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
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