Legal basis: right to travel and police power
- The right to travel is recognized as not absolute.
- The right to travel must yield to the State’s inherent police power.
- Kant Kwong, et al. vs. PCGG (G.R. No. 794384, 7 December 1987) is treated as the authority recognizing that limitation.
Supreme Court framework for HDOs
- Supreme Court Circular No. 39-97 governs hold departure orders issued by the Regional Trial Courts.
- Circular No. 39-97 requires RTC-issued HDOs to include specified identity and case particulars.
- The order reinforces compliance with the content requirements mandated under Circular No. 39-97.
Required contents of RTC-issued HDOs
- Every RTC-issued HDO must state the complete name of the affected person, including the middle name.
- Every RTC-issued HDO must state the affected person’s date of birth and the place of the last residence.
- Every RTC-issued HDO must state the complete title and docket number of the case where the HDO was issued.
- Every RTC-issued HDO must state the specific nature of the case.
- Every RTC-issued HDO must state the date of the HDO.
- If available, a recent photograph of the affected person must be included in the RTC-issued HDO.
Implementation rule and non-compliance consequence
- The Bureau must not implement any RTC-issued HDO that fails to comply with the content requirements of Supreme Court Circular No. 39-97.
- Non-compliant RTC HDOs are treated as non-implementable by the Bureau.
Adoption and signatory
- The order is adopted on February 17, 2003.
- It is signed by ANDREA D. DOMINGO, Commissioner.