Law Dictionary

Question A.9, Political Law, 2019 Bar Exam

Notice: The following suggested answers simulate those that a bar examinee may provide as an answer to a bar exam question. Thus, specific citations (i.e., republic acts, articles/sections, jurisprudence, etc.) are not provided because it is not required in the bar exam. For purposes other than answering the bar exam, please be reminded that proper referencing or legal citation is required.

Question A.9, Political Law, 2019 Bar Exam

The unabated rise of criminality and the reported identification of delinquent children loitering in the wee hours of the night prompted City Z to implement a curfew ordinance. Minors unaccompanied or unsupervised on the streets by their parents or guardians between 10:00 P.M. to 5:00 A.M. may be apprehended by law enforcers subject to certain exclusive exceptions. These exceptions are: 1. minors running lawful errands, such as buying of medicines, using of telecommunications facilities for emergency purposes and the like; 2. night school students; and 3. minors working at night.

Minors apprehended for violation of the curfew ordinance shall be required to undergo counseling, accompanied by their parents/guardians.

(a) Does the curfew ordinance violative the primary right and duty of parents to rear their children? Explain. (2.5%)

(b) Does the curfew ordinance infringe any of the minors’ fundamental rights? Explain. (2.5%)

Suggested Answer:

(a) No. Answer

Under jurisprudence, the Curfew Ordinances are but examples of legal restrictions designed to aid parents in their role of promoting their children’s well-being. They apply only when the minors are not – whether actually or constructively – accompanied by their parents. This serves as an explicit recognition of the State’s deference to the primary nature of parental authority and the importance of parents’ role in child-rearing.. Rule

In the case at bar, the curfew ordinance of City Z is consistent with jurisprudence as it applies only if the minors are unaccompanied or unsupervised on the streets by their parents or guardians between 10:00 om and 5:00 am. It also provides for exceptions.    Apply

Thus, the curfew ordinance does not violate the primary right and duty of parents to rear their children. Conclusion

(b) No. Answer

Under the jurisprudence, curfew ordinances further compelling State interest. Their purpose is the promotion of juvenile safety and prevention of juvenile crime, both of which serve the interest of public safety. Rule

In the case at bar, the issuance of the curfew ordinance is aimed at reducing the criminality and protection of minors during the curfew period. There is compelling State interest given the unabated rise of criminality and the reported identification of delinquent children loitering in the wee hours of the night. Apply

Thus, the curfew ordinance does not infringe on any of the minor’s fundamental rights. Conclusion

Disclaimer: All information is for educational and general information only. These should not be taken as professional legal advice or opinion. Please consult a competent lawyer to address your specific concerns. Any statements or opinions of the author are solely his own and do not reflect that of any organization he may be connected.

Suggested Answers

Question XIX, Political Law, 2018 Bar Exam

President Alfredo died during his third year in office. In accordance with the Constitution, Vice President Anastasia succeeded him. President Anastasia then nominated the late

Top Read

Jurisdiction

1. Original vs. appellate a. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Jurisdiction in civil cases: Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction: 1) In all civil actions in

Video Lessons

Legal Maxims

par in parem non habet imperium

Latin maxim. • “one State is not subject to the jurisdiction of another State.” (Arigo v. Swift, En Banc, G.R. No. 206510, September 16, 2014

lex prospicit, non respicit

• “the law looks forward not backward” (Co v. CA, En Banc, G.R. No. 100776, October 28, 1993, citing Development Bank of the Philippines v.

distingue tempora et concordabis jura

Latin maxim. • “Distinguish times and you will harmonize laws.” (Commissioner of Customs v. Superior Gas and Equipment Co., En Banc, G.R. No. L-14115, May

Read more

Annotations

You cannot copy content of this page