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

  1. Which obligation is expressly covered by Article III, Section 20's non-imprisonment guarantee?
  2. Besides debt, what nonpayment is expressly mentioned in Section 20?
  3. What distinction is central to Lozano v. Martinez?
  4. A borrower fails to repay an ordinary civil loan. No fraud, dishonored-check offense or other crime is alleged. The cre…
  5. A defendant argues that BP 22 is necessarily unconstitutional because the check arose from a debt. Which response follo…
  6. A creditor obtains a civil money judgment on a simple loan. The debtor has not paid, and the creditor identifies no fra…
  7. A business owner issues a check and later faces a BP 22 prosecution. The owner relies solely on non-imprisonment for de…
  8. Explain the difference between enforcing a civil debt and imprisoning a person merely because it is unpaid.
  9. Does the non-imprisonment clause immunize every unlawful act connected with a loan? Explain using Lozano.
  10. A municipal official orders imprisonment solely for failure to pay a poll tax. Identify the constitutional problem and …
  11. Does Section 20’s prohibition on imprisonment for debt itself cancel the underlying civil obligation?
  12. What public harm did Lozano identify in support of the penal regulation of worthless checks?