for rebellion or any other offense inherent in or connected with In a habeas corpus petition, the order to present an individual before the court is a
invasion, you must be judicially charged within three days. preliminary step in the hearing of the petition. The respondent must produce the person
It does not mean that with the suspension of the privilege, one can be and explain the cause of his detention. However, this order is not a ruling on the propriety
detained without charge for more than three days. You must be charged in of the remedy or on the substantive matters covered by the remedy. Thus, the order to
court within a period of three days. If you are not charged, even if arrested produce the body is not equivalent to a grant of the writ of habeas corpus (In the Matter of
for rebellion, you must be released. If you are not released, then you can file the Petition for Habeas Corpus of Alejano vs. Cabuay, G.R. No. 160792, 2005)
a petition for habeas corpus.
 2

1. CONTENTS OF THE PETITION 2. CONTENTS OF RETURN

Who May File an Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Return Shall be in Writing and Shall State

The application shall be by petition signed and verified by: 1. Whether he has or has not the party in his custody or power, or under restraint;
a. The party for whose relief it is intended; or
b. Some person on his behalf. (Rule 102, Sec. 3) 2. The authority and the true and whole cause of restraint, set forth at large, with a copy of
the writ, order execution, or other process, if any, upon which the party is held;
The Petition Shall Set Forth the Following
1. The person in whose behalf the application is made is imprisoned or restrained of his 3. If the party is in his custody or power or is restrained by him, and is not produced,
liberty; particularly the nature and gravity of the sickness or infirmity of such party by reason of
2. Name of the person detaining another or assumed appellation; which he cannot, without danger, be bought before the court or judge;
3. Place where he is imprisoned or restrained of his liberty; or
4. A copy of the commitment or cause of detention, or allegation that there’s none. (Rule 4. If he has had the party in his custody or power, or under restraint, and has transferred
102, Sec. 3) such custody or restraint to another, particularly to whom, at what time, for what cause,
and by what authority such transfer was made. (Rule 102, Sec. 10)
Who May Grant the Writ
The return or statement shall be signed and sworn to by the person who makes it if the
a. Supreme Court or any member thereof – enforceable anywhere in the Philippines and prisoner is not produced, UNLESS the return is made and signed by a sworn public officer
made returnable before any court in his official capacity. (Rule 102, Sec. 11)
b. Court of Appeals or any member thereof - enforceable anywhere in the Philippines and
made returnable before any court Hearing UPON Return
c. Regional Trial Court or a judge thereof – enforceable only within his judicial district, When the Writ is returned before the judge, he may forthwith HEAR and examine the
returnable only to itself. (Rule 102 , Sec. 2) return and such other matters as are submitted for consideration. (Rule 102, Sec. 12)

The Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals and Regional Trial Courts have Effect of Failure to File a Return
CONCURRENT jurisdiction to issue Writs of Habeas Corpus. Failure of petitioners to file a return of the writ WARRANTS DISMISSAL of the petition.
In the absence of ALL Regional Trial Court judges in a province or city, Municipal Trial Unless the allegations in the return are controverted, they are DEEMED to be true or
Court judges MAY hear and decide petitions for a Writ of Habeas Corpus in that province admitted. (Florendo v. Javier, G.R. No. L-36101, 1979)
or city.
Family Courts have EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION to issue Writ of Habeas When Return Evidence of Cause of Restraint and When Only a Plea of Facts; Effect
Corpus involving the custody of minors. (R.A. 8369) of petitioner’s failure to file a reply to the return or to controvert statements in the
The Sandiganbayan may grant the writ only if it is in aid of its appellate jurisdiction return during the hearing
(Festin, Special Proceedings: A Foresight to the Bar Exam, 2nd Ed. 2011)
A. If the return is filed by an officer who is the respondent detaining the person
Procedure for Grant of Writ concerned - if the prisoner is in custody under a warrant of commitment (public
authority) in pursuance of law, the return is considered PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE
1. Filing of the verified petition; of the legality of the commitment, imprisonment or restraint.(Rule 102, Sec. 13)
2. Allowance of Writ if determined by the judge that the writ ought to issue; Thus, the failure of petitioners to file a reply to the return or controvert the matters
3, Service of writ by sheriff or other officer; stated in the return, WARRANTS DISMISSAL of the petition. Unless the allegations
4. Return filed; reply to the return, if any. in the return are controverted, they are DEEMED to be true or admitted (Florendo v.
5. Hearing on return Javier, G.R. No. L36101, 1979)
6. Judgment on the petition – dismissal of the petition or order of discharge from
imprisonment/restraint. B. If the return is filed by an officer in case the prisoner is restrained by a private
authority or person - the return is considered only a PLEA of FACTS, and the party
TO WHOM WRIT DIRECTED, AND WHAT TO REQUIRE claiming the custody must prove such facts. Failure to reply to the return or
controvert the return is NOT fatal to the petition. (Rule 102, Sec. 13)
To Whom Writ Served

A. In case of imprisonment by an officer – the writ shall be directed to such OFFICER and When LAWFULLY Imprisoned - When Recommitted or When Bailed
shall command him to have the body of the person restrained before the court designated
in the writ. If it appears that the prisoner was LAWFULLY committed AND is charged with an
offense punishable by death, he shall NOT be released, discharged or bailed.
B. In case of imprisonment by a person NOT an officer – the writ shall be directed to an
OFFICER and shall command him to If he is LAWFULLY imprisoned AND is charged with an offense NOT punishable by
death, he MAY be recommitted to imprisonment OR admitted to bail in the discretion of
1. Take and have to body of the person restrained before the court designated in the writ; the judge. (Rule 102, Sec. 14)
and
2. Summon the private person by whom he is restrained to appear before said judge to When Prisoner Discharged IF NO APPEAL
show the cause of the imprisonment or restraint. (Rule 102, Sec. 6) When the court is satisfied that a prisoner is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained, an order
will be made for the DISCHARGE from confinement. Such discharge will not be effective
Service of the Writ UNTIL a copy of the order is SERVED on the officer or person detaining the prisoner.
(Rule 102, Sec. 5)
Service of the Writ shall be made by leaving the original with the person to whom it is
directed and preserving a copy on which to make return of service. (Rule 102, Sec. 7) Appeal
Appeal may be made forty-eight (48) hours from notice of the judgment or final order.
Defect of Form
This shall be in the form of a NOTICE OF APPEAL. (Rule 41, Sec. 3)
No Writ of Habeas Corpus can be disobeyed for defect or form IF it sufficiently states in
whose custody or under whose restraint the party imprisoned is held AND the court or Prisoner discharged upon a Writ of Habeas Corpus shall NOT be again imprisoned for the
judge to whom he is to be brought. (Rule 102, Sec. 9) SAME OFFENSE, UNLESS, by lawful order or process of a court having jurisdiction over
the cause or offense.
Execution of Writ
Those who recommits or imprisons or causes to be committed or imprisoned for the same
The officer to whom the Writ is directed shall convey the person imprisoned or restrained offense any person set at liberty, shall FORFEIT the sum of one thousand pesos (P1000)
before the court allowing the writ and on such date and time specified in the writ UNLESS AND MAY also be punished for CONTEMPT. (Rule 102, Sec. 17)
such person cannot be produced without danger by reason of some sickness or infirmity.

