WRITS OF MANDAMUS,
HABEAS CORPUS,
AMPARO AND
HABEAS DATA
RULE 65, RULE 102,
A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC
ACOSTA, MANIGBAS, REYES, RUMOHR, SANDOVAL, YACAPIN
WRIT OF MANDAMUS
RULE 65
Mandamus



A special civil action under Rule 65
a writ issued in the name of the State, to
an inferior tribunal, a corporation, board
or person, commanding the performance
of an act which the law enjoins as a duty
resulting from an office, trust or station.
employed to compel the performance,
when refused, of a ministerial duty
Elements of Mandamus




Directed at any tribunal, corporation, board, officer
or person
Who unlawfully neglects the performance of an act
which the law specifically enjoins as a duty
resulting from an office, trust, or station; or
OR unlawfully excludes another from the use and
enjoyment of a right or office to which such other is
entitled
When there is no other plain, speedy, and adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law
Elements of Mandamus

A person aggrieved may file a verified petition


Alleging the facts with certainty
Praying that judgment be rendered commanding the
respondent to do the act required to be done to
protect the rights of the petitioner, and


To pay the damages sustained by the petitioner
Petition shall contain a sworn certification of
non-forum shopping
Characteristics


mandamus may lie in the performance of
a duty involving discretion to the extent
that the body or officer exercising such
duty may be compelled to act, but not to
act in a particular way.
Mandamus does not lie in the absence of
showing of a clear legal right which must
be well defined, clear, and certain as
reflected in the petition.
Characteristics

mandamus
will
not
issue
when
administrative remedies are still available


Except: when the rule of exhaustion cannot
be invoked because the party is estopped or if
only pure questions of law are raised.
Can be availed of only by the party who
has direct legal interest in the right sought
to be enforced

Where to file? Concurrent jurisdiction of




Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Regional Trial Court
When to file?

Within 60 days after receipt of notice of the
judgment/order/resolution
Writ of Habeas Corpus
Rule 102
Definition

It is a writ directed to a person detaining
another commanding him to produce the
body of the prisoner at a designated time
or place or by which the rightful custody
of a person is withheld from the on
entitled thereto.
Objective

The objective of the writ is to determine
whether the confinement or detention is
valid or lawful. If it is, the writ cannot be
issued. Its great object of the writ is the
liberation of those who may be imprisoned
without sufficient cause.
Objective

Jurisprudence

Villavicencio v. Lucban (39 Phil. 778)


Zagala v. Ilustre (48 Phil. 282)


to inquire into all manner of involuntary restraint as
distinguished from voluntary, and to relieve a person
therefrom if such restraint is illegal
actual and effective restraint, not merely nominal or
moral, is required
Moncupa v. Enrile, et al. (G.R. No. 63345,
January 30, 1986)

actual physical restraint is not always required; any
restraint which prejudice freedom of action is sufficient
Nature

Jurisprudence

Alimpos v. CA (106 SCRA 159)


proceeding in rem as it is an inquisition by the
government, at the suggestion and instance of an
individual but still in the name and capacity of the
sovereign.
Caballes v. CA (G.R. No. 163108, February 23,
2005)
summary remedy
 a prerogative writ which does not issues as a
matter of right but in the sound discretion of the
court or judge

Section 1

To what habeas corpus extends. –
Except as otherwise expressly
provided by law, the writ of habeas
corpus shall extend to all cases of
illegal confinement or detention by
which any person is deprived of his
liberty, or by which the rightful
custody of any person is withheld
from the person entitled thereto.
Section 1

Two instances when the writ of habeas
corpus may be availed of as a remedy:


In all cases of illegal confinement or detention
by which a person is deprived of his liberty.
When the rightful custody of any person is
withheld from the person entitled thereto.
Section 1

Jurisprudence

Sombong v. CA (252 SCRA 663)


Gumabon v. Director of the Bureau of Prisons (37 SCRA 420)


Remedy to enable parents to regain the custody of minor child even if the latter
be in the custody of a third person of his/her own free will upon the concurrence
of certain requisites
Temporary release of a person which carries such restriction does not render the
petition for habeas corpus moot and academic
Feria v. CA (325 SCRA 525)

Writ may be availed of where:




There has been a deprivation of a constitutional right resulting in the restraint of a
person;
The court had no jurisdiction to impose the sentence; or
An excessive penalty has been imposed, as such is void as to such excess.
In Re Azucena L. Garcia (339 SCRA 292)

Habeas corpus cannot function as a writ of error. Mere errors of fact or law, which
did not have the effect of depriving the trial court of its jurisdiction over the cause
and the person of the defendant, if corrected at all, must be corrected on appeal
in the form and manner prescribed by law.
Section 1

Constitutional provisions related to the writ of
habeas corpus:


Sec. 15, Article III of the 1987 Constitution
provides that the privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus shall not be suspended except in cases of
invasion or rebellion where the public safety
requires it.
Sec. 18, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution
provides that in case of invasion or rebellion, the
President may, for a period not exceeding sixty
days, suspend the privilege of habeas corpus,
which Congress may revoke or, upon the initiative
of the President, extend for a period to be
determined by it.
Section 2

