Is Santiago Correct to Demand a Lawyer During Police Lineup?

Question from Pink Barbie, Is Santiago Correct to Demand a Lawyer During Police Lineup?

Answer from AI:

In the Philippines, the right to counsel is a fundamental right protected under the Constitution and various laws. Let’s break down whether Santiago is correct in demanding the presence of his lawyer during a police lineup.

Right to Counsel Under Philippine Law

The 1987 Philippine Constitution guarantees the right to counsel in several provisions:

• Article III, Section 12(1): “Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice.”
• Article III, Section 12(2): “No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate the free will shall be used against him. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are prohibited.”

Case Law and Jurisprudence

Philippine jurisprudence has consistently upheld the right to counsel during custodial investigations. The Supreme Court has ruled in several cases that the presence of counsel is necessary to ensure that the rights of the accused are protected.

• People v. Mahinay, G.R. No. 122485, February 1, 1999: The Court emphasized that the right to counsel is indispensable during custodial investigations to prevent coercion and ensure the voluntariness of any statement given by the accused.
• People v. Galit, G.R. No. L-51770, March 20, 1985: The Court ruled that any confession obtained without the presence of counsel is inadmissible in court.

Application to Santiago’s Case

In Santiago’s case, he is being asked to participate in a police lineup for identification purposes. While this is not a formal interrogation, it is still part of the investigative process. According to the principles established in the aforementioned cases, Santiago has the right to demand the presence of his lawyer to ensure that his rights are protected during this stage.

Admissibility of Eliuterio’s Written Confession

Now, let’s consider the case of Eliuterio, who gave an oral confession to the barangay chairman, which he later reduced to writing.

Legal Framework for Confessions

Under Philippine law, the admissibility of confessions is governed by several key principles:

• Article III, Section 12(1) and (2) of the Constitution: As mentioned earlier, these provisions protect the right to counsel and prohibit the use of coercion.
• Article III, Section 12(3): “Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall be inadmissible in evidence against him.”

Case Law on Extrajudicial Confessions

The Supreme Court has ruled on the admissibility of extrajudicial confessions in several cases:

• People v. Andan, G.R. No. 116437, March 3, 1997: The Court held that a confession made without the assistance of counsel is inadmissible.
• People v. Jara, G.R. No. 100421, March 3, 1997: The Court emphasized that the right to counsel is indispensable during custodial investigations.

Application to Eliuterio’s Case

In Eliuterio’s case, his confession was made to the barangay chairman without the presence of a lawyer. According to the principles established in the aforementioned cases, this confession would likely be deemed inadmissible in court due to the absence of legal counsel during the custodial investigation.

Conclusion

Both Santiago and Eliuterio have rights that are protected under the Philippine Constitution and jurisprudence. Santiago is correct in demanding the presence of his lawyer during the police lineup, and Eliuterio’s written confession is likely inadmissible due to the absence of counsel.

For personalized legal advice, it is always recommended to consult with a legal professional. For more information, you can refer to the [1987 Philippine Constitution](https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/constitutions/1987-constitution/) and relevant [Supreme Court decisions](https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/).

Remember, this information is for general guidance and should not be considered as specific legal advice.