1
MODULE 7
SEVENTH WEEK
BAIL
Bail is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law,
furnished by him or by a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court
as required under certain specified conditions. (Sec. 1, Rule 114, Rules of Court)
It is the security given for the temporary release of a person who has been
arrested but whose guilt has not yet been proven in court beyond reasonable
doubt.
Constitutional basis of the right to bail
1. The right to bail is a constitutional right.
“All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion
perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by
sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be provided by law. The
right to bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required. (Sec. 13, Art. III, 1987
Constitution)
2. The right to bail emanates from the accused’s constitutional right to be
presumed innocent.
3. The Constitution lays down the following fundamental tenets on bail:
(a) All persons, charged before their conviction for a criminal offense, shall be
entitled to bail. This is the general rule.
(b) The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus does not impair
the right to bail.
(c) Excessive bail is not to be required.
1. The Constitutional provision on bail is substantially reiterated in the Rules
of Court:
“No person charged with capital offense, or an offense punishable
by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, shall be admitted to bail
when evidence of guilt is strong, regardless of the stage of the
criminal prosecution.”
2. A person shall, before conviction, be accorded the right to bail, unless he is
charged with a capital offense, or an offense punishable by reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment, and the evidence of guilt is strong.
2
3. The amount of bail should be high enough to assure the presence of the
accused when so required, but it should be no higher than is reasonably
calculated to fulfill this purpose.
Case: People vs. Hu Ruey Chun, G.R. No. 158064, June 30, 2005
Case: Jimenez vs. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 178607, December 5, 2012
Case: Ocampo vs. Abando, G.R. No. 176830, February 11, 2014
Case: People vs. Jalosjos, G.R. No. 132875-76, February 3, 2000
Case: Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847, August 18, 2015
Bail when a matter of right; Exceptions
The general rule is that all person in custody shall be admitted to bail as a
matter of right.
Bail is a matter of right in the following situations:
(a) Before conviction by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court,
Municipal Trial Court in Cities or Municipal Circuit Trial Court;
(b) After conviction by the courts mentioned in letter “a”;
(c) Before conviction by the RTC of offense not punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment.
When a matter of discretion
Bail is a matter of right before conviction by the RTC of an offense not
punishable by death, reclusion perpetual or life imprisonment. But when the
accused has been convicted in the RTC of an offense not punishable by death,
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. But when accused has been
convicted in the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment, the admission to bail becomes
discretionary.
Case: Pareja vs. Gomez, G.R. No. L-18733, July 31, 1962
Case: Jorda vs. Judge Bitas, A.M. No. RTJ-14-2376, March 5, 2014
Case: Leviste vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 189122, March 17, 2010
Hearing of Application for Bail in Capital Offenses
In the hearing of the application for bail when a person is in custody for the
commission of an offense punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life
3
imprisonment, the prosecution has the burden of showing that the evidence of
guilt is strong. The hearing shall be summary.
Guidelines in Fixing Amount of Bail
1. Excessive bail shall not be required.
2. The judge who issued the warrant or who granted the application for bail
shall fix a reasonable amount of bail considering primarily, but not limited to the
following:
a. financial ability of the accused to give bail;
b. nature and circumstances of the offense;
c. penalty for the offense charged;
d. character and reputation of the accused;
e. age and health of the accused;
f. weight of the evidence against the accused;
g. probability of the accused appearing at the trial;
h. forfeiture of other bail;
i. the fact that the accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested; and
j. pendency of other cases where the accused is on bail.
1. If accused does not have the financial ability to post the amount of bail that
the court initially fixed, he may move for his reduction, submitting for that
purpose such documents or affidavits as may warrant the reduction he
seeks.
2. The order fixing the amount of bail is not appealable.
Case: Cenzon vs. Judge Abad Santos, G.R. No. 164337 June 27, 2006
Bail When Not Required
1. Generally, bail is not required when the law or the Rules of Court so
provide.
2. When a person has been in custody for a period equal to or more than
the possible maximum imprisonment prescribed for the offense charged, he shall
be released immediately, without prejudice to the continuation of the trial or the
proceedings on appeal. Also, if the maximum penalty to which the accused may
be sentenced is destierro, he shall be released after 30 days of preventive
imprisonment.
3. In cases filed with the MTC or MTCC for an offense punishable by
imprisonment of less than four years, two months and one day, and the judge is
satisfied that there is no necessity for placing the accused under custody, he may
issue summons instead of warrant of arrest.
4
4. Subject to certain exceptions, bail shall not be required if a person is
charged with a violation of a municipal or city ordinance, light felony and or a
criminal offense, the prescribed penalty of which is not higher than 6 months
imprisonment or a fine of 2k or both where it is established that he is unable to
post the required cash or bail bond.
Increase or Reduction of Bail
Even after the accused is admitted to bail, the amount of bail may either be
increased or reduced by the court upon good cause.
The increased amount must be given within a reasonable period if the
accused wants to avoid being taken into custody.
Case: San Miguel vs. Judge Maceda, A.M. No. RTJ-03-1749, April 4,
2007
Forfeiture and Cancellation of Bail
One of the conditions of the bail is for the accused to appear before the
proper court or whenever required.
When his presence is required, his bail shall be declared forfeited. The
bondsmen shall be given 30 days within which to produce their principal and to
show cause why no judgment should be rendered against them for the amount of
bail.