The officer shall make due return of the Writ, together with the day and cause of the
caption and restraint of such person. (Rule 102, Sec. 8)
 3

3. WHEN NOT PROPER/APPLICABLE Q: While Marietta was in her place of work in Makati City, her estranged husband Carlo barged
into her house in Paranaque City, abducted their six-year old son, Percival, and brought the child
Instances When the Writ of Habeas Corpus Is NOT Proper: to his hometown in Baguio City. Despite Marietta’s pleas, Carlo refused to return their child.
Marietta, through counsel, filed a petition for habeas corpus against Carlo in the Court of Appeals
i. For asserting or vindicating denial of right to bail (Galvez v. CA, G.R. No. 114046, 1994); in Manila to compel him to produce their son before the court and for her to regain custody. She
alleged in the petition that despite her efforts, she could no longer locate her son. In his comment,
ii. For correcting errors in appreciation of facts or appreciation of law – where the trial court Carlo alleged that the petition was erroneously filed in the Court of Appeals as the same should
had no jurisdiction over the cause, over the person of the accused, and to impose the penalty have been filed in the Family Court of Baguio City which, under Republic Act No. 8369, has
provided for by law, the mistake committed by the trial court, in the appreciation of the facts exclusive jurisdiction, over the petition. Marietta replied that under Rule 102 of the Rules of
and/or in the appreciation of the law cannot be corrected by habeas corpus (Sotto v. Director Court, as amended, the petition may be filed in the Court of Appeals and if granted, the writ of
of Prisons, G.R. No. L-18871, 1962); habeas corpus shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines. Whose contention is correct?
Explain. (2005 Bar)
iii. Once a person detained is duly charged in court, he may no longer file a petition for A: Marietta's contention is correct. The Court of Appeals has concurrent jurisdiction with the
habeas corpus. His remedy would be to quash the information or warrant. (Rodriguez v. family courts and the Supreme Court in petitions habeas corpus where the custody of minors is at
Judge Bonifacio, A.M. NO. RTJ-99-1510, 2000); issue, notwithstanding the provision in the Family Courts Act (R.A. No. 8369) that family courts
have exclusive jurisdiction in such cases. (Thornton v. Thornton, G.R. No. 154598, August 16,
iv. Even granting that a person was illegally arrested, the petition for a Writ of Habeas 2004) Sec. 20, par. 6 of SC AM No. 03-04-04 provides that the petition may likewise be filed with
Corpus will NOT prosper because the detention falls under a ―legal process‖ by virtue of the the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or with any of its members and, if so granted; the writ shall
complaint filed against him. (Velasco v. CA, G.R. No. 116884, 1995); be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines. The writ may be made returnable to a Family Court or
to any regular court within the region where the petitioner resides or where the minor may be
v. If the accused was illegally detained, the proper remedy would be the quashal of the found for hearing and decision on the merits.
warrant of arrest and NOT a Writ of Habeas Corpus. (Ilagan v. Enrile, G.R. No. 70748,
1985)

Posting of bail is NOT a bar for the accused to challenge the validity of his arrest. (Rule 114, Q: Widow A and her two children, both girls, aged 8 and 12 years old, reside in Angeles City,
Sec. 26) Pampanga. A leaves her two daughters in their house at night because she works in a brothel as a
prostitute. Realizing the danger to the morals of these two girls, B the father of the deceased
Effect of Release of Detained Person on the Petition husband of A, files a petition for habeas corpus against A for the custody of the girls in the Family
Court in Angeles City. In said petition, B alleges that he is entitled to the custody of the two girls
General Rule: The release, whether permanent or temporary, of a detained person, renders in the Family Court in Angeles City. In said petition, B alleges that he is entitled to the custody of
the petition for habeas corpus moot and academic the two girls because their mother is living a disgraceful life. The court issues the writ of habeas
corpus. When A learns of the petition and the writ, she brings her two children to Cebu City. At
Exceptions: Petition May Prosper the expense of B the sheriff of the said Family Court goes to Cebu City and serves the writ on A.
When there are restraints attached to his release which precludes freedom of action, in which A files her comment on the petition raising the following defenses:
the court can still inquire into the nature of his involuntary restraint (Villavicencio v.
Lukban, G.R. No. L-14639, 1919; Moncupa v. Enrile, G.R. No. L63345, 1986) a. The enforcement of the writ of habeas corpus in Cebu City is illegal; and A: The writ of habeas
corpus issued by the Family Court in Angeles City may not be legally enforced in Cebu City,
Where there are grounds for grave doubts about the alleged release of the detainees, [such because the writ is enforceable only within the judicial region to which the Family Court belongs,
as] where the standard and prescribed procedure in effecting the release has not been unlike the writ granted by the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals which is enforceable anywhere
followed (Dizon v. Eduardo, L-59118, 1988). in the Philippines.(Sec. 20, A.M.No. 03-04- 04-SC)

b. B has no personality to institute the petition. Resolve the petition in the light of the above
defenses of A. (2003 Bar)
4.WHEN WRIT DISALLOWED/ DISCHARGED A: B, the father of the deceased husband of A, has the personality to institute the petition for
habeas corpus of the two minor girls, because the grandparent has the right of custody as against
The Writ Is Not Allowed When the mother A who is a prostitute. (Sec. 2 and 13, A.M. No. 03-04-04-SC)

A. Person is in custody of an officer Q: Hercules was walking near a police station when a police officer signalled for him to approach.
a. Under process issued by a court or judge; or As soon as Hercules came near, the police officer frisked him but the latter found no contraband.
b. By virtue of a judgment; or The police officer told Hercules to get inside the police station. Inside the police station, Hercules
c. By virtue of an order of the court; AND that the court or judge HAD JURISDICTION to asked the police officer, "Sir, may problema po ba?" Instead of replying, the police officer locked
issue the process, render the judgment or make the order. up Hercules inside the police station jail. What is the remedy available to Hercules to secure his
immediate release from detention? (2015 Bar)
B. Jurisdiction appears after writ is allowed A: The remedy available to Hercules is to file a petition for habeas corpus questioning the
C. Person is charged with or convicted of an offense in the Philippines illegality of his warrantless arrest. The writ of habeas corpus shall extend to all cases of illegal
D. Person is suffering imprisonment under lawful judgment (Rule 102, Sec. 4) confinement or detention by which any person is deprived of liberty. (Sec. 1, Rule 102)

RULE 101:PROCEEDINGS FOR HOSPITALIZATION OF INSANE PERSONS

Venue: RTC of province where the person alleged to be insane is found.

