Practice question
After televised committee hearings about suspected corruption, Congress enacts a statute naming six private contractors as criminals. It directs their imprisonment and punitive forfeiture of their assets without any judicial prosecution or opportunity for a court to decide guilt. Sponsors argue that the hearings supplied all the process needed and that rapid punishment will deter corruption. Which is the strongest conclusion?
- The statute is valid because congressional hearings replace criminal trials
- The statute is valid if the allegations are widely believed
- The statute is invalid only if fewer than six persons are named
- The measure presents the prohibited legislative punishment without judicial trial characteristic of a bill of attainder
- The measure is immune from review because corruption is a public concern
Legal references
- People v. Ferrer, G.R. Nos. L-32613-14, December 27, 1972, main opinion, bill-of-attainder discussion: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1972/dec1972/gr_l_32613_14_1972.html
- 1987 Constitution, Article III, Sections 1, 5 and 22; Article VI, Section 1: https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.