Dear PAO,

My girlfriend was stopped and requested to surrender her vehicle for inspection at a police checkpoint, without a search warrant. Does a warrantless search at checkpoints violate the constitutional right of a person against unreasonable searches and seizures?

Piolo

Dear Piolo,

The general rule is that no arrest, search, and seizure can be made without a valid warrant issued by a competent judicial authority. This guarantee is enshrined in Article III, Section 2 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which provides:

“SECTION 2. 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.”

However, not all searches and seizures are prohibited. Between the inherent right of the State to protect its existence and promote public welfare, and an individual’s right against unreasonable search, the former should prevail if the search is limited and reasonably conducted.

Correlatively, warrantless searches are valid when there is a “stop-and-search” of a moving vehicle for as long as it is warranted by the exigencies of public order and conducted in a way least intrusive to motorist.

In Valmonte v. de Villa, (GR 83988, Sept. 29, 1989, penned by Associate Justice Teodoro Padilla), the Supreme Court held that routine inspections are not regarded as violative of an individual’s right against unreasonable searches, and thus, permissible, if limited to the following:

“1. where the officer merely draws aside the curtain of a vacant vehicle which is parked on the public fair grounds;

“2. simply looks into a vehicle;

“3. flashes a light therein without opening the car’s doors;

“4. where the occupants are not subject to a physical or body search;

“5. where the inspection of the vehicle is limited to a visual search or visual inspection; and

“6. where the routine check is conducted in a fixed area.”

Moreover, in the case of Caballes v. CA (GR 136292, Jan. 15, 2002) the Supreme Court, speaking through Chief Justice Reynato Puno, further explained that a checkpoint search may either be a mere routine inspection, or it may involve an extensive search. For a mere routine inspection, the search is normally permissible when it is limited to a mere visual search where the occupants are not subject to a physical or body search. On the other hand, when the vehicle is stopped and subjected to an extensive search, it “would be constitutionally permissible only if the officers conducting the search had reasonable or probable cause to believe, before the search, that either the motorist is a law-offender or they will find the instrumentality or evidence pertaining to a crime in the vehicle to be searched.”

Thus, if the search conducted on your girlfriend’s car at a police checkpoint complied with the above standards for limited routine check, then the said search may be considered as legal, even if there is no previously issued search warrant.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice was based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.

Thank you for your continued trust and support.”

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected]