The Supreme Court on Tuesday declared as constitutional an ordinance in Quezon City implementing curfews on minors.
However, the SC disallowed similar ordinances in the cities of Manila and Navotas, which were assailed by a youth group Samahan ng Progresibong Kabataan in July last year.
The SC ruled that Ordinance No. SP 2301- 2014 by the Quezon City government is constitutional.
On the other hand, the assailed ordinances of Manila and Navotas were declared unconstitutional for their failure to provide the least restrictive means to address the compelling state interest they seek to advance.
The tribunal cited the penal provisions in the Manila ordinance imposing reprimand, fines and imprisonment on minors, which are in conflict with Section 57-A of RA 9344 of Juvenile Delinquency Act.
The SC agreed with petitioners that the Manila City curfew ordinance violates Republic Act No. 9344 or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act.
It noted that the ordinance punishes violators despite the fact that the JJWA prohibits the imposition of curfews except if it is for the protection of the child and the child or minor is not punished.
In ruling on the case, the SC has lifted the temporary restraining order (TRO) it issued on the three ordinances also in July last year.
Spark, a group of students in the three cities, argued in their petition filed through lawyer Jesus Falcis III that the curfew ordinances were unconstitutional due to vagueness as they result in arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement and overbreadth as they impair legitimate activities of minors during curfew hours.
The petitioner also claimed violation of the right of minors to liberty and to travel without substantive due process, adding that the curfew deprives parents of the natural and primary right in the rearing of the youth without substantive due process.