Ang Tibay doctrine on due process
The essence of procedural due process is embodied in the basic requirement of notice and a real opportunity to be heard. In administrative proceedings, such as in the case at bar, procedural due process simply means the opportunity to explain one’s side or the opportunity to seek a reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of. "To be heard" does not mean only verbal arguments in court; one may be heard also thru pleadings. Where opportunity to be heard, either through oral arguments or pleadings, is accorded, there is no denial of procedural due process. (G.R. No. 187854. November 12, 2013)
In Ang Tibay v. CIR, the Supreme Court enumerated the requisites of administrative due process, as follows:
[1] The right to a hearing, which includes the right to present one’s case and submit evidence in support thereof;
[2] The tribunal must consider the evidence presented;
[3] The decision must have something to support itself;
[4] The evidence must be substantial;
[5] The decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing, or at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties;
[6] The tribunal or any of its judges must act on its or his own independent consideration of the facts and the law of the controversy, and not simply accept the views of a subordinate in arriving at a decision; and
[7] The board or body should, in all controversial questions, render its decision in such a manner that the parties to the proceeding will know the various issues involved, and the reasons for the decision. (G.R. No. 46496. February 27, 1940. 69 Phil 635.)In Ledesma v Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court ruled that "[d]ue process, as a constitutional precept, does not always and in all situations require a trial-type proceeding. Due process is satisfied when a person is notified of the charge against him and given an opportunity to explain or defend himself. In administrative proceedings, the filing of charges and giving reasonable opportunity for the person so charged to answer the accusations against him constitute the minimum requirements of due process. The essence of due process is simply to be heard, or as applied to administrative proceedings, an opportunity to explain one’s side, or an opportunity to seek a reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of." (G.R. No. 166780. December 27, 2007)
The observance of fairness in the conduct of any investigation is at the very heart of procedural due process. The essence of due process is to be heard, and, as applied to administrative proceedings, this means a fair and reasonable opportunity to explain one’s side, or an opportunity to seek a reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of. Administrative due process cannot be fully equated with due process in its strict judicial sense, for in the former a formal or trial-type hearing is not always necessary, and technical rules of procedure are not strictly applied. (Persida Acosta (2017). What constitutes due process in administrative cases? August 15, 2017. https://www.manilatimes.net/2017/08/15/legal-advice/dearpao/constitutes-due-process-administrative-cases/344652/344652.)
