Practice question
A statute declares three named people guilty of an offense and directs immediate collection of a punitive fine, expressly dispensing with judicial trial. Which is the clearest objection?
- The people were named, so they must be guilty
- It is a bill of attainder because the legislature inflicts punishment without judicial determination
- No issue exists if the fine is affordable
- Only an employer may object
- The statute is necessarily a lawful judicial judgment
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 Used for doctrine, not as a claim that repealed RA 1700 remains operative.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.