Who files? Director of Health with assistance of city or provincial fiscal

Q: Roxanne, a widow, filed a petition for habeas corpus with the Court of Appeals against Major
Amor who is allegedly detaining her 18 year old son Bong without authority of law. After Amor Requisites
had filed a return alleging the cause of detention of Bong, the Court of Appeals promulgated a 1. Director of Health is of the opinion that the commitment of the person alleged to
resolution remanding the case to the RTC for a full blown trial due to the conflicting facts be insane is for PUBLIC WELFARE or for THE WELFARE of said person;
presented by the parties in their pleadings. In directing the remand, the Court of Appeals relied on
Sec. 9(1) in relation to Sec. 21 of BP 129 conferring upon said Court the authority to try and 2. such person or the one having charge of him is opposed to his being taken to a
decide habeas corpus cases concurrently with the RTCs. Did the Court of Appeals act correctly in hospital or asylum
remanding the petition to the RTC? Why? (1993 Bar)
A: No, because while the CA has original jurisdiction over habeas corpus concurrent with the
RTCs, it has no authority for remanding to the latter original actions filed with the former. On the Sec. 2. Order for hearing. If the petition filed is sufficient in form and substance, the court, by an
contrary, the CA is specifically given the power to receive evidence and perform any and all acts order reciting the purpose of the petition, shall fix a date for the hearing thereof, and copy of such
necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases falling within its original jurisdiction. order shall be served on the person alleged to be insane, and to the one having charge of him, or on
such of his relatives residing in the province or city as the judge may deem proper. The court shall
furthermore order the sheriff to produce the alleged insane person, if possible, on the date of the
hearing.
Q: A was arrested on the strength of a warrant of arrest issued by the RTC in connection with an Note that there is no publication requirement for hospitalization of insane persons.
Information for Homicide. W, the live-in partner of A filed a petition for habeas corpus against
A’s jailer and police investigators with the Court of Appeals. a. Does W have the personality to
file the petition for habeas corpus? A: Yes. W, the live-in partner of A, has the personality to file Sec. 3. Hearing and judgment. Upon satisfactory proof, in open court on the date fixed in the
the petition for habeas corpus because it may be filed by ―some person in his behalf.‖ (Sec 3, Rule order, that the commitment applied for is for the public welfare or for the welfare of the insane
102) b. Is the petition tenable? (1998 Bar) person, and that his relatives are unable for any reason to take proper custody and care of him, the
A: No, the petition is not tenable because the warrant of arrest was issued by a court which had court shall order his commitment to such hospital or other place for the insane as may be
jurisdiction to issue it. (Sec. 4 Rule 102) Rules on Custody of Minors and Writ of Habeas Corpus recommended by the Director of Health. The court shall make proper provisions for the custody of
in relation to Custody of Minors property or money belonging to the insane until a guardian be properly appointed.

Sec. 4. Discharge of insane. When, in the opinion of the Director of Health, the person ordered to
be committed to a hospital or other place for the insane is temporarily or permanently cured, or
may be released without danger he may file the proper petition with the Court of First Instance
which ordered the commitment.

Sec. 5. Assistance of fiscal in the proceeding. It shall be the duty of the provincial fiscal or in the
City of Manila the fiscal of the city, to prepare the petition for the Director of Health and represent
him in court in all proceedings arising under the provisions of this rule.
 4

RULES ON CUSTODY OF MINORS AND WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IN

RELATION TO CUSTODY OF MINORS (A.M. NO. 03-04- 04-SC)

Where Filed
Provisional Order Awarding Custody
The Family Court has exclusive original jurisdiction to hear petitions for custody of minors
and the issuance of the writ of habeas corpus in relation to custody of minors. The petition After and answer has been filed or the expiration of the period to file it, the court may
for custody of minors shall be filed with the Family Court of the province or city where the issue a provisional order awarding the custody of the minor.
petitioner resides or where the minor may be found.
Such petition shall be enforceable only within the judicial region to which the Family The following order of preference shall be observed as far as practicable:
Court belongs. (Sec. 3, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC)
The petition may also be filed with the CA or the Supreme Court and such petition shall be 1. Both parents jointly;
enforceable anywhere within the Philippines. (Sec. 20, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC) 2. Either parent, taking into account all relevant considerations especially the choice
The Court is tasked with the duty of promulgating special rules or procedure for the of the minor over seven (7) years of age and of sufficient discernment, unless parent
disposition of family cases with the best interests of the minor as primary consideration, chosen is unfit;
taking into account the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. It should be 3. The grandparent, if there are several, then the grandparent chosen by the minor
clarified that the writ is issued by the Family Court only in relation to custody of minors. over seven (7) years of age and of sufficient discernment, unless grandparent chosen
An ordinary petition for habeas corpus should be filed in the regular Court. The issue of is unfit or disqualified;
child custody may be tackled by the Family Court without need of a separate petition for 4. The eldest brother or sister over twenty-one (21) years of age, unless he or she is
custody being filed. (Sec. 20, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC) unfit or disqualified
5. The actual custodian of the minor over twentyone (21) years of age, unless the
Requisites former is unfit or disqualified; or
6. Any other person or institution the court may deem suitable to provide proper care
1. That the petitioner has the right of custody over the minor; and guidance for the minor. (Sec. 13, A.M. NO. 03- 04-04-SC)

2. That the rightful custody of the minor is being withheld from the petitioner by Under Section 1, Rule 102, the writ of habeas corpus is available, not only in cases of
respondent; and illegal confinement or detention by which any person is deprived of his liberty, but also in
cases involving the rightful custody over a minor.
3. That it is to the best interest of the minor concerned to be in the custody of
petitioner and not that of the respondent. (Sombong v. CA, G.R. No. 111876, 1996) The general rule is that parents should have custody over their minor children. But the
State has the right to intervene where the parents, rather than care for such children, treat
The mother who has custody of the child cannot refuse to present the child to the court them cruelly and abusively, impairing their growth and well-being and leaving them
after the issuance of the writ on the basis of the child of tender years doctrine. It is not emotional scars that they carry throughout their lives unless they are liberated from such
legal basis to deprive the father of custody. Also, Such petition did not grant custody to the parents and properly counseled. (Vingson Yu v. Cabcaban, UDK No. 14817, 2014, A.M.
father but merely required the mother to bring the child to court to determine custody. NO. 03-04-04-SC)
(Salientes v. Abanilla, G.R. No. 162734, 2006)

In cases involving minors, the purpose of a petition for habeas corpus is not limited to the
production of the child before the court. The main purpose of the petition for habeas
corpus is to determine who has the rightful custody over the child. Therefore, mere Temporary Visitation Rights
production of the body of the child does not moot the petition for habeas corpus if custody
has not yet been decided. (Bagtas v. Hon. Santos, GR No. 166682, 2009) The court shall provide in its order awarding provisional custody appropriate visitation
rights to the non-custodial parent or parents, unless the court finds said parent or parents
unfit or disqualified. (Sec. 15, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC)
Who May File

The Committee chose the phrase ―any person claiming custody‖ as it is broad enough to
cover the following: Hold Departure Order

a. The unlawful deprivation of the custody of a minor; or The minor child subject of the petition shall NOT be brought out of the country without
b. Which parent shall have the care and custody of a minor, when such parent is in prior order from the court while the petition is pending. The court motu proprio OR upon
the midst of nullity, annulment or legal separation proceedings. (Sec. 2, A.M. NO. application under oath may issue EX PARTE a hold departure order addressed to the
03-04-04-SC) Bureau of Immigration and Deportation of the Department of Justice a copy of the hold
departure order within 24 hours from its issuance and through the fastest available means
Defendant Must File Answer; Period to File of transmittal (Sec 16, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC)