Who may grant the writ. – The writ of
habeas corpus may be granted by the
Supreme Court, or any member thereof,
on any day and at any time, or by the
Court of Appeals or any member thereof
in the instances authorized by law, and
if so granted it shall be enforceable
anywhere in the Philippines, and may
be made returnable before the court or
any member thereof, or before the
Court of First Instance, or any judge
thereof for the hearing and decision on
the merits. It may also be
Section 2

Courts that may issue the writ:




The Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Regional Trial Court
The decisions of the Supreme Court and the
Court of Appeals are enforceable anywhere in
the Philippines while the regional trial courts
have jurisdiction to issue writs of habeas
corpus only when such writ can be enforced
within their respective judicial districts.
Section 2

Jurisprudence

Martin v. Guerrero (317 SCRA 166)


Medina v. Yap (60 SCRA 73)



A writ issued by a Regional Trial Court and enforced outside
of his judicial district is void.
A petition filed with the Supreme Court may make the writ
returnable to itself.
Where factual issues are raised, the Supreme Court may
make the writ returnable to a regional trial court.
Orla v. Court of Appeals (192 SCRA 768)


In a petition filed with the Court of Appeals, the latter may
not make the writ returnable to the regional trial courts
The Court of Appeals should instead hear the case, conduct a
trial or hearing to receive evidence and decide the petition
for habeas corpus on the merits.
Section 3

Requisites of application therefor. – Application for the writ
shall be by petition signed and verified either by the party
for whose relief it is intended, or by some person on his
behalf, and shall set forth:
(a) That the person in whose behalf the application is made
is imprisoned or restrained of his liberty;
(b) The officer or name of the person by whom he is so
imprisoned or restrained; or, if both are unknown or
uncertain, such officer or person may be described by an
assumed appellation, and the person who is served with the
writ shall be deemed the person intended;
(c) The place where he is so imprisoned or restrained, if
known;
(d) A copy of the commitment or cause of detention of such
person, if it can be procured without impairing the
efficiency of the remedy; or, if the imprisonment or restraint
is without any legal authority, such fact shall appear.
Section 3

The petition for habeas corpus may be
filed, signed and verified by the party for
whose relief it is intended or the person
illegally detained, or by some other person
on his behalf.
Section 3

Jurisprudence

Velasco v. CA (245 SCRA 677)


People v. Labriaga (250 SCRA 163)


The term “some other person” means any person who has a
legally justified interest in the freedom of the person whose
liberty is restrained (parents, wife or the common-law spouse,
one who shows some authorization to make the application).
Strict compliance with the technical requirements of Section 3
may be dispensed with, where the application is sufficient in
substance, as the rules on habeas corpus are liberally
construed.
Bernarte v. CA (263 SCRA 323)

The court must inquire into every phase and aspect of
petitioner’s detention – from the moment petitioner was taken
into custody up to the moment the court passes upon the
merits of the petition and only after such a scrutiny can the
court satisfy itself that the due process clause of the
Constitution has been satisfied.
Section 4

When writ not allowed or discharge authorized.
– If it appears that the person alleged to be
restrained of his liberty is in the custody of an
officer under process issued by a court or judge
or by virtue of a judgment or order of a court of
record, and that the court or judge had
jurisdiction to issue the process, render the
judgment, or make the order, the writ shall not
be allowed; or if the jurisdiction appears after
the writ is allowed, the person shall not be
discharged by reason of any informality or
defect in the process, judgment, or order. Nor
shall anything in this rule be held to authorize
the discharge of a person charged with or
convicted of an offense in the Philippines, or of
a person suffering imprisonment under lawful
judgment.
Section 4

Jurisprudence
 Rodriguez v. Bonifacio (344 SCRA 519)




Cannot question his detention via writ once duly charged in court.
Remedy: quash the information and/or the warrant of arrest duly
issued.
The term “court” includes quasi-judicial bodies.
In Velasco v. CA (245 SCRA 677)

Other instances




The subsequent issuance of a judicial process preventing the discharge of the
detained persons;
The filing of a complaint or information for the offense for which the accused is
detained and the issuance of a warrant of arrest; and
The filing of a motion for bail, as it is an admission that the person was under the
custody of the court and voluntarily submitted to his person to its jurisdiction, or
by appearing in court and giving a bond for his provisional release.
Ilusorio v. Bildner (332 SCRA 169)

Wife may not secure a writ of habeas corpus to compel her husband to
live with her in conjugal basis. Marital rights including overture and
living in conjugal swelling may not be enforced by the extraordinary writ
of habeas corpus.
Section 5

When the writ must be granted and
issued. – A court or judge authorized
to grant the writ must, when a
petition therefor is presented and it
appears that the writ ought to issue,
grant the same forthwith, and
immediately thereupon the clerk of
the court shall issue the writ under
the seal of the court; or in case of
emergency, the judge may issue the
writ under his own hand, and may
depute any officer or person to serve
Section 6

