KAY VILLEGAS KAMI INC., VS IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR THE DECLARATION OF THE PETITIONER’S RIGHTS AND DUTIES UNDER SEC. 8 OF R.A. No. 6132.
G.R. No.: L-32485 October 22, 1970
Facts:
A petition for declaratory relief was filed by Kay Villegas Kami Inc. claiming to be a duly recognized and existing non-stock and non-profit corporation created under the laws of the land, and praying for determination of the validity of Sec. 8 of R.A. No. 6132 and the declaration of the petitioner’s rights and duties thereunder. Kay Villegas Kami Inc. actually impugns only on the first paragraph of R.A. No. 6132 Sec. 8(a) on the grounds that it violates the due process clause, right of association, and freedom of expression, and that it is an ex post facto law.
Issue:
Whether or Not Section 8(a) of R.A. No. 6132 is unconstitutional and is in the nature of an ex post facto law
Ruling:
No, Section 8(a) of R.A. No. 6132 is not unconstitutional and is not in the nature of an ex post facto law. An ex post facto law is a law that: a) makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law and which was innocent when done, and punishes such an act; b) aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed; c) changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to the crime when committed; d) alters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes conviction upon less or different testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense; e) assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies only, in effect imposes penalty or deprivation of a right for something which when done was lawful ; and f) deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful protection to which he has become entitled such as protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of amnesty. Given such, the constitutional inhibition pertains only to criminal laws which are given a retroactive effect.