SIXTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC 
) 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
) 
First Regular Session 
) 
SENATE 
s. No.3SB 
Introduced by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago 
EXPLANATORY NOTE 
fti!enatl' 
It!f""r of tlj. Ji'm.lI>'ll 
'13 
JUL -3 P l :25 
o 
The Constitution, Article 3, Section 6 proscribes the impairment of the right to travel 
"except in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may be provided by 
law." 
Section 3, Chapter 1, Title III, Book IV of Executive Order 292 (the Administrative Code 
of 1987) mandates the Department of Justice (DOJ) to uphold the rule of law by serving as the 
principal law enforcement agency of the government and as legal counsel and representative 
thereof. It tasks the DO] to administer the criminal justice system in accordance with the 
accepted processes thereof consisting in, among other things, the investigation of crimes, 
prosecution of offenders and administration of the correctional system. 
Pursuant thereto, the DOJ issued Department Circular No. 18 on 23 April 2007 to govern 
the issuance, lifting, and implementation of a Watchlist Order (WLO) against the accused in 
criminal cases pending preliminary investigation or petition for review before it. The validity of 
this circular, subsequently revised on 7 June 2010 by Department Circular No. 41, Thas in recent 
times been subjected to criticism and called into question. 
The primary criticism is leveled against the DOTs perceived lack of power to issue hold 
departure orders (HDOs) and WLOs in the absence of a law. 
Courts already possess inherent powers, implied from a general grant of jurisdiction and 
essential to the administration of justice, to issue HDOs. Such powers are indispensable in 
upholding the integrity of our institutions and ensuring that its people maintain faith and respect 
1 


for the rule of law. Absent such powers, the country's laws may be ignored with impunity, and 
public safety compromised, by the simple expedient of flight once charges are brought against 
violators in a court of law. 
Withholding this same power from the DOJ pending preliminary investigation would 
visit a similar risk of flight during the earlier stages of the criminal proceedings. 
On the other hand, a regulation allowing the State's chief prosecution arm to motu 
proprio restrict a person's constitutional right to travel upon the filing of a criminal complaint 
opens the doors for political harassment and oppression. 
This bill requires. the DOJ to apply to the courts for the issuance of an HDO. iIn so doing, 
it reconciles the DOl's need to effectively carry out its prosecutorial functions with the 
Constitution, Article 3, Section 6. 1 
L:u... 4¥.~~ J¥~ 
,oM" MIRIAM DEF~NSOR S-ANTlifJO 
1 This bill was originally filed during the Fifteenth Congress, Second Regular Session. 
2 


SIXTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC 
) 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
) 
First Regular Session 
) 
SENATE 
s.No.~88 
Introduced by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiag'o 
1 
~Acr 
j.~natl1 
(Off,;. "f t~,>"".I!tt'll 
'1) JUL -3 P2 :25 
2 
IMPOSING LIMITATIONS ON THE RIGHT OF INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL 
3 
OF PERSONS UNDER INVESTIGATION, EMPOWERING THE REGIONAL 
4 
TRIAL COURTS TO ISSUE HOLD DEPARTURE ORDERS, AND FOR OTHER 
5 
PURPOSES 
Be it enacted in the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in the 
Congress assembled: 
6 
SECTION 1. Short Title. - This Act shall be known as "The Anti-Justice Evasion 
7 
Through Travel (JETT) Act of2011." 
8 
SECTION 2. Declaration of Policy. - The State upholds the right of persons to 
9 
international travel, except in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health. The 
1 0 
State likewise recognizes the necessity of regulating such a right in order to ensure that the 
, 
I 
11 
authority of its institutions to enforce the law and prosecute offenders is not negated by loss of 
J 
12 
jurisdiction. 
13 
The State shall adopt sufficient measures to ensure that the right of persons to travel 
14 
across borders while under preliminary investigation shall not be impaired except upon a lawful 
15 
order by a court of law upon a finding that such a person is a flight risk, and such flight may 
16 
result either in a miscarriage of justice or a threat against national security, public safety, or 
17 
public health. 
18 
SECTION 3. Definition of Terms. - The following terms as used in this Act shall mean-
19 
(a) "Secretary" refers to the Secretary of Justice; 
1 