To whom writ directed, and what to require. –
In case of imprisonment or restraint by an
officer, the writ shall be directed to him, and
shall command him to have the body of the
person restrained of his liberty before the court
or judge designated in the writ at the time and
place therein specified. In case of imprisonment
or restraint by a person not an officer, the writ
shall be directed to an officer, and shall
command him to take and have the body of the
person restrained of his liberty before the court
or judge designated in the writ at the time and
place therein specified, and to summon the
person by whom he is restrained then and there
to appear before said court or judge to show
the cause of the imprisonment or restraint.
Section 7

How prisoner designated and writ served. –
The person to be produced should be
designated in the writ by his name, if
known, but if his name is not known he may
be otherwise described or identified. The
writ may be served in any province by the
sheriff or other proper officer, or by a
person deputed by the court or judge.
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. If that person
cannot be found, or has not the prisoner in
his custody, then the service shall be made
on any other person having or exercising
such custody.
Section 8

How writ executed and returned. – The
officer to whom the writ is directed shall
convey the person so imprisoned or
restrained, and named in the writ, before
the judge allowing the writ, or, in case of his
absence or disability, before some other
judge of the same court, on the day
specified in the writ, unless, from sickness
or infirmity of the person directed to be
produced, such person cannot, without
danger, be brought before the court or
judge; and the officer shall make due return
of the writ, together with the day and the
cause of the caption and restraint of such
person according to the command thereof.
Section 9

Defect of form. – No writ of habeas
corpus can be disobeyed for defect of
form, if it sufficiently appears
therefrom in whose custody or under
whose restraint the party imprisoned
or restrained is held and the court or
judge before whom he is to be
brought.
Section 10.

Contents of return. – When the person to be produced is
imprisoned or restrained by an officer, the person who makes the
return shall state therein, and in other cases the person in whose
custody the prisoner is found shall state, in writing to the court or
judge before whom the writ is returnable, plainly and
unequivocably:
(a) Whether he has or has not the party in his custody or power, or
under restraint;
(b) If he has the party in his custody or power, or under restraint,
the authority and the true and whole cause thereof, set forth at
large, with a copy of the writ, order, execution, or other process, if
any, upon which the party is held;
(c) If the party is in his custody or power or is restrained by him,
and is not produced, particularly the nature and gravity of the
sickness or infirmity of such party by reason of which he cannot,
without danger, be brought before the court or judge;
(d) If he has had the party in his custody or power, or under
restraint, and has transferred such custody or restraint to another,
particularly to whom, at what time, for what cause, and by what
authority such transfer was made.
Return of the Writ
Form
In writing
Signed by the person making the Return
Sworn to by said person if:





Prisoner is not produced
In all other cases
UNLESS: Made and signed by a sworn public officer in
his official capacity.
Contents
Day when the Return is made
Cause of caption and restraint of prisoner
If the Return is made by the person alleged to have custody of the prisoner,
whether or not he has the prisoner in his custody or power or is under restrain
If the prisoner is in his custody or is under restraint:
1)
2)
3)
4)
a)
The authority thereof
True and whole cause thereof
5)
a)
Including copy of the writ, order, execution or process embodying the authority, if any
If the prisoner is in his custody or is under restraint and not produced before the
court:
6)
a)
The nature and gravity of the sickness or infirmity of the prisoner
If the prisoner is in his custody or under restraint and was transferred to another:
7)
a)
b)
c)
d)
To whom transferred
Time transfer was made
Cause of transfer
Authority under which transfer was made
To Whom Made
The Return should be made before the judge of the
court where the application of the writ was filed.
By Whom Made


Sheriff or other officer who served the writ
The person in whose custody the prisoner is
found
Effects After Return is Made
1) If the prisoner is produced:



The judge to whom the return was made hears and examines the return
and such other matters as are properly submitted for consideration.
If the judge is satisfied that the prisoner is unlawfully imprisoned or
detained, the prisoner shall be ordered discharged from confinement to be
effective when a copy of the order has been served on the officer or
person detaining the prisoner. If such officer or person does not appeal,
the prisoner shall be released.
The person set at liberty shall not be imprisoned again for the same
offense UNLESS, by lawful order or process of a court having jurisdiction
over the cause or offense.

If a person knowingly recommits or imprisons, or causes to be committed
or imprisoned, for the same offense or pretended offense, any person set
at liberty, or knowingly aids or assists therein, such person shall forfeit to
the party aggrieved one thousand pesos to be recovered in a proper action
and may also be punished for contempt.
Effects After Return is Made


If it appears that the prisoner was lawfully committed, and is plainly and
specifically charged in the warrant of commitment with an offense
punishable by death, he hall not be released, discharged or baled.
If the prisoner is lawfully imprisoned or restrained on a charge of having
committed an offense not punishable by death, he may be recommitted or
imprisoned or admitted to bail in the discretion of the court or judge.
Upon application for bail:



The judge or court shall consider the circumstances of the
prisoner and the nature of the offense charged.
The prisoner files a bund in the sum determined by the judge
or court.
Thu judge or court grants bail conditioned on the appearance
of the prisoner before the court where the offense is properly
cognizable to abide its order or judgment.
Effects After Return is Made
2) If the prisoner is not produced:

