Lacson v. Puey
This is a civil case where petitioner Clarita Lilia Lacson sought the issuance of a writ of habeas data against respondents. The Supreme Court of the Philippines denied the petition and affirmed the Regional Trial Court's (RTC) decision to dismiss the petition for habeas data for lack of legal basis. The RTC correctly ruled that there was no threatened violation nor actual injury to the petitioner's right to informational privacy as her personal data was used in a lawful proceeding before the Bureau of Immigration. The extraordinary writ of habeas data is a judicial remedy aimed at protecting a person's right to control information regarding oneself, particularly in instances where such information is being collected through unlawful means in order to achieve unlawful ends. However, in this case, the RTC found that there is no nexus between the right to privacy and the right to life, liberty, or security, which is necessary for the issuance of the writ.
ADVERTISEMENT
SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 248861. November 20, 2019.]
CLARITA LILIA LACSON, petitioner, vs.MANUEL H. PUEY, ATTY. JONATHAN M. POLINES, ENRIQUE REGALADO, SR., LUIS ALFONSO BENEDICTO, MARIBEL P. KO,*ET AL., respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated20 November 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 248861 (Clarita Lilia Lacson v. Manuel H. Puey, Atty. Jonathan M. Polines, Enrique Regalado, Sr., Luis Alfonso Benedicto, Maribel P. Ko, et al.)
After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition 1 and AFFIRM the July 31, 2019 Order 2 of the Regional Trial Court of Bacolod City, Branch 44 (RTC) in Spec. Proc. No. 18-2752 for failure of petitioner Clarita Lilia Lacson (petitioner) to sufficiently show that the RTC committed any reversible error in dismissing her petition for habeas data 3 for lack of legal basis.
As correctly ruled by the RTC, there was no threatened violation nor actual injury to petitioner's right to informational privacy since it was not proven that her personal data was unlawfully collected, used, or disclosed for unlawful purposes, having been used in a lawful proceeding before the Bureau of Immigration. 4 It bears stressing that the extraordinary writ of habeas data is a judicial remedy aimed to protect a person's right to control information regarding oneself, particularly in instances where such information is being collected through unlawful means in order to achieve unlawful ends. As such, it may be issued only when a nexus is shown to exist between the right to privacy on the one hand, and the right to life, liberty, or security on the other, 5 which, as the RTC found, is absent in this case. aDSIHc
SO ORDERED. (HERNANDO, J., on leave. ZALAMEDA, J., designated as Additional Member per Special Order No. 2727 dated October 25, 2019.)"
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
* "Maribel P. Kho" in some parts of the rollo.
1.Rollo, pp. 9-26.
2.Id. at 33-34. Signed by Presiding Judge Ana Celeste P. Bernad.
3.Id. at 35-48.
4. See id. at 34.
5.Vivares v. St. Theresa's College, 744 Phil. 451, 463 (2014).
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU