Back

Genuino vs. Hon. De Lima [SEPARATE CONCURRING OPINION, VELASCO,JR., J.]

EFRAIM C. GENUINO, ERWIN F. GENUINO AND SHERYL G. SEE, PETITIONERS, VS. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, AND RICARDO V. PARAS III, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHIEF STATE COUNSEL, CRISTINO L. NAGUIAT, JR. AND THE BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, RESPONDENTS. [G.R. No. 199034] MA. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, PETITIONER, VS. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., AS COMMISSIONER OF THE BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, RESPONDENTS. [G.R. No. 199046] JOSE MIGUEL T. ARROYO, PETITIONER, VS. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO V. PARAS III, AS CHIEF STATE COUNSEL, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, RESPONDENTS.

G.R. No. 197930 | 2018-04-17

SEPARATE CONCURRING OPINION

VELASCO,JR., J.:

I concur with the ponencia of my esteemed colleague, Justice Andres B. Reyes, Jr.

That the right to travel and to freedom of movement are guaranteed protection by no less than the fundamental law of our land brooks no argument. While these rights are not absolute, the delimitation thereof must rest on specific circumstances that would warrant the intrusion of the State. As mandated by Section 6 of the Bill of Rights, any curtailment of the people's freedom of movement must indispensably be grounded on an intrinsically valid law, and only whenever necessary to protect national...