If the person imprisoned or restrained is
not produced because of his alleged
sickness or infirmity, the court or judge
must be satisfied that it is so grave that
the person cannot be produced without
danger before proceeding to hear and
dispose of the matter.
When the Return is Evidence and
When Only A Plea


The Return shall be considered prima facie evidence of the cause
of restraint if the prisoner is in custody under a warrant of
commitment in pursuance of law.
The Return shall be considered only as a plea of the facts therein
set forth and the party claiming the custody must prove such facts
if the prisoner is restrained of his liberty by any private authority.
When the Custody of the Prisoner
may be Removed to Another:
A person committed to prison or in custody of an officer for any CRIMINAL matter shall
not be removed therefrom into the custody of another officer UNLESS:





By legal process
The prisoner be delivered to an inferior officer to carry to jail
By order of the proper court or judge
By order of the proper court or judge, be removed from one place or another
within the Philippines for trial
In case of fire, epidemic, insurrection, or other necessity or public calamity.
A person who makes, signs, or countersigns any order for such removal contrary to
Section 18, Rule 102 shall forfeit to the party aggrieved one thousand pesos to be
recovered in a proper action.
Penalties
Penalty for Refusing to Issue the Writ:

A clerk of court who refuses to issue the writ after the court or judge
allowed it and after a demand is made shall forfeit to the party aggrieved
one thousand pesos to be recovered in a proper action and may also be
punished for contempt.
Penalty for Disobeying the Writ:

A person to whom a writ is directed, who neglects or refuses to obey or
make return of the same or makes false return thereof or who, upon
demand by or on behalf of the prisoner, refuses to deliver to the person
so demanding within 6 hours after the demand therefore a true copy of
the warrant or order of commitment shall forfeit to the party aggrieved
one thousand pesos to be recovered in a proper action and may also be
punished for contempt.
Record of Writ
The proceedings upon a writ of habeas corpus shall be recorded by the clerk of court.
Fees and Costs





Upon the final disposition of the proceedings, the court or judge shall make such
order as to costs as the case requires.
The fees of officers and witnesses shall be included in the costs taxed.
No officer or person shall have the right to demand payment in advance of any fees
to which he is entitled by virtue of the proceedings.
When a person confined under color of proceedings in a CRIMINAL case is
discharged, the costs shall be taxed against the Republic of the Philippines and paid
out of its Treasury.
When a person in custody by virtue or under color of proceedings in a CIVIL case is
discharged, the costs shall be taxed against him or against the person who signed
the application for the writ or both as the court shall direct.
POINTS OF
COMPARISON
HABEAS CORPUS
MANDAMUS
Definition
A writ commanding another to
produce the body of a prisoner
at a designated time and place
A Writ commanding an inferior court,
tribunal, board, corporation or person
to perform a particular duty resulting
from the official station of the party
commanded
Purpose
a) To determine whether or not
the detention is lawful
b) To liberate those imprisoned
without sufficient cause
a) To compel the performance of a
ministerial duty
b) To compel the performance of a
duty requiring discretion only to the
extent of requiring to act but not how
to act
Grounds
a) Illegal confinement or
detention by which a person is
deprived of his liberty
b) When rightful custody of any
person withheld from a person
entitled thereto
a) Unlawful neglect of performing an
act which the law specifically enjoins
as a duty resulting from an office, trust
or station
b) Unlawful exclusion of another from
the use and enjoyment of a right or
office to which such other is entitled
POINTS OF
COMPARISON
HABEAS CORPUS
MANDAMUS
Applicant
a) Party whose relief it is
intended
b) Person illegally detained
c) Other person on his behalf
Person aggrieved
To whom
directed
a) If imprisoned or restrained by
an officer, directed to such
officer
b) If imprisoned or restrained by
a person not an officer, directed
to an officer
Directed at any tribunal, corporation,
board, officer or person
Where filed
Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Regional Trial Court
Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Regional Trial Court
* If it involves acts of quasi-judicial
agencies, petition filed only in the
Court of Appeals
* May also be file in Sandiganbayan in
aid of its appellate jurisdiction
WRIT OF AMPARO
A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC
DEFINITION


A petition for a writ of amparo is a remedy
available to any person whose right to life,
liberty and security is violated or
threatened with violation by an unlawful
act or omission of a public official or
employee, or of a private individual or
entity.
‘Amparo’ literally means ‘to protect’
SCOPE



- The writ shall cover extralegal killings
and enforced disappearances or threats
thereof.
- Limited only to the right to life, liberty
and security of persons.
- covers both actual and threatened
violations of such rights committed by
both public officials and private individuals
or entities.
WHO MAY FILE
- Aggrieved Party –
 Any member of the immediate family, namely: the
spouse, children and parents of the aggrieved party;
 Any ascendant, descendant or collateral relative of the
aggrieved party within the fourth civil degree of
consanguinity or affinity, in default of those mentioned in
the preceding paragraph
-Authorized Party –
 Any concerned citizen, organization, association or
institution, if there is no known member of the
immediate family or relative of the aggrieved party.
FILING
may be filed on any day, including Saturdays, Sundays and holidays; and at
any time, from morning until evening.
The amparo petition may be filed with:

Regional Trial Court having territorial jurisdiction on the place where the act
or omission was committed, or where any of its elements occurred.