Within 5 days from service of summons and a copy of the petition (Sec. 6)

Motion to Dismiss
Appeal
A motion to dismiss the petition is NOT allowed EXCEPT on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter or over the parties. Any other ground that might Notice of Appeal within fifteen (15) days from notice of denial of motion for
warrant the dismissal of the petition shall be raised as an affirmative defense in the answer. reconsideration or new trial.
(Sec. 6, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC) No appeal shall be allowed UNLESS a motion for reconsideration or new trial is filed.
(Sec. 19, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC)
Case Study Report
Confidentiality of the Proceedings
Upon the filing of the verified answer of the expiration of the period to file it, the court
may order a social worker to make a case study of the minor and the parties and to submit The hearings on custody of minors may, at the discretion of the court, be closed to the
a report and recommendation to the court at least three (3) days before the scheduled pre- public and the records of the case shall be released to non-parties without its approval.
trial. (Sec. 8, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC)

Pre-Trial; Effects of Failure to Appear

Pre-trial is MANDATORY. (Sec. 9, A.M. NO. 03- 04-04-SC)

If the petitioner fails to appear personally at the pre-trial, the case shall be dismissed,
unless his counsel or a duly authorized representative appears in court and proves a valid
excuse for the non-appearance of the petitioner.

If the respondent has filed his answer but fails to appear at the pre-trial, the petitioner shall
be allowed to present his evidence ex parte. The court shall then render judgment on the
basis of the pleadings and the evidence thus presented (Sec. 11)
 5

WRIT OF AMPARO (A.M. NO. 07-9-12- SC)

Remedy available to those whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or Government Involvement an indispensable requirement
threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or
employee or a private individual or entity. It covers extra-legal killings and enforced To fall within the ambit of A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC in relation to RA 9851, the disappearance
disappearances or threats thereof. (Sec. 1, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC, October 24, 2007) must be attended by some government involvement. This hallmark of State participation
differentiates an enforced disappearance case from an ordinary case of a missing person
The writ of amparo does not cover impairment of the right to travel. For it to be granted, (Navia v. Pardo, G.R. No. 184467, 2012)
petitioner must show that his right to travel was curtailed to such an extent as to threaten
his right to life, liberty and security for which there is no readily available recourse or BAR: Does non-appearance of the petitioner affect the validity of a writ of habeas
remedy. (Reyes v. CA, G. R. No. 182161, 2009) data? No. That petitioner did not appear in the proceedings at such stage (SC) for fear of
reprisals does not affect the validity of the writ granted by the CA. (In the Matter of the
Extralegal Killings Petition for the Writ of Amparo and Habeas Data in Favor of Noriel Rodriguez, G.R. No.
Killings committed without due process of law (i.e. without legal safeguards or judicial 191805, Apr 16, 2013)
proceedings).
Examples on instances when a writ of habeas data may issue
Enforced Disappearances
Attended by the following circumstances: In the case of Noriel Rodriguez, three separate acts were committed by the respondents
which justify the issuance by the CA of the Writ of Amparo. First is the taking videos of
1. Arrest/detention/abduction of a person by a government official or organized the photos of petitioner’s relatives hung on the wall of the house, and the innermost
groups or private individuals acting with the in/direct acquiescence of the State; portions of the house. There is no reasonable justification for doing this. Second is the
2. Carried out by or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State or a abduction and torture of the petitioner by the respondents. Third, the failure to conduct a
political organization; fair and effective investigation similarly amounted to a violation of, or threat to
3. Refusal of the State to disclose the fate or whereabouts of the person concerned, or Rodriguez’s rights to life, liberty, and security. (In the Matter of the Petition for the Writ of
refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty, which places such persons outside Amparo and Habeas Data in Favor of Noriel Rodriguez, G.R. No. 191805, Apr 16, 2013)
the protection of the law.
4. Intention is to remove the person from the protection of law for a prolonged period
of time. (Navia v. Paradico, G.R. No. 18446, 2012)

“Any threat‖
The term ―any threat‖ cannot be taken to mean every conceivable threat in the mind that
may cause one to fear for his life, liberty, or security. In the context of the Amparo rule,
only actual threats, as may be established from all the facts and circumstances of the case,
can qualify as a violation that may be addresses under the Rule on the Writ of Amparo (In
re: Ladaga, G.R. No. 189689, 2013)

Instances Which Do Not Fall Under Life, Liberty, or Security

The threatened demolition of a dwelling by virtue of a final judgment of the court is

not included among the enumeration of rights for a writ of amparo. Their claim to
their dwelling, assuming they still have any despite the final and executory judgment
adverse to them, does not constitute right to life, liberty and security. (Canlas v.
NAPICO, G.R. No. 182795, 2008).

4BLUE 95: The writ of amparo is not available against a Barangay Captain’s
alleged trespass of petitioner’s property since it is merely a violation of
petitioner’s property rights (Sps. Pador v. Arcayan, G.R. No. 183649, 2013)

The restriction on the petitioner’s right to travel as a consequence of the pendency of

the criminal case filed against him was not unlawful, and thus not a valid ground to
invoke issuance of Writ of Amparo (Reyes v. CA, G.R. No. 182161, 2009)

The writ of amparo is not available in order for a biological mother to recover
custody of child from the DSWD. There is no enforced disappearance. When what is
involved is the issue of child custody and the exercise of parental rights over a child,
who, for all intents and purposes, has been legally considered a ward of the State, the 4BLUE 95: The production order under the Amparo Rule should not be confused with a
Amparo rule cannot be properly applied (Caram v. Segui, G.R. No. 193652, 2014). search warrant for law enforcement under Article III, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution.
This Constitutional provision is a protection of the people from the unreasonable intrusion
The writ of amparo cannot be availed of by an alien detained by the Bureau of of the government, not a protection of the government from the demand of the people such
Immigration by virtue of legal process (Mison v. Gallegos, G.R. Nos. 210759, as respondents.
211403, and 211590, 2015) Instead, the amparo production order may be likened to the production of documents or
things under Section 1, Rule 27 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. (The Secretary of National
Defense v. Manalo, G.R. No. 180906, 2008)
Distinguish Privilege of the Writ of Amparo from Actual Order called Amparo

The privilege of the Writ of Amparo should be distinguished from the actual order called
the Writ of Amparo. The privilege includes availment of the entire procedure outlined in
A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC, the Rule on the Writ of Amparo. (Sec. De Lima v. Gatdula, G.R. THE PETITION MAY BE FILED BY
No. 204528, 2013)
A. Aggrieved Party; or
The writ of amparo was conceived to provide expeditious and effective procedural relief B. Any qualified person or entity in the following order:
against violations or threats of violation of the basic rights to life, liberty, and security of a. Any member of the immediate family
persons; the corresponding amparo suit, however, is not an action to determine criminal b. Any ascendant, descendant or collateral relative of the aggrieved within the fourth
guilt requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt or administrative liability requiring (4th) civil degree of consanguinity or affinity
substantial evidence that will require full and exhaustive proceedings. (The Secretary of c. Any concerned citizen, organization, association or institution
National Defense v. Manalo, G.R. No. 180906, 2008)
Filing by the aggrieved OR representative suspends the right of all others. (Sec. 2, A.M.
Preventive and Curative Roles of the Writ No. 07-9-12-SC)

The writ of amparo serves both preventive and curative roles in addressing the problem of
extralegal killings and enforced disappearances.

