Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

IN MATTER OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF AMPARO v. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 203254 2014-10-08	DR. JOY MARGATE LEE v. P/SUPT. NERI A. ILAGAN PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC, or the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data (Habeas Data Rule), was conceived as a response, given the lack of effective and available remedies, to address the extraordinary rise in the number of killings and enforced disappearances.[16] It was conceptualized as a judicial remedy enforcing the right to privacy, most especially the right to informational privacy of individuals,[17] which is defined as "the right to control the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of data about oneself."[18]
	GR No. 193636 2012-07-24	MARYNETTE R. GAMBOA v. P/SSUPT. MARLOU C. CHAN SERENO, J.
The writ of habeas data is an independent and summary remedy designed to protect the image, privacy, honor, information, and freedom of information of an individual, and to provide a forum to enforce one's right to the truth and to informational privacy.[49] It seeks to protect a person's right to control information regarding oneself, particularly in instances in which such information is being collected through unlawful means in order to achieve unlawful ends.[50] It must be emphasized that in order for the privilege of the writ to be granted, there must exist a nexus between the right to privacy on the one hand, and the right to life, liberty or security on the other. Section 1 of the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data reads: Habeas data. The writ of habeas data is a remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data information regarding the person, family, home and correspondence of the aggrieved party.
	GR No. 186050 2011-12-13	ARTHUR BALAO v. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO VILLARAMA, JR., J.
In the case of Roxas v. Macapagal-Arroyo,[32] the Court noted that the similarity between the circumstances attending a particular case of abduction with those surrounding previous instances of enforced disappearances does not, necessarily, carry sufficient weight to prove that the government orchestrated such abduction. Accordingly, the trial court in this case cannot simply infer government involvement in the abduction of James from past similar incidents in which the victims also worked or affiliated with the CPA and other left-leaning groups.
	GR No. 191805 2011-11-15	IN MATTER OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF AMPARO v. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO SERENO, J.
Meanwhile, the writ of habeas data provides a judicial remedy 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.[65] As an independent and summary remedy to protect the right to privacy especially the right to informational privacy[66] the proceedings for the issuance of the writ of habeas data does not entail any finding of criminal, civil or administrative culpability. If the allegations in the petition are proven through substantial evidence, then the Court may (a) grant access to the database or information; (b) enjoin the act complained of; or (c) in case the database or information contains erroneous data or information, order its deletion, destruction or rectification.[67]