In a protest rally’ along Padre Faura Street, Manila, Pedrong Pula took up the stage and began shouting “kayong mga kurakot kayo! Magsi-resign na kayo! Kung hindi, manggugulo kami dito!” (“you corrupt officials, you better resign now, or else we will cause trouble here!”) simultaneously, he brought out a rock the size of a· fist and pretended to hurl it at the flagpole area of a government building. He did not actually throw the rock.
Police officers who were monitoring the situation immediately approached Pedrong Pula and arrested him. He was prosecuted for seditious speech and was convicted. On appeal, Pedrong Pula argued he was merely exercising his freedom of speech and freedom of expression guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Decide with reasons. (5%)
What is “commercial speech”? Is it entitled to constitutional protection? What must be shown in order for government to curtail “commercial speech”? Explain. (3%)
What are the two (2) basic prohibitions of the freedom of speech and of the press clause? Explain. (2%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
(a) Pula must be acquitted; (b) commercial speech is protected expression proposing a transaction; and (c) free speech prohibits prior restraint and subsequent punishment. Under David vs Macapagal-Arroyo, speech is protected absent a clear
Unlock the full Political Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
Under the clear and present danger test, when may political speech uttered during a protest rally be constitutionally penalized?
Political speech is protected unless it creates a clear and present danger of producing an imminent substantive evil that the State may prevent.
What defines commercial speech under Philippine constitutional law?
Commercial speech is defined as expression that proposes a commercial or business transaction.
Under the Central Hudson test, what must the government demonstrate to constitutionally regulate lawful commercial speech?
Government regulation of lawful commercial speech requires showing a substantial state interest directly advanced by a narrowly tailored law.
What is prior restraint under the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech?
Choices available with full access.
Which two fundamental prohibitions are embodied in the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech and of the press?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Clear Present Danger
Under the clear and present danger test, speech may only be restricted or penalized if the words used create a clear and present danger of bringing about a substantive evil that the State has a right to prevent. Political speech uttered during a public protest, even if aggressive or provocative, remains protected expression under Section 4, Article III of the 1987 Constitution unless it directly incites imminent lawless action. Where the speaker merely makes empty threats without creating an immediate danger of serious violence, prosecuting the speaker for seditious speech unconstitutionally infringes upon freedom of expression.
2. Commercial Speech Protection
Commercial speech refers to expression that proposes a commercial transaction, such as advertisements or product promotions. While commercial speech receives constitutional protection under the freedom of speech clause, it enjoys a lower degree of protection than political or religious speech. To constitutionally curtail commercial speech, the government must demonstrate under the Central Hudson test that: (1) the speech concerns lawful activity and is not misleading; (2) the asserted governmental interest is substantial; (3) the regulation directly advances that interest; and (4) the restriction is no more extensive than necessary to serve that interest.
3. Speech Prohibitions Scope
The freedom of speech and of the press clause under Section 4, Article III of the Constitution embodies two fundamental prohibitions against governmental interference: prior restraint and subsequent punishment. Prior restraint refers to official censorship or restrictions imposed prior to the publication or utterance of expression. Subsequent punishment involves imposing administrative, civil, or criminal liability after the speech or publication has been made. Both forms of restriction bear a heavy presumption of unconstitutionality, requiring the State to satisfy stringent constitutional standards before suppressing or penalizing expression.