The Supreme Court has recently posted landmark cases decided in 2024 concerning the right to life, liberty, and security.
Every person has the right to life, liberty, and security and the State has the duty to safeguard these rights. In a series of decided cases, the SC ensures these fundamental rights are protected as enshrined in the Constitution.
2024 LANDMARK SC CASES IN RELATION TO THE RIGHT TO LIFE, LIBERTY, AND SECURITY
In Deduro v. Vinoya, the SC declared that red-tagging, vilification, labeling, and guilt by association threaten a person’s right to life, liberty, or security, which entitles one to protection under the writ of amparo.
The writ of amparo has also protected abducted environmental advocates, as in the case of Castro v. Dela Cruz, where the SC found elements of enforced disappearance.
However, in Roque v. House of Representatives Quad-Committee, the SC denied Atty. Herminio Harry L. Roque, Jr.’s prayer for the writ of amparo, holding that it is not the proper remedy against Congressional contempt and detention orders. The SC clarified that the scope of amparo is limited to extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or such threats, which were not present in this case.
In Besmonte v. NAPOCOLM-NCR, the SC found a police officer guilty of simple misconduct for using unnecessary force and violence during a buy-bust operation. The SC issued a reminder that it does not condone the indiscriminate use of force by police officers against persons under arrest.
In Ridon v. People, the SC emphasized that simply violating ordinances and regulations is not enough to justify a valid warrantless search and seizure, especially when the penalty does not involve imprisonment.
In People v. Agustin and Antonio, the SC ruled that imprisonment beyond the maximum penalty is not only cruel and inhumane but also undermines the dignity of detainees. The SC stressed that the power of the courts to commit prisoners carries with it the duty to immediately release them in case of detention for a period equivalent to or longer than the maximum imposable penalty.
Source: As posted by the Supreme Court of the Philippines
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.