Sandiganbayan


may be returnable before such court or any justice thereof, or to any RTC
of the place where the violation was committed.
Supreme Court of any of its justices


may be returnable before such court or any justice thereof, or to any RTC
of the place where the violation was committed.
Court of Appeals or any of its justices


returnable before the RTC or judge.
returnable before the SC or any justice thereof, or before the
Sandiganbayan or the CA or any of their justices, or to any RTC of the place
where the violation took place.
No docket and other lawful fees required.
CONTENTS

The petition shall be signed and verified and shall allege the following:
a.
The personal circumstances of the petitioner;
b.
The name and personal circumstances of the respondent responsible
for the threat, act or omission, or, if the name is unknown or uncertain, the
respondent may be described by an assumed appellation;
c.
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 violation is committed with the attendant
circumstances detailed in supporting affidavits;
d.
The investigation conducted, if any, specifying the names, personal
circumstances, and addresses of the investigating authority or individuals,
as well as the manner and conduct of the investigation, together with any
report;
e.
The actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to determine the
fate or whereabouts of the aggrieved party and the identity of the person
responsible for the threat, act or omission; and
f.
The relief prayed for.
ISSUANCE



Upon filing, the court, justice or judge
shall IMMEDIATELY order the issuance of
the writ, when on the face of the petition,
it ought to issue.
A hearing of the petition, which shall not
be later than 7 days from the date of
issuance, shall be held.
Shall be GRANTED if petitioner is able to
prove his cause of action
SERVICE


Personal Service made by judicial officer
or by a person deputized by the court,
justice or judge against the respondent.
If personal service cannot be made: Rules
on substituted service will apply
RETURN
CONTENTS




The lawful defenses to show that the respondent did not violate or threaten with violation
the right to life, liberty and security of the aggrieved party, through any act or omission;
The steps or actions taken by the respondent to determine the fate or whereabouts of the
aggrieved party and the person or persons responsible for the threat, act or omission;
All relevant information in the possession of the respondent pertaining to the threat, act or
omission against the aggrieved party; and
If the respondent is a public official or employee, the return shall further state the actions
that have been or will still be taken:





to verify the identity of the aggrieved party;
to recover and preserve evidence related to the death or disappearance of the person identified in the
petition which may aid in the prosecution of the person or persons responsible;
to identify witnesses and obtain statements from them concerning the death or disappearance;
to determine the cause, manner, location and time of death or disappearance as well as any pattern
or practice that may have brought about the death or disappearance;
to identify and apprehend the person or persons involved in the death or disappearance; and to bring
the suspected offenders before a competent court
When to File Return: Within SEVENTY-TWO (72) HOURS after the service of the writ
Must be a detailed verified return
No general denial is allowed
Defenses not pleaded is deemed waived
Failure to file the return will give rise to an Ex Parte Hearing
Refusal to make a return is punishable by CONTEMPT, the respondent may be imprisoned
or be fined.
PROHIBITED PLEADINGS AND
MOTIONS
The following pleadings and motions are prohibited:
a. Motion to dismiss;
b. Motion for extension of time to file return, opposition, affidavit, position
paper and other pleadings;
c. Dilatory motion for postponement;
d. Motion for a bill of particulars;
e. Counterclaim or cross-claim;
f. Third-party complaint;
g. Reply;
h. Motion to declare respondent in default;
i. Intervention;
j. Memorandum;
k. Motion for reconsideration of interlocutory orders or interim relief
orders; and
l. Petition for certiorari, mandamus or prohibition against any interlocutory
order.
HEARING

Summary in nature, but the court may
conduct a preliminary conference
INTERIM RELIEFS
1. Temporary Protection Order (TPO)

The court, justice or judge, upon motion or motu proprio, may order that
the petitioner or the aggrieved party and any member of his immediate
family be protected in a government agency or by an accredited person or
private institution capable of keeping and securing their safety.
2. Inspection Order (IO)

The court, justice or judge, upon verified motion and after due hearing,
may order any person in possession or control of a designated land or other
property, to permit entry for the purpose of inspecting, measuring,
surveying, or photographing the property or any relevant object or
operation thereon.





Must stated in sufficient detail the place/s to be inspected
Must be under oath and should have supporting affidavits
Specify the persons authorized to make the inspection, as well as the date, time
and manner of making such inspection
If opposed: The amparo court may conduct a hearing in chambers to determine
the merit of the opposition
LIFETIME: 5 Days, unless extended under justifiable circumstances
INTERIM RELIEFS
3. Production Order (PO)

The court, justice or judge, upon verified motion and after due hearing, may order
any person in possession, custody or control of any designated documents, papers,
books, accounts, letters, photographs, objects or tangible things, or objects in
digitized or electronic form, which constitute or contain evidence relevant to the
petition or the return, to produce and permit their inspection, copying or
photographing by or on behalf of the movant.

