RIGHT AGAINST SELF–INCRIMINATION
Article 3, Section 17, Case Doctrines
Bermudez v. Castillo
– handwriting; refused to provide; perjury – She was completely entitled to the privilege invoked by her because she was compelled to write and were it proven by means of what she might right later that the documents were written by her, it would be impossible for her to evade persecution for perjury
Cabal v. Kapunan Jr.
– graft; corrupt practices, unexplained wealth – Proceedings for the forfeiture of property are deemed criminal and penal and hence, the exemption of the defendants in criminal cases from the obligation to be a witness against themselves are applicable thereto;
Almonte v. Vasquez
– subpoena duces tecum; government agency – At common law, a governmental privilege is recognized
with respect to state secrets bearing on military, diplomatic and similar matters. In this case, there is no claim that military or diplomatic secrets will be disclosed by the production of records pertaining to the
personnel of EIIB (economic something).
People v. Malimit
– robbery with homicide – The right against self-incrimination is simply a prohibition against legal process to extract from the accused’s own lips, against his ill, admission of his guilt. It does NOT apply when the evidence sought is NOT an incriminating statement but an object evidence; Miranda rights –
covers only inadmissibility of extrajudicial confession or admission made during custodial investigation; other evidence (like IDs, wallet, keys, etc) is not affected even if obtained or taken in the course of custodial investigation.
US v. Tan Teng
– substance taken from the body of the defendant – The prohibition against compelling a man in a criminal cause to be a witness against himself is a prohibition against physical or moral compulsion to extort communications from him and not an exclusion of his body as evidence when it may be material.
Standard Chartered Bank v. Senate Committee on Banks et. al.
– The right of the accused against self-incrimination is extended in administrative investigations that partake of the nature of or are analogous to criminal proceedings – the privilege has consistently been held to extend to all proceeding sanctioned by law and to all cases in which punishment is sought to be visited upon a witness, whether a party or not.