DOJ ISSUES ADVISORY OPINION ON RULES
ON MILITARY/POLICE CHECKPOINTS [1]
24 March 2011
The Department of Justice (DOJ) released today the first Advisory Opinion summarizing the basic rights of citizens in military/police checkpoints.
Advisory Opinion No. 1 signed by Secretary Leila M. De Lima is issued in line with the thrust of the Department to take a pro-active stance and dynamic approach in criminal justice concerns.
The ten (10) checkpoint rules outlined in the Advisory are anchored on the constitutional guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizures (Section 2, Article III). These are:
Each rule is supported by law and jurisprudence to ensure that in the implementation of proper search and seizure procedures at military and police checkpoints, human rights are not violated. Important definitions such as “checkpoint,� “visual search� and “probable cause� are included in the Advisory. The rules are couched in a language that is easy to understand and memorize.
Republika ng Pilipinas
KAGAWARAN NG KATARUNGAN
Department of Justice Manila
15 March 2011
ADVISORY OPINION NO. 01
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ADVISORY
ON RULES ON MILITARY/POLICE CHECKPOINTS
I. INTRODUCTION
This Department of Justice (DOJ) Advisory (the “Advisory�) is intended to address and advise the public on the proper conduct of checkpoints to protect citizens, to serve as warning to erring law enforcers and to weed out illegal checkpoints. The Advisory summarizes law and jurisprudence to ensure that in the implementation of proper search and seizure procedures at military or police checkpoints, civil, political and human rights are not violated.
II. SUMMARY OF THE LAW
Section 2, Article III of the Constitution provides for the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
Section 3, Article III also provides that any evidence obtained in violation of the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.
The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) has issued guidelines on the establishment of checkpoints to effectively implement the firearms ban during election period pursuant to the powers vested in it by the Constitution, Omnibus Election Code and other election laws.
The Supreme Court, in several cases, has ruled that not all checkpoints are illegal. Those which are warranted by the exigencies of public order and are conducted in a way least intrusive to motorists are allowed. For, admittedly, routine checkpoints do intrude, to a certain extent, on motorists’ right to “free passage without interruption,� but it cannot be denied that, as a rule, it involves only a brief detention of travelers during which the vehicle’s occupants are required to answer a brief question or two. For as long as the vehicle is neither searched not its occupants subjected to a body search, and the inspection of the vehicle is limited to a visual search, said routine checks cannot be regarded as violative of an individual’s right against unreasonable search. In fact, these routine checks, when conducted in a fixed area, are even less intrusive. [1]
III. IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS
IV. ADVISORY
The general public is hereby advised on the rules on military/police checkpoints as follows:
This Advisory is issued in line with the thrust of the Department to take a pro-active stance and dynamic approach in criminal justice concerns and all are enjoined to observe this Advisory.
(signed)
LEILA M. DE LIMA
Secretary