If opposed: The amparo court may conduct a hearing in chambers to determine the merit of
the opposition
4. Witness Protection Order (WPO)

The court, justice or judge, upon motion or motu proprio, may refer the witnesses to
the Department of Justice for admission to the Witness Protection, Security and
Benefit Program, pursuant to Republic Act No. 6981.
Interim Reliefs Available to both Petitioner and Respondent
1.
Inspection Order - Shall be supported by affidavits or testimonies of witnesses
having personal knowledge of the defenses of the respondent/s.
2.
Protection Order
BURDEN OF PROOF AND
STANDARD OF DILIGENCE


Substantial Evidence
Standard of Diligence


Private Individual or Entity as Respondent: Prove that
ORDINARY DILIGENCE as required by applicable
laws, rules and regulations was observed in the
performance of duty.
Public Official or Employee as Respondent – Prove
that EXTRA-ORDINARY DILIGENCE as required by
applicable laws, rules and regulations was observed in
the performance of duty
JUDGMENT



Court shall render judgment within 10 days from the
time petition is submitted for decision
GRANTED if allegations are proven by substantial
evidence, OTHERWISE, it shall be DENIED.
FAILURE TO PRESENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE: Case
will be archived, not dismissed


Revival of Archived Petition - A periodic review shall be made by
the court and shall motu proprio or upon motion of any party
order its revival when ready for further proceedings.
Dismissal of Petition after it has been archived - DISMISSED
WITH PREJUDICE upon failure to prosecute the case after the
lapse of two (2) years from notice to the petitioner of the order
archiving the case.
APPEAL




Any party may appeal from the final
judgment or order TO THE SUPREME
COURT under Rule 45.
May raise questions of fact or law or both.
Period of Appeal: Five (5) working days
from the date of notice of the adverse
judgment.
Order to archive petition NOT
APPEALABLE. Interlocutory order…
INSTITUTION OF SEPARATE
ACTIONS


Prerogative Writ: thus, it does not suspend the filing of
criminal, civil or administrative actions
Not a criminal proceeding Will NOT determine the
criminal guilt of respondent, BUT the amparo court may
refer the case to the DOJ for criminal prosecution.
EFFECT OF FILING A SEPARATE CRIMINAL ACTION:



If instituted BEFORE the filing of a petition for writ of amparo,
NO SEPARATE PETITION for the writ of amparo shall be filed.
The reliefs under the writ shall be available BY MOTION in the
criminal case.
If instituted AFTER the filing of a petition for writ of amparo, the
petition for the writ shall be CONSOLIDATED with the criminal
action.
Criminal and a separate civil action are instituted AFTER a
petition for the writ of amparo has already been filed, the
petition shall be CONSOLIDATED WITH THE CRIMINAL ACTION.
OTHER RULES/DOCTRINES

Does not diminish, increase or modify
substantive rights recognized and protected by
the Constitution. (Sec. 24, A.M. No. 07-9-12-
SC)