1 
(b) "Commissioner" refers to the Commissioner ofImmigration; 
2 
(c) "Bureau" refers to the Bureau ofImmigration; and 
3 
(d) "Hold Departure Order" refers to a Hold Departure Order issued by the Regional Trial 
4 
Court commanding the Commissioner to prevent the departure for abroad of Filipinos and/or 
5 
aliens named therein by including them in the Bureau's Hold Departure List. 
6 
SECTION 4. Hold Departure Order. - The Regional Trial Court (RTC) with jurisdiction 
i 
7 
over the residence of the' person sought to be held, upon application of the Secretary, 'may issue a 
8 
Hold Departure Order (HDO) under any ofthe following circumstances: 
9 
(a) Against the accused, itTespective of nationality, in criminal cases falling within the 
10 
jurisdiction of courts below the RTCs; 
11 
(b) Against the alien whose presence is required either as a defendant, respondent, or 
12 
witness in a civil or labor case pending litigation, or any case before an administrative agency of 
13 
the Government; 
14 
(c) Against the respondent, irrespective of nationality, in criminal cases pending 
15 
preliminary investigation, petition for review, or motion for reconsideration before the 
16 
Department of Justice or any of its provincial or city prosecution offices. 
17 
SECTION 5. HDO Not Issued Without Notice, Exceptions. - No HDO shall be granted 
18 
without hearing and prior notice to persons subject of the HDO. If it shall appear from facts 
19 
shown by affidavits or by the verified application that the accused, alien, or respondent is a flight 
20 
risk, and such flight may result either in (a) a miscarriage of justice or (b) prejudice against 
21 
national security, public safety, or public health, the court to which the application for HDO was 
22 
made, may issue ex parte a temporary HDO to be effective only for a period of thirty (30) days 
23 
from service on the person sought to be held, except as herein provided. Within the said thirty-
24 
day period, the court must order said person to show cause, at a specified time and place, why a 
25 
permanent HDO should not be granted, determine within the same period whether or not the 
26 
permanent HDO shall be granted, and accordingly issue the corresponding order. 
2 


1 
In the event that the application for HDO is not resolved within the said period, the 
2 
temporary HDO order is deemed automatically vacated. 
3 
SECTION 6. Period of Validity. - The validity of the HDO issued pursuant to this Act 
4 
shall be reckoned from the date of its issuance. The HDO shall be valid for two (2) years unless 
5 
sooner terminated. 
6 
SECTION 7. Lifling or Cancellation of HDO. - The HDO may be lifted or cancelled 
7 
under any ofthe following grounds: 
8 
(a) When the validity period of the HDO as provided for in the preceding section has 
9 
already expired; 
10 
(b) When the accused subject of the HDO has been allowed to leave the country during 
II 
the pendency of the case, or has been acquitted of the charge, or the case in which the 
12 
warrant/order of arrest was issued has been dismissed, or the warrant/order of arrest has been 
13 
recalled; 
14 
(c) When the c,ivil or labor case or case before an administrative ag~ncy of the 
15 
government wherein the presence of the alien subj ect of the HDO is required has bebn dismissed 
16 
by the court or by appropriate government agency, or the alien has been discharged as a witness 
17 
therein, or the alien has been allowed to leave the country. 
18 
SECTION 8. Implementation of HDO and Lifling/Cancellation. - All orders issued 
19 
pursuant to this Act shall be immediately transmitted to the Commissioner for implementation, 
20 
copy furnished the person/s subject thereof, to give the latter adequate opportunity to contest the 
21 
order or request reconsideration thereof. 
22 
SECTION 9. Allow Departure Order (ADO). - Any person subject of HDO issued 
23 
pursuant to this Act who intends, for some exceptional reason, to leave the country may, upon 
24 
application under oath with the court issuing the HDO, be issued an ADO. 
3 


1 
SECTION 10. Issuance of Clearance/Certification of Not the Same Person. - Any person 
2 
who is prevented from leaving the country because his or her name appears to be the same as the 
3 
one that appears in the HDO issued pursuant to this Act may, upon application under oath with 
4 
the court issuing the HDO, be issued a Certification to the effect that said person is not the same 
5 
person whose name appears in the issued HDO. 
6 
SECTION 11. Separability Clause. -
If any part of this Act is held invalid or 
7 
unconstitutional, the other parts or provisions thereof not affected shall remain valid and 
8 
effective. 
9 
SECTION 12. Repealing Clause. - All laws, orders, issuances, rules, and regulations or 
10 
parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, modified, or 
11 
amended accordingly. 
12 
SECTION 13. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its 
13 
publication in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation. 
Approved, 
4