It is preventive in that it breaks the expectation of impunity in the commission of these OMNIBUS WAIVER RULE
offenses;
It is curative in that it facilitates the subsequent punishment of perpetrators as it will All defenses shall be raised in the return, otherwise, they shall be deemed waived. (Sec. 10,
inevitably yield leads to subsequent investigation and action. A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)

In the long run, the goal of both the preventive and curative roles is to deter the further
commission of extralegal killings and enforced disappearances (Secretary of Defense v.
Manalo, G.R. No. 180906, 2008).
 6

PETITION: RETURN

Contents of Petition
CONTENTS OF RETURN
1. Personal circumstances of the petitioner;
2. The name and personal circumstances of the respondent responsible for the threat, act or Within 72 hours after service of the writ, the respondent shall file a verified written return
omission, or, if the name is unknown or uncertain, the respondent may be described by an together with supporting affidavits. The period to file cannot be extended except on highly
assumed appellation; meritorious grounds.
3. The right to life, liberty and security of the aggrieved party violated or threatened with
violation by an unlawful act or omission of the respondent, and how such threat or The Return Shall Contain:
violation is committed with the attendant circumstances detailed in supporting affidavits;
4. The investigation conducted, if any, specifying the names, personal circumstances, and 1. Lawful defenses;
addresses of the investigating authority or individuals, as well as the manner and conduct 2. The steps or actions taken to determine the fate or whereabouts of the aggrieved party;
of the investigation, together with any report; 3. All relevant information in the possession of the respondent pertaining to the threat, act
5. The actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to determine the fate or whereabouts of or omission against the aggrieved party; and
the aggrieved party and the identity of the person responsible for the threat, act or 4. If the respondent is a public official or employee, the return shall further state acts:
omission; and
6. The relief prayed for the petition may include a general prayer for other just and a) To verify identity of aggrieved party
equitable reliefs. b) To recover and preserve evidence
c) To identify and collect witness statements
2023 Note: The petition may be filed on any day, including Saturdays, Sundays, and d) To determine cause, manner, location, and time of death or disappearance
holidays, and at any time, from morning to evening. e) To identify and apprehend persons involved
f) Bring suspected offenders before a competent court (Sec. 9, A.M. No. 07-9-12- SC)
Test for Sufficiency in Amparo Petition
NOTE: General denial is not allowed
The test in reading the petition for the writ of amparo should be to determine whether it
contains the details available to the petitioner under the circumstances, while presenting a
cause of action showing a violation of the victim’s rights to life, liberty and security EFFECTS OF FAILURE TO FILE RETURN
through State or private party action.
The petition should likewise be read in its totality, rather than in terms of its isolated The Court or justice shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte. (Sec. 12, A.M. No. 07-9-
component parts, to determine if the required elements – namely, of the disappearance, the 12-SC)
State or private action, and the actual or threatened violations of the rights to life, liberty or
security – are present. (Razon v. Tagitis, G.R. No. 184298, 2009)

Lack of Supporting Affidavits is NOT a Ground for Dismissal of the Petition PROCEDURE FOR HEARING

This requirement, however, should not be read as an absolute one that necessarily leads to
the dismissal of the petition if not strictly followed. Where, the petitioner has substantially The hearing shall be SUMMARY in nature. However, the court, justice, or judge
complied with the requirement by submitting a verified petition sufficiently detailing the MAY call for a preliminary conference to simplify the issues and look at
facts relied upon, the strict need for the sworn statement that an affidavit represents is possibility of obtaining stipulations and admissions from the parties. Hearing shall
essentially fulfilled. be from day to day until completed; same priority as petitions for writ of habeas
The failure to attach the required affidavits was fully cured when the respondent and her corpus. (Sec. 13, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)
witness (Mrs. Talbin) personally testified in the CA hearings held on January 7 and 17 and
February 18, 2008 to swear to and flesh out the allegations of the petition. Thus, even on Hearing shall be set NOT LATER than seven (7) days from the issuance of the
this point, the petition cannot be faulted. (Razon v. Tagitis, G.R. No. 184298, 2009) writ.

When Respondent’s Denial is not Supported by Affidavits, Petition Cannot be Denied Judgment
The court shall render judgment within ten (10) days from the time the petition is
Section 17 of the Rules for the Writ of Amparo requires that the respondent, who is a submitted for decision. (Sec. 6, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)
public official or employee, must prove that extraordinary diligence as required by
applicable laws, rules and regulations was observed in the performance of duty. When the Appeal
petitioner has categorically stated that police cars have driven by her house with alarming Any party may appeal from the final judgment or order to the Supreme Court
regularity after she identified her husband's body, respondent’s blanket denial without under Rule 45. The appeal may raise questions of fact or law or both.
affidavits from his police officers is not enough to the deny the issuance of the Writ.
Respondent’s failure to exert the extraordinary diligence expected of him hints at a motive The period of appeal shall be five (5) working days from the date of notice of the
against the petitioner. (Sanchez v. Darroca, G.R. No. 242257, October 15, 2019) adverse judgment. Appeal shall be given the SAME priority as Habeas Corpus
cases. (Sec. 19, A.M. No. 07-9- 12-SC)
Issuance of the Writ Upon the filing of the petition, the court, justice or judge shall
immediately order the issuance of the writ if on its face it ought to issue. (Sec. 6, A.M. No. Archival of Cases
07-9-12-SC) The court shall not dismiss the petition, but shall archive it, if upon its
determination it cannot proceed for a valid cause such as the failure of petitioner or
witnesses to appear due to threats on their lives. (Sec. 20, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)

Where to File
INSTITUTION OF SEPARATE ACTION
a. Regional Trial Court - of the place where the threat, act or omission was committed OR
any of its elements occurred; or This Rule shall NOT preclude the filing of separate criminal, civil or administrative
b. Sandiganbayan; or actions. (Sec. 21, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)
c. Court of Appeals; or It would be inappropriate to apply to amparo proceedings the doctrine of command
d. Supreme Court. When issued by the REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, the writ shall be responsibility as a form of criminal complicity through omission, for individual
returnable to such court or judge. respondents’ criminal liability, if there be any, is beyond the reach of amparo. In other
words, the Court does not rule in such proceedings on any issue of criminal culpability,
When issued by the SANDIGANBAYAN or the COURT OF APPEALS, the writ shall be even if incidentally a crime or an infraction of an administrative rule may have been
returnable before such court or judge, or to the Regional Trial Court of the place where the committed. (Rubrico v. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 183871, 2010)
threat, act or omission was committed or any of its elements occurred.