The bondsmen must, within the period:
a. Produce the body of their principal or give the reasons for his
non-production; and
b. Explain why the accused did not appear before the court
when first required to do so. Failing in these two
requirements, a judgment shall be rendered against the
bondsmen, jointly and severally, for the amount of the bail.
Judgment against the bondsmen cannot be entered unless such judgment
is preceded by an order of forfeiture and an opportunity given to the bondsmen to
produce the accused or to adduce satisfactory reason for their inability to do so.
An order of forfeiture is interlocutory and merely requires the bondsmen “to show
cause why judgment should not be rendered against them for the amount of the
bond.” The order is different from the judgment on the bond which is issued if the
accused was not produced within the 30 day period.
Aside from forfeiture, when the accused fails to appear in court despite
notice, the court may issue a bench warrant for his arrest.
A bench warrant is defined as a writ issued directly by a judge to a law
enforcement officer, for the arrest of a person who has been held in contempt, has
disobeyed a subpoena, or has to appear at a hearing or trial.
Cancellation of the Bail
5
1. Cancellation by application of the bondsmen – bail may be cancelled
upon application of the bondsmen with due notice to the prosecutor upon
surrender of the accused or proof of his death.
2. Automatic cancellation – the bail may be deemed automatically
cancelled upon (a) acquittal of the accused; (b) dismissal of the case, or (c)
execution of the judgment of conviction.
3. Section 5, Rule 114 allows the cancellation of bail where the penalty
imposed by the trial court is imprisonment exceeding 6 years if any of the grounds
in the said section is present as when the circumstances indicate the probability
of flight. This order of cancelling the bail is subject to review by the appellate
court, motu proprio or on motion.
Application not a bar to objections in illegal arrest, lack of or irregular
preliminary investigation
The application or admission of the accused to bail shall not bar him from
challenging both the validity of his arrest or the legality of the warrant issued
therefor, provided that he raises them before entering his plea. It shall not,
likewise, bar the accused from assailing the regularity or questioning the absence
of a preliminary investigation of the charge against him provided the same is
raised before he enters his plea.
The principle that the accused is precluded from questioning the legality of
the arrest after arraignment is true only if he voluntarily enters his pela and
participates during trial, without invoking his objections thereto.
Hold Departure Order and Bureau of Immigration Watchlist
DEPARTMENT CIRCULAR NO. 41, JUNE 07, 2010
CONSOLIDATED RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE
ISSUANCES AND IMPLEMENTING OF HOLD DEPARTURE ORDERS,
WATCHLIST ORDERS, AND ALLOW DEPARTURE ORDERS
Section 1. Hold Departure Order. - The Secretary of Justice may issue an
HDO, under any of the following instances:
(a) Against the accused, irrespective of nationality, in criminal cases
falling within the jurisdiction of courts below the Regional Trial
Courts (RTCs).
If the case against the accused is pending trial, the application under oath
of an interested party must be supported by (a) a certified true copy of the
complaint or information and (b) a Certification from the Clerk of Court
concerned that criminal case is still pending.
6
(b) Against the alien whose presence is required either as a defendant,
respondent, or witness in a civil or labor case pending litigation, or any case
before an administrative agency of the government.
The application under oath of an interested party must be supported by (a)
a certified true copy of the subpoena or summons issued against the alien
and (b) a certified true copy complaint in civil, labor or administrative case
where the presence of the alien is required.
(c) The Secretary of Justice may likewise issue an HDO against any person,
either motu proprio, or upon the request by the Head of a Department of
the Government; the head of a constitutional body or commission; the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for the Judiciary; the Senate President
or the House Speaker for the Legislature, when the adverse party is the
Government or any of its agencies or instrumentalities, or in the interest of
national security, public safety or public health.
Section 2. Watchlist Order. - The Secretary of Justice may issue a WLO,
under any of the following instances:
(a) Against the accused, irrespective of nationality, in criminal cases
pending trial before the Regional Trial Court.
The application under oath of an interested party must be supported by (a)
certified true copy of an Information filed with the court, (b) a certified true
copy of the Prosecutor's Resolution; and (c) a Certification from the Clerk
of Court concerned that criminal case is still pending.
(b) Against the respondent, irrespective of nationality, in criminal cases
pending preliminary investigation, petition for review, or motion for
reconsideration before the Department of Justice or any of its provincial or
city prosecution offices.
The application under oath of an interested party must be supported by (a)
certified true copy of the complaint filed, and (b) a Certification from the
appropriate prosecution office concerned that the case is pending
preliminary investigation, petition for review, or motion for
reconsideration, as the case may be.
(c) The Secretary of Justice may likewise issue a WLO against any person,
either motu proprio, or upon the request of any government agency,
including commissions, task forces or similar entities created by the Office
of the President, pursuant to the "Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act
of 2003" (R.A. No. 9208) and/or in connection with any
investigation being conducted by it, or in the interest of national
security, public safety or public health.
7
Section 3. Completeness of Information. - To ensure the proper identification of
the subject of the HDO/WLO and to avoid inconvenience to any innocent party,
all applications or requests, including the HDO/WLO to be issued, shall contain
the following information of the subject:
a. Complete name, i.e. given name, middle name or initial and surname;
b. Alias/es, if any;
c. Date and place of birth;
d. Place of last residence;
e. Passport details, if available;
f. Recent photograph, if available;
g. Complete title and docket number of the case; and
h. Specific nature of the case.
Case: Arroyo vs. De Lima, G.R. No. 199034, November 15, 2011
Resolution