Philippine Bar review · Topic
Non-imprisonment for Debt
Explore Non-imprisonment for Debt in CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS for the Philippine Bar. Browse subtopics and published practice questions, then take a quiz or…
Explore the syllabus
Direct subtopics
This topic has no further subtopics. Explore its practice questions below.
Put it into practice
Practice questions
- Which obligation is expressly covered by Article III, Section 20's non-imprisonment guarantee?
- Besides debt, what nonpayment is expressly mentioned in Section 20?
- What distinction is central to Lozano v. Martinez?
- A borrower fails to repay an ordinary civil loan. No fraud, dishonored-check offense or other crime is alleged. The cre…
- A defendant argues that BP 22 is necessarily unconstitutional because the check arose from a debt. Which response follo…
- A creditor obtains a civil money judgment on a simple loan. The debtor has not paid, and the creditor identifies no fra…
- A business owner issues a check and later faces a BP 22 prosecution. The owner relies solely on non-imprisonment for de…
- Explain the difference between enforcing a civil debt and imprisoning a person merely because it is unpaid.
- Does the non-imprisonment clause immunize every unlawful act connected with a loan? Explain using Lozano.
- A municipal official orders imprisonment solely for failure to pay a poll tax. Identify the constitutional problem and …
- Does Section 20’s prohibition on imprisonment for debt itself cancel the underlying civil obligation?
- What public harm did Lozano identify in support of the penal regulation of worthless checks?