When issued by the SUPREME COURT, the writ shall be returnable before such court or
judge, the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, or the Regional Trial Court of the place EFFECT OF FILING A CRIMINAL ACTION
where the threat, act or omission was committed or any of its elements occurred.
A separate petition for the Writ of Amparo CANNOT be filed, but the remedies available
4BLUE 95: The writ shall be enforceable ANYWHERE in the Philippines. under the WRIT may be availed BY MOTION in the criminal action. (Sec. 22, A.M. No.
NO docket fees shall be paid. (Sec. 4, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC) 07-9-12- SC)
 7

CONSOLIDATION Q: What is the writ of amparo? How is it distinguished from the writ of habeas corpus? (2009 Bar)
A: The petition for a writ of amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty
When a criminal action is filed subsequent to the filing of a petition for the Writ, the latter shall be and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public
consolidated with the criminal action. Nonetheless, the Amparo Rule shall govern the disposition official or employee, or of a private individual or entity. The writ shall cover extra-legal killings
of the relief under the Rule (Rubrico v. Arroyo, G.R. No. 183871, 2010) and enforced disappearances or threats thereof. The writ of amparo differs from a writ of habeas
When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to a petition for a Writ of corpus in that the latter writ is availed of as a remedy against cases of unlawful confinement or
Amparo, the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal action. After consolidation, the detention by which any person is deprived of his liberty, or cases by which rightful custody of any
procedure under this Rule shall continue to apply to the disposition of the reliefs in the petition. person is withheld from another who is lawfully entitled thereto. (Sec 1, Rule 102)
(Sec. 23, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)

INTERIM RELIEFS AVAILABLE TO PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT Q: Marinella is a junior officer of the Armed Forces of the Philippines who claims to have
personally witnessed the malversation of funds given by US authorities in connection with the
Upon Filing of the Petition OR Anytime Before Final Judgment, the Court May Grant Any of the Balikatan exercises. Marinella alleges that as a result of her exposé, there are operatives within the
Following Reliefs to PETITIONER military who are out to kill her. She files a petition for the issuance of a writ of amparo against,
among others, the Chief of Staff but without alleging that the latter ordered that she be killed.
1. Temporary Protection Order– the court, UPON MOTION or MOTU PROPRIO, may Atty. Daro, counsel for the Chief of Staff, moves for the dismissal of the Petition for failure to
order that the petitioner or the aggrieved party and any member of the immediate family be allege that his client issued any order to kill or harm Marinella. Rule on Atty. Daro’s motion.
protected in a government agency or by an accredited person or private institution capable of Explain. (2010 Bar)
keeping and securing their safety. A: The motion to dismiss must be denied on the ground that it is a prohibited pleading under
Section 11(a) of the Rule on the Writ of Amparo. Moreover, said Rule does not require the
2. Inspection Order: the court, UPON MOTION AND HEARING, may order any person in petition therefor to allege a complete detail of the actual or threatened violation of the victim’s
possession or control of a designated property to permit entry for inspecting relevant rights. It is sufficient that there be an allegation of real threat against petitioner’s life, liberty
objects/operations/ property. and/or security. (Razon v. Tagitis, G.R. No. 182498, December 03, 2009)

3. Production order: the court, UPON MOTION AND HEARING, may order any person to
produce and permit inspection of documentary or object evidence (i.e. documents, papers,
accounts, etc.) Q: The residents of Mt. Ahohoy, headed by Masigasig, formed a nongovernmental organization -
4. Witness protection order - The court, justice or judge, UPON MOTION or MOTU Alyansa Laban sa Minahan sa Ahohoy (ALMA) to protest the mining operations of Oro Negro
PROPRIO, may refer the witnesses to the Department of Justice for admission to the Mining in the mountain. ALMA members picketed daily at the entrance of the mining site
Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Program, pursuant to Republic Act No. 6981. (Sec. blocking the ingress and egress of trucks and equipment of Oro Negro, hampering its operations.
14, A.M. No. 07- 9-12-SC) Masigasig had an altercation with Mapusok arising from the complaint of the mining engineer of
Oro Negro that one of their trucks was destroyed by ALMA members. Mapusok is the leader of
Availability of Interim Reliefs to RESPONDENT the Association of Peace Keepers of Ahohoy (APKA), a civilian volunteer organization serving as
auxiliary force of the local police to maintain peace and order in the area. Subsequently, Masigasig
Upon verified motion of the respondent and after due hearing, the court, justice or judge may issue disappeared. Mayumi, the wife of Masigasig, and the members of ALMA searched for Masigasig,
an inspection order or production order. (Sec. 15, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC) but all their efforts proved futile. Mapagmatyag, a member of ALMA, learned from Maingay, a
member of APKA, during their binge drinking that Masigasig was abducted by other members of
APKA, on order of Mapusok. Mayumi and ALMA sought the assistance of the local police to
QUANTUM OF PROOF IN APPLICATION FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF AMPARO search for Masigasig, but they refused to extend their cooperation. Immediately, Mayumi filed
with the RTC, a petition for the issuance of the writ of amparo against Mapusok and APKA.
Quantum of Proof in Application for Issuance of Writ of Amparo: ALMA also filed a petition for the issuance of the writ of amparo with the Court of Appeals
against Mapusok and APKA. Respondents Mapusok and APKA, in their Return filed with the
1. Establish claims by substantial evidence RTC, raised among their defenses that they are not agents of the State; hence, cannot be impleaded
2. If respondent is a private individual or entity, he must prove that ordinary diligence was as respondents in an amparo petition.
observed in the performance of duty
3. If public official or employee, he must prove that extraordinary diligence was observed in the a. Is their defense tenable? A: No. The defense is not tenable. The writ of amparo is a
performance of duty. (Sec. 17, A.M. No. 07-9- 12-SC) remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty and security has been violated or
is threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public officer or employee
2023 Note: Respondent public official of employee cannot invoke the presumption of regularity. or of a private individual or entity. The writ covers extralegal killings, enforced
disappearances or threats thereof. (Sec. 1, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC) Moreover, the rules do not
4BLUE 95 Note: The failure to establish that the public official observed extraordinary diligence require that the respondents should be agents of the State in order to be impleaded as
in the performance of duty does not result in the automatic grant of the privilege of the amparo respondents in an amparo petition. (Secretary of National Defense v. Manalo, G.R. No.
writ. It does not relieve the petitioner from establishing his or her claim by substantial evidence. 180906, October 7, 2008)
The omission or inaction on the part of the public official provides, however, some basis for the
petitioner to move and for the court to grant certain interim reliefs. (Yano v. Sanchez, G.R. No. b. Respondents Mapusok and APKA, in their Return filed with the Court of Appeals, raised
186640, 2010) as their defense that the petition should be dismissed on the ground that ALMA cannot file
the petition because of the earlier petition filed by Mayumi with the RTC. Are respondents
Hearsay Evidence May Be Considered in Amparo Proceedings correct in raising their defense?
A: Yes. The respondents are correct in raising the defense. Under Section 2(c) of the Rules
The fair and proper rule is to consider all the pieces of evidence adduced in their totality, and to on the Writ of Amparo, the filing of a petition by Mayumi who is an immediate member of
consider any evidence otherwise inadmissible under our usual rules to be admissible if it is the family of the aggrieved party already suspends the right of all other authorized parties to
consistent with the admissible evidence adduced. In other words, we reduce our rules to the most file similar petitions. Hence, ALMA cannot file the petition because of earlier petition by
basic test of reason—i.e., to the relevance of the evidence to the issue at hand and its consistency Mayumi with the RTC.
with all other pieces of adduced evidence. Thus, even hearsay evidence can be admitted if it
satisfies this basic minimum test. (Rodriguez v. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. no. 191805, 2013) c. Mayumi later filed separate criminal and civil actions against Mapusok. How will the
cases affect the amparo petition she earlier filed? (2015 Bar)
Though hearsay evidence is generally considered inadmissible under rules of evidence, such may A: When a criminal action and separate civil action are filed subsequent to a petition for a
be considered in a writ of amparo proceeding if required by the unique circumstances of the case. writ of amparo, the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal action. After consolidation,
It is the totality of the obtaining situation that must be taken into consideration to determine if a the procedure under Rules shall continue to apply to the disposition of the reliefs in the
petitioner is entitled to a Writ of Amparo. Police surveillance because of the petitioner’s petition. (Sec. 1, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)
relationship with a suspected member of the NPA, creates a real threat to life, liberty, or security.
(Sanchez v. Darroca, G.R. No. 242257, October 15, 2019)

