ALIH vs. CASTRO

A contingent of more than two hundred Philippine marines and elements of the home defense forces raided the compound occupied by the petitioners in search of loose firearms, ammunitions, and explosives. The Military operation was commonly known and dreaded as a "zona," which was similar to the feared Kempeitai practiced during the Japanese Occupation. Here, the persons fingered by the informed would be executed outright.

The petitioners initial reaction was to resist, and fired a warning shot. Though no one was hurt, the soldiers returned fire, and the situation aggravated to a shoot out. From the incident, 16 male occupants were arrested and were subjected to finger-printing, photographing, and paraffin-testing.

Forwarding Art IV, Sec 3 of the 1973 Constitution against Unlawful S&S, petitioners now contend that said was violative of their right against self-incrimination, and filed a petition for prohibition to recover the articles serized, and to prevent their use as evidence.

The respondents, while admitting the absence of the required such warrant, sought to justify their act on the ground that they were acting under superior orders. Such is untenable. The Constitution protects the innocent as well as the guilty.

Neither may respondents plead the urgency of the raid because they did have all the time in the world to avail themselves of a warrant. They had no reason to disregard the process required by the Constitution. (MAIN ISSUE) Despite the fact that the S&S was Warrantless, respondents forward that the seizure was valid as it was incidental to a lawful arrest. Under the Revised Rule 113, Section 5(b), the officer making the arrest must have personal knowledge of the ground therefor of the offense. No such ground to justify the required probable cause of a crime to be/about to be/ being committed was offered.

(As to Right Against Self-Incrimination) The objection to the photographing, fingerprinting and paraffin-testing of the petitioners deserves slight comment. The prohibition against self-incrimination applies to testimonial compulsion only and does not apply to the body as evidence.