Rules of Court apply in a SUPPLETORY manner
(Sec. 25, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)
Shall govern cases involving ELKs and EDs
pending in trial courts and appellate
courts. (Sec. 26, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)
CASE DOCTRINES
G.R. No. 182795
ARMANDO Q.
CANLAS et. al. vs. NAPICO
HOMEOWNERS ASS’N., I – XIII,
INC., ET AL.
G.R. No. 182484
TAPUZ et. al. vs.
DEL ROSARIO et. al.
The threatened demolition of a dwelling by
virtue of a final judgment of the court
is not included among the
enumeration of rights as stated in
Section 1 for which the remedy of a
writ of amparo is made available.
A writ of amparo is not a writ to protect
concerns that are purely property or
commercial. Neither is it a writ that we
shall issue on amorphous and
uncertain grounds.
When recourses in the ordinary course of
law fail because of deficient legal
representation or the use of improper
remedial measures, neither the writ of
certiorari nor that of amparo extraordinary though they may be will suffice to serve as a curative
substitute
CASE DOCTRINES
G.R. No. 180906
SECRETARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE vs. MANALO
As the Amparo Rule was intended to address the intractable problem of
"extralegal killings" and "enforced disappearances," its coverage, in
its present form, is confined to these two instances or to threats
thereof.
The remedy of the writ of amparo provides rapid judicial relief as it
partakes of a summary proceeding that requires only substantial
evidence to make the appropriate reliefs available to the petitioner;
it is not an action to determine criminal guilt requiring proof beyond
reasonable doubt, or liability for damages requiring preponderance
of evidence, or administrative responsibility requiring substantial
evidence that will require full and exhaustive proceedings.
CASE DOCTRINES
G.R. No. 182165
CASTILLO et. al. vs. CRUZ et. al.
The coverage of the writs of amparo and habeas data is limited to the
protection of rights to life, liberty and security. And the writs cover
not only actual but also threats of unlawful acts or omissions.
To thus be covered by the privilege of the writs, respondents must
meet the threshold requirement that their right to life, liberty and
security is violated or threatened with an unlawful act or omission.
Petitions for writs of amparo and habeas data are extraordinary
remedies which cannot be used as tools to stall the execution of a
final and executory decision in a property dispute.
CASE DOCTRINES
G.R. No. 182498
RAZON, JR et. al. vs. TAGITIS
. The issuance of writ of amparo does not determine guilt nor pinpoint
criminal culpability for the disappearance; rather, it determines
responsibility, or at least accountability, for the enforced
disappearance for purposes of imposing the appropriate remedies to
address the disappearance.
The burden for the public authorities to discharge in these situations,
under the Rule on the Writ of Amparo, is twofold. The first is to
ensure that all efforts at disclosure and investigation are undertaken
under pain of indirect contempt from this Court when governmental
efforts are less than what the individual situations require. The
second is to address the disappearance, so that the life of the victim
is preserved and his or her liberty and security restored.
CASE DOCTRINES
To read the Rules of Court requirement on pleadings while addressing
the unique Amparo situation, the test in reading the petition 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 through State or private party action. The petition should
likewise be read in its totality, rather than in terms of its isolated
component parts, to determine if the required elements – namely, of
the disappearance, the State or private action, and the actual or
threatened violations of the rights to life, liberty or security – are
present.
The requirement for supporting affidavits, with the annotation that
these can be used as the affiant’s direct testimony should not be
read as an absolute one that necessarily leads to the dismissal of
the petition if not strictly followed.
CASE DOCTRINES
Thus, in these proceedings, the Amparo petitioner needs
only to properly comply with the substance and form
requirements of a Writ of Amparo petition, and prove the
allegations by substantial evidence. Once a rebuttable
case has been proven, the respondents must then
respond and prove their defenses based on the standard
of diligence required. The rebuttable case, of course,
must show that an enforced disappearance took place
under circumstances showing a violation of the victim’s
constitutional rights to life, liberty or security, and the
failure on the part of the investigating authorities to
appropriately respond.
POINTS OF
COMPARISON
AMPARO
MANDAMUS
Definition
A remedy available to any person
whose right to life, liberty and
security is violated or threatened
with violation by an unlawful act or
omission of a public official or
employee, or of a private individual
or entity.
A Writ commanding an inferior court,
tribunal, board, corporation or person to
perform a particular duty resulting from the
official station of the party commanded
Purpose
the
writ protects the right to life,
liberty and security of persons
It covers both actual and threatened
violations of such rights committed
by both public officials and private
individuals or entities.
The writ covers extralegal killings
(ELKs) and enforced disappearances
(EDs)
a) To compel the performance of a
ministerial duty
b) To compel the performance of a duty
requiring discretion only to the extent of
requiring to act but not how to act
Grounds
Threatened or actual violation of the
right to life, liberty and security by an
unlawful act or omission
a) Unlawful neglect of performing an act
which the law specifically enjoins as a duty
resulting from an office, trust or station
b) Unlawful exclusion of another from the
use and enjoyment of a right or office to
which such other is entitled
POINTS OF
COMPARISON
HABEAS CORPUS
MANDAMUS
Applicant
Aggrieved Party
Authorized Party
Person aggrieved
To whom
directed
a) If imprisoned or restrained by
an officer, directed to such
officer
b) If imprisoned or restrained by
a person not an officer, directed
to an officer
Directed at any tribunal, corporation,
board, officer or person
Where filed
Regional Trial Court
Sandiganbayan
Court of Appeals or any of its
justices
Supreme Court of any of its
justices
Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Regional Trial Court
* If it involves acts of quasi-judicial
agencies, petition filed only in the
Court of Appeals
* May also be file in Sandiganbayan in
aid of its appellate jurisdiction
WRIT OF HABEAS
DATA
A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC
WRIT OF HABEAS DATA



The basic attribute of an effective right to informational
privacy is the right of individuals to control the flow
information concerning or describing them. It is however
a right that must be balanced by legitimate concerns.
There is therefore a pressing need to provide for judicial
remedies (such as the writ of habeas data) that would
allow the summary hearing of the unlawful use of data
or information and the remedy possible violations of the
right to privacy.
In general, the Writ of Habeas Data is designed to
protect, by means of an individual complaint presented
to a constitutional court, the image, privacy, honor,
information, self-determination and freedom of
information of a person.
WRIT OF HABEAS DATA



Several studies have shown remarkable uses of the habeas data writ- uses
that were not really intended by its developers. An “unforeseen effect” of
this juridical remedy is that it has become “an excellent Human Rights tool
mostly in the countries that are recovering from military dictatorships. The
Supreme Court in Argentina held that the habeas data rule applied implicitly
to the families of the deceased in a case involving extrajudicial killing and
enforced disappearance. This was a recognition of the right of families of
the disappeared, usually victims of the military regime, to request access to
police and military records otherwise closed to them- and, in essence,
establishing a right to truth.
This right to truth entitles the families of disappeared persons to know the
totality of circumstances surrounding the fates of their relatives and
imposes an obligation of investigation on the part of governments.
The right to truth is a component of the right to life, liberty and security.
The writ of habeas data will provide people with additional remedy that
would hopefully terminate the extrajudicial killings and enforced
disappearances plaguing the country.
WRIT OF HABEAS DATA


All persons have the right to access information about themselves,
especially if it is in the possession of the government. The right to access
and control personal information is essential to protect one’s privacy, honor
and personal identity.
The writ of habeas data is a remedy to protect the right to life, liberty or
security of a person from violation or threatened violation by an unlawful
act or omission of a public official or employee or of a private individual or
entity. It complements the remedies of the writ of amparo and writ of
habeas corpus.