Command Responsibility in Amparo Proceedings WRIT OF HABEAS DATA

The doctrine of command responsibility may be used to determine whether respondents are Q: What is the writ of habeas data? (2009 Bar)
accountable for and have the duty to address the abduction of Rodriguez in order to enable the A: The writ of habeas data is a remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life,
courts to devise remedial measures to protect his rights (Rodriguez v. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. liberty or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or
No. 181805, 2011) employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data
or information regarding the person, family, home and correspondence of the aggrieved party.
Amparo proceedings determine
Q: Azenith, the cashier of Temptation Investments, Inc. (Temptation, Inc.) with principal offices
1. Responsibility, or the extent the actors have been established by substantial evidence to in Cebu City, is equally hated and loved by her co-employees because she extends cash advances
have participated in whatever way, by action or omission, in an enforced disappearance, and or "sales" to her colleagues whom she likes. One morning, Azenith discovers an anonymous letter
2. Accountability, or the measure of remedies that should be addressed to those who: inserted under the door of her office threatening to kill her. Azenith promptly reports the matter to
a. Exhibited involvement in the enforced disappearance without bringing the level of her superior Joshua, who thereupon conducts an internal investigation to verify the said threat.
their complicity to the level of responsibility defined above; Claiming that the threat is real, Temptation, Inc. opts to transfer Azenith to its Palawan Office, a
b. Are imputed with knowledge relating to the enforced disappearance and who carry move she resists in view of the company’s refusal to disclose the results of its investigation.
the burden of disclosure; or Decrying the move as a virtual deprivation of her employment, Azenith files a petition for the
c. Carry, but have f ailed to discharge, the burden of extraordinary diligence in the issuance of a writ of habeas data before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to enjoin Temptation, Inc.
investigation of the enforced disappearance. from transferring her on the ground that the company’s refusal to provide her with a copy of the
investigation results compromises her right to life, liberty and privacy. Resolve the petition.
Thus, although there is no determination of criminal, civil or administrative liabilities, the doctrine Explain. (2010 Bar)
of command responsibility may nevertheless be applied to ascertain responsibility and A: Azenith’s petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas data must be dismissed. Under the facts,
accountability within these foregoing definitions (Id.). there is no showing that her right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by
an unlawful act or omission. Neither was the company shown to be engaged in the gathering,
collecting nor, storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home and
correspondence of the aggrieved party. (Sec. 1, A.M. 01-08-16-SC)
 8

WRIT OF HABEAS DATA (A.M. NO. 08- 1-16-SC) CONTENTS OF THE PETITION

SCOPE AND AVAILABILITY OF WRIT Verified And Written Petition Shall Contain:

The Writ of Habeas Data is a remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life, 1. Personal circumstances of petitioner and respondent;
liberty or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public 2. Manner the right to privacy is violated or threatened and its effects;
official or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, 3. Actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to secure the data or information;
collecting or storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home and 4. The location of files, registers, or databases, the government office, and the person in
correspondence of the aggrieved party. (Sec. 1, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC) charge or control;
5. The reliefs prayed for;
It also involves the right to privacy in life, liberty or security of the aggrieved party and 6. Such other relevant reliefs as are just and equitable. (Sec. 6, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)
covers extralegal killings and enforced disappearances. (Sec. 2, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)
Issuance of the Writ
In order for the privilege of the writ to be granted, there must exist a nexus between the
right to privacy on the one hand, and the right to life, liberty or security on the other Upon FILING of the petition, the court shall immediately order the issuance of the writ if
(Manila Electric Company v. Lim, G.R. No. 184769, 2010) on its face it ought to issue.

2023 Note: Habeas data is NOT LIMITED to cases of enforced disappearances and The Clerk of Court shall cause it to be SERVED within three (3) days from the issuance.
extralegal killings (Vivares v. St. Theresa’s College, G.R. No. 202666, 2004) The Writ shall set the date and time for SUMMARY HEARING which shall NOT be later
than ten (10) work days from the date of its issuance. (Sec. 7, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)
“Engaged” in gathering, collecting, or storing of data

Habeas data cannot be invoked when the respondents are not gathering, collecting, or CONTENTS OF RETURN
storing data or information (Castillo v. Cruz, G.R. No. 182165, 2009)
To "engage" means "to do or take part in something." It does not necessarily mean that the The respondent shall file a verified written return together with supporting affidavits
activity must be done in pursuit of a business. Whether such undertaking carries the within five (5) working days from service of the writ. This period MAY be extended by
element of regularity, as when one pursues a business, and is in the nature of a personal the court for justifiable reasons.
endeavor, for any other... reason or even for no reason at all, is immaterial and such will
not prevent the writ from getting to said person or entity. (Vivares v. St. Theresa’s College, The Return Shall Contain The Following:
G.R. No. 202666, 2004)
1. Lawful defenses such as national security, state secrets, privileged communications,
Instances When the Writ is NOT applicable confidentiality of the source of information of media and others;

The writ of habeas data cannot be invoked in labor disputes where there is no unlawful 2. In case of respondent in charge, in possession or in control of the data or information
violation of the right to life, liberty, or security (Meralco v. Lim, G.R. No. 184768, 2010) subject of the petition:
The writ of habeas data will not issue to protect purely property or commercial concerns,
nor when the grounds invoked in support of the petitions therefor are vague and doubtful i. A disclosure of the data or information about the petitioner, the nature of such data or
(Lee v. Ilagan, G.R. No. 203254, 2014) information, and the purpose for its collection
ii. The steps or actions taken by the respondent to ensure the security and confidentiality of
the data or information
WHO MAY FILE iii. The currency and accuracy of the data or information held; and

