Practice question
A law avoids listing names but identifies everyone who held a specified post on one past date, an easily ascertainable closed group. It declares them traitors and automatically imposes imprisonment without judicial trial. The proponents say no names means no attainder. Which is correct?
- Names are always indispensable to attainder
- A closed ascertainable group can be targeted; omitting names does not cure legislative punishment without trial
- Past employment automatically proves treason
- The law becomes valid if the group contains more than ten people
- Imprisonment is not punishment if imposed by a statute
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html — Constitution, Article III section 22: prohibition of bills of attainder.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1972/dec1972/gr_l_32613_14_1972.html — People v. Ferrer, G.R. L-32613–14, December 27, 1972, main decision: legislative punishment without judicial trial, ascertainable groups and conduct-based laws. Used for doctrine, not as a claim that repealed RA 1700 remains operative.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2020/jan2020/gr_208162_2020.html — Fuertes v. Senate, G.R. 208162, January 7, 2020, main decision: judicial determination and rebuttable presumption distinguished from attainder.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.