The writ of habeas data can be availed of as an independent remedy to
enforce one’s right to privacy, more specifically, the right to informational
privacy. The remedies against the violation of such right can include
updating, rectification, suppression or destruction of the database or
information or files in possession or in control of respondents.
The right to privacy is a personal right. Hence, generally, it is the aggrieved
party who can seek the remedy of the writ for its enforcement.
Tapuz et. al v. del Rosario
(G.R. No. 182484)
Section 6 of the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data requires the following material allegations of ultimate facts in a
petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas data:
"(a) The personal circumstances of the petitioner and the respondent;
(b) The manner the right to privacy is violated or threatened and how it affects the right to life, liberty or security
of the aggrieved party;
(c) The actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to secure the data or information;
(d) The location of the files, registers or databases, the government office, and the person in charge, in
possession or in control of the data or information, if known;
(e) The reliefs prayed for, which may include the updating, rectification, suppression or destruction of the
database or information or files kept by the respondent.
In case of threats, the relief may include a prayer for an order enjoining the act complained of; and
(f) Such other relevant reliefs as are just and equitable."
Support for the habeas data aspect of the present petition only alleges that:
"1. [ ... ] Similarly, a petition for a WRIT OF HABEAS DATA is prayed for so that the PNP may release the report
on the burning of the homes of the petitioners and the acts of violence employed against them by the private
respondents, furnishing the Court and the petitioners with copy of the same;
66. Petitioners apply for a WRIT OF HABEAS DATA commanding the Philippine National Police [PNP] to produce
the police report pertaining to the burning of the houses of the petitioners in the land in dispute and likewise the
investigation report if an investigation was conducted by the PNP."
Tapuz et. al v. del Rosario
(G.R. No. 182484)
These allegations obviously lack what the Rule on Writ of Habeas Data
requires as a minimum, thus rendering the petition fatally deficient.
Specifically, we see no concrete allegations of unjustified or unlawful
violation of the right to privacy related to the right to life, liberty or
security. The petition likewise has not alleged, much less
demonstrated, any need for information under the control of police
authorities other than those it has already set forth as integral
annexes. The necessity or justification for the issuance of the writ,
based on the insufficiency of previous efforts made to secure
information, has not also been shown. In sum, the prayer for the
issuance of a writ of habeas data is nothing more than the "fishing
expedition" that this Court - in the course of drafting the Rule on
habeas data - had in mind in defining what the purpose of a writ of
habeas data is not. In these lights, the outright denial of the petition
for the issuance of the writ of habeas data is fully in order.
Castillo et. al v Cruz et. al
G.R. No. 182165



Section 1 of the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data provides:
Section 1. Habeas Data. – The writ of habeas data is a remedy
available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or
security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a
public official or 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. (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)
From the above-quoted provisions, the coverage of the writs is
limited to the protection of rights to life, liberty and security. And the
writs cover not only actual but also threats of unlawful acts or
omissions.
3.
G.R. No. 184769
October 5, 2010
MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY, ALEXANDER S. DEYTO
and RUBEN A. SAPITULA, Petitioners, vs. ROSARIO
GOPEZ LIM, Respondent.
4. G.R. No. 189155
September 7, 2010
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR THE WRIT OF
AMPARO AND THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA IN FAVOR OF
MELISSA C. ROXAS, MELISSA C. ROXAS, Petitioner, vs.
GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, GILBERT TEODORO,
GEN. VICTOR S. IBRADO, P/DIR. GEN. JESUS AME
VERZOSA, LT. GEN. DELFIN N. BANGIT, PC/SUPT. LEON
NILO A. DELA CRUZ, MAJ. GEN. RALPH VILLANUEVA,
PS/SUPT. RUDY GAMIDO LACADIN, AND CERTAIN
PERSONS WHO GO BY THE NAME[S] DEX, RC AND
ROSE, Respondents.
Writ of Mandamus


It is a writ developed to protect the rights of
the individual against the State.
It is used to command a governmental
agency to perform a ministerial function, so
that a person may enjoy the benefits of a
common government.
Writ of Habeas Data





In general, the Writ of Habeas Data is
designed to protect, by means of an
individual complaint presented to a
constitutional court, the image, privacy,
honor, information, self-determination and
freedom of information of a person.
The habeas data rule applied implicitly to
the families of the deceased in a case
involving extrajudicial killing and enforced
disappearance. This was a recognition of the
right of families of the disappeared, usually
victims of the military regime, to request
access to police and military records
otherwise closed to them- and, in essence,
establishing a right to truth.
This right to truth entitles the families of
disappeared persons to know the totality of
circumstances surrounding the fates of their
relatives and imposes an obligation of
investigation on the part of governments.
Family members of disappeared persons
have used actions for habeas data to obtain
information concerning government
conduct, to learn the fate of disappeared
persons, ant to exact accountability.
This action constitute important means to
guarantee the right to privacy and, as a
complementary right, “the right to truth”.