Any aggrieved party may file a petition for the Writ of Habeas Data. (Sec. 2, A.M. No. 08- 3. Other allegations relevant to the resolution of the proceeding (Sec. 10, A.M. No. 08-1-
1-16-SC) 16-SC)

In Cases Of Extra-legal Killings And Enforced Disappearances, The Petition May Be Filed 2023 NOTE: General denial is not allowed.
By (In Order of Preference):

1. Any member of the immediate family of the aggrieved; or in default thereof, PROCEDURE FOR HEARING

2. Any ascendant, descendant or collateral relative of the aggrieved party within the The hearing shall be SUMMARY in nature. However, the court, justice, or judge MAY
fourth (4th) civil degree of consanguinity or affinity. (Sec. 2, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC) call for a preliminary conference to simplify the issues and look at possibility of obtaining
stipulations and admissions from the parties. (Sec. 15, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)
WHERE FILED
Judgment
a. Regional Trial Court - of the place where petitioner or respondent resides, or that
which has jurisdiction over the place where the data or information is gathered, The court shall render judgment within ten (10) days from the time the petition is
collected or stored at the option of the petitioner; or submitted for decision.
Upon finality, the judgment shall be enforced by the sheriff or any lawful officer within
b. Supreme Court; or five (5) working days. (Sec. 16, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)

c. Court of Appeals; or Appeal

d. Sandiganbayan – when the action concerns public data files of government offices Any party may appeal from the final judgment or order to the Supreme Court under Rule
(Sec. 3, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC) 45. The appeal may raise questions of fact or law or both. The period of appeal shall be
five (5) working days from the date of notice of the adverse judgment or final order.
When issued by the REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, the writ shall be returnable to such Appeal shall be given the SAME priority as Habeas Corpus and Amparo cases. (Sec. 19,
court or judge. A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)

When issued by the SANDIGANBAYAN or the COURT OF APPEALS, the writ shall be INSTANCES WHEN PETITION IS HEARD IN THE CHAMBERS
returnable such court or justice, or to the Regional Trial Court of the place where petitioner
or respondent resides, or that which has jurisdiction over the place where the data or A hearing in chambers may be conducted where the respondent invokes the defense that
information is gathered, collected or stored. the release of the data or information in question shall compromise national security or
state secrets, or when the data or information cannot be divulged to the public due to its
When issued by the SUPEME COURT, the writ shall be returnable before such court or nature or privileged character. (Sec. 12, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)
judge, the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, or the Regional Trial Court of the place
where petitioner or respondent resides, or that which has jurisdiction over the place where
the data or information is gathered, collected or stored
CONSOLIDATION
The writ shall be enforceable ANYWHERE in the Philippines. (Sec. 4, A.M. No. 08-1-16-
SC) No docket fees shall be paid by the indigent petitioner. (Sec. 5, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC) When a criminal action is filed subsequent to the filing of a petition for the writ, the latter
shall be consolidated with the criminal action. When a criminal action and a separate civil
INSTITUTION OF SEPARATE ACTION action are filed subsequent to a petition for a Writ of Habeas Data, the latter shall be
consolidated with the criminal action. After consolidation, the procedure under this Rule
The filing of a petition for the Writ of Habeas Data shall NOT preclude the filing of shall continue to govern the disposition of the reliefs in the petition.
separate criminal, civil or administrative actions. (Sec. 20) 9.
EFFECT OF FILING A CRIMINAL ACTION
QUANTUM OF PROOF IN APPLICATION FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF
HABEAS DATA When a criminal action has been commenced, no separate petition for the writ shall be
filed. The relief under the writ shall be available to an aggrieved party by motion in the
SUBSTANTIAL evidence is required to prove the allegations in the petition. (Sec. 16, criminal case. (Sec. 22, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)
A.M. No. 08-1- 16-SC The effect is the same as in Amparo cases.
 9

APPEAL IN SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS

ANY interested person may appeal in SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS from order or judgment RULE ON ADVANCE DISTRIBUTION
by a Court of First Instance or a Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court, where such order
or judgment: Notwithstanding a pending controversy or appeal in proceedings to settle the estate of a
decedent, the court may, in its discretion and upon such terms as it may deem proper and
a. Allows or disallows a will just, permit that such part of the estate as may not be affected by the controversy or appeal
be distributed among the heirs and legatees, upon compliance with the conditions set forth
b. Determines who are the lawful heirs of a deceased person, or the distributive share of in Rule 90 of the Rules (Rule 109, Sec.2)
the estate to which such person is entitled
Although it is within the discretion of the RTC whether or not to permit the advance
c. Allows or disallows, in whole or in part, any claim against the estate of a deceased distribution of the estate, its exercise of such discretion should be qualified by the
person, or any claim presented on behalf of the estate in offset to a claim against it following:

d. Settles the account of an executor, administrator, trustee, or guardian 1. Only part of the estate that is not affected by any pending controversy or appeal
may be the subject of advance distribution (Rule 109 Sec. 2); and
e. Constitutes, in proceedings related to the settlement of the estate of a deceased person,
or the administration of a trustee or guardian, a final determination in the lower court of 2. The distributes must post a bond, fixed by the court, conditioned for the payment
the rights of the party appealing, except that no appeal shall be allowed on the appointment of outstanding obligations of the estate (Rule 90, Sec. 1)
of a special administrator
Where, however, the estate has sufficient assets to ensure the equitable distribution of the
f. Is the final order or judgment rendered in the case, and affects the substantial rights of inheritance in accordance with law and the final judgment in the proceedings and it does
the person appealing unless it be an order granting or denying a motion for a new trial or not appear there are unpaid obligations, as contemplated in Rule 90, for which provisions
for reconsideration (Rule 109, Sec. 1) should have been made or a bond required, such partial distribution may be allowed
(Quasha Ancheta Pena and Nolasco Law Office vs LCN Construction Corp., G.R. No.
174873, August 26, 2008)

Partial distribution of the decedent’s estate pending final termination of the testate or
intestate proceeding should as much as possible be discouraged by the courts, and except
in extreme cases, such advanced form of inheritance should not be countenanced (Quasha
Ancheta Pena and Nolasco Law Office vs LCN Construction Corp., G.R. No. 174873,
August 26, 2008)

4BLUE 95: Note: In certain special proceedings, appeal may be taken from one aspect of
the case while the court proceeds to hear another aspect of the case. For instance, an appeal
may be taken from an order admitting the will to probate, while the court proceeds to
resolve its intrinsic validity (Republic of the Philippines v Marcos II, G.R. No. 130371,
August 4, 2009)

MODES OF APPEAL

The following modes of appeal may be resorted to when proper:

a. Appeal from Municipal Trial Courts to Regional Trial Court (Rule 40)

b. Appeal from the Regional Trial Courts (Rule 41)

c. Petition for Review from the Regional Trial Courts to the Court of Appeals (Rule
42)

d. Appeal by Certiorari to the Supreme Court (Rule 45)

If it is an ordinary appeal under Rules 40 or 41, and the subject proceedings are subject to
multiple appeals, like settlement of estate, the appeal period is 30 days, a notice of appeal
and record of appeal being required. Settlement of estate is the only species of special
proceedings where there are many stages.