LAW ON PROPERTY | ACOSTA V. OCHOA, ET AL., G.R. NO. 211559; G.R. NO. 215634, OCTOBER 15, 2019
ACOSTA V. OCHOA, ET AL., G.R. NO. 211559;
G.R. NO. 215634, OCTOBER 15, 2019.
TOPIC/DOCTRINE
Ownership and possession of firearms is not a property right, but
a mere privilege. Should the State find that bearing arms would be contrary to
its legitimate interests, it can revoke the license without violating the due
process clause.
FACTS
This is a consolidated petition assailing the constitutionality of
certain provisions of Republic Act No. 10591, or the Comprehensive
Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act, and their corresponding
provisions in the 2013 Implementing Rules and Regulations for allegedly
violating petitioners right to bear arms, right to property, and right to
privacy.
Yes, Section 9 of Republic Act No. 10591 which mandates applicants
for Types 3 to 5 licenses to comply with "inspection...
requirements." The law and the corresponding provision in the
Implementing Rules. Initially the law is silent and has not yet provided a
standard or scope of the inspection.
Also, in the pro forma Individual Application
for New Firearm Registration, included a paragraph indicating the Consent
of Voluntan; Presentation for Inspection, to be signed by the applicant.
It provides that the applicant agrees to voluntarily consent to the
inspection of the firearm at the residence indicated in the application.
ISSUE
Whether or not the license to possess a firearm is a
property?
Whether or not Republic Act No. 10591 and its Implementing Rules
and Regulations unduly restrict their right to bear arms, their right to
property, and their right to privacy.
RULING
No.
The court held that license to possess a firearm is not property. There
is no vested right in the continued ownership and possession of firearms. Like
any other license, the license to possess a firearm is “neither a property nor
a property right. “As a mere” permit or privilege to do what otherwise would be
unlawful," it does not act as "a contract between the authority
granting it and the person to whom it is granted.” Being a license, the
permit to carry firearm outside residence is neither a property nor a property
right. A grantee of the permit does "not have a property interest in
obtaining a license to carry a firearm.”
Yes.
The court held that the inspection requirement is an unreasonable
search prohibited in Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution, and a
violation of their right to privacy. Further, signing the Consent of Voluntary
Presentation for Inspection would allegedly be an invalid waiver, as it is not
given "freely, voluntarily, and knowingly" by the applicant who would
just sign it, lest the application not be approved. Considering that the
inspection is done before a license is issued, there is no compelling urgency
to immediately conduct the inspection. A search warrant must first be obtained
from a judge to determine probable cause for its issuance. This inspection
requirement is an unreasonable search prohibited in Article III, Section 2 of
the Constitution, and a violation of their right to privacy. Further, signing
the Consent of Voluntary Presentation for Inspection would allegedly be an
invalid waiver, as it is not given "freely, voluntarily, and
knowingly" by the applicant who would just sign it, lest the application not
be approved.