Case Digest: Rizal Alih et al vs Castro GR No L-69401

Rizal Alih et. al., vs Castro

GR No L-69401                                                                                 June 23, 1987

Facts:
A group of more than 200 Philippine marines and home defense forces raided the compound occupied by the petitioners (Rizal Alih et. al.) is search of loose firearms, ammunition and other explosives. The people inside the compound resisted the invasion and a crossfire between the Philippine marines and the petitioner occurred, resulting in number of casualties. The petitioners surrendered the next morning and 16 occupants were arrested, later to be finger-printed, paraffin-tested and photographed over their objection. The military also inventoried and confiscated several M16 rifles, M14 rifle, rifle grenades and rounds of ammunition.

Petitioner filed a petition for prohibition and mandamus with preliminary injunction and restraining order. Their purpose was to recover the articles seized from them, to prevent these from being used as evidence against them, and to challenge their finger-printing, photographing and paraffin-testing being violative of their right against self-incrimination. Petitioner argued that the arms and ammunition were taken without a search warrant as required by law under Sec. 3 of the 1973 Constitution, and it be declared inadmissible in relation to Sec 4 (2) of the 1973 Constitution.

Respondent justified their act on the ground that they were acting under superior orders and that the measures was necessary due to the aggravation of peace and order problem in their place.

Issue:
Whether or not the confiscated items shall be considered admissible.

Whether or not the finger-printing, photographing and paraffin-test is protected by the constitutional right against self-incrimination.

Ruling:
No, superior orders cannot countermand the Constitution. There is no excuse for the constitutional shortcuts done by the military. Also, the aggravation of peace and order problem in their place does not excuse the non-observance of the constitutional guaranty against unreasonable searches and seizure (Art III Sec. 2, 1973 Philippine Constitution).

The arrest does not fall also under the warrantless arrest provided for by Rule 113 Sec. 5 of the Rules of Court. Therefore, all the firearms and ammunition taken from the raided compound are inadmissible in evidence in any proceedings against petitioners.

With respect to the finger-printing, photographing and paraffin-testing, the acts are not covered by the protection against self-incrimination, for it only applies to testimonial compulsion.