Persona Non Grata: A Flawed Resolution Against Constitutional Rights

In recent years, the declaration of individuals as "persona non grata" by Philippine Local Government Units (LGUs) has become an increasingly common, if not concerning, practice. While seemingly a strong expression of local sentiment, this practice, when directed at Filipino citizens, fundamentally clashes with the spirit and letter of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, particularly concerning the right to liberty of abode, freedom of movement, and free speech. It is high time for LGUs to reconsider this symbolic but ultimately unconstitutional gesture and uphold the fundamental rights guaranteed to every Filipino.

The power of LGUs is derived from the Constitution and statutes, primarily the Local Government Code. While they possess legislative powers, these powers are not absolute and must always be exercised within the bounds of the supreme law of the land. Declaring a Filipino citizen persona non grata via a resolution, however well-intentioned, oversteps these constitutional boundaries.

The Unassailable Right to Liberty of Abode and Travel

The core of the issue lies in Article III, Section 6 of the 1987 Constitution, which unequivocally states:

"The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may be provided by law."

A resolution from an LGU is not a lawful order of the court, nor is it a national law enacted by Congress in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health. Therefore, an LGU's declaration of persona non grata cannot, and should not, legally bar a Filipino citizen from entering, residing in, or traversing its territorial jurisdiction. To suggest otherwise would be to allow local legislative bodies to effectively amend the Constitution, creating a fragmented legal landscape where basic rights can be arbitrarily curtailed by local sentiments. This would lead to chaos and severely undermine the unitary nature of our republic.

Respecting the Sanctity of Free Speech

Beyond the rights to abode and travel, such declarations often emerge as a reaction to statements, opinions, or actions perceived as critical or offensive by local authorities. This brings to the forefront another cornerstone of our democracy: freedom of speech and expression.

Article III, Section 4 of the Constitution affirms that "No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances." While free speech is not absolute and has limitations (e.g., incitement to violence, defamation), the power to declare someone persona non grata can be used to silence dissent or punish individuals for exercising their right to express views that might be unpopular with the local administration. This creates a chilling effect, discouraging critical discourse and healthy debate, which are essential for good governance and a vibrant democracy.

LGUs, as instruments of democratic governance, should foster an environment where diverse opinions can be aired, discussed, and debated without fear of being ostracized or deemed "unwelcome" through official pronouncements. If a person's speech genuinely crosses legal boundaries (e.g., libel, incitement), then the proper course of action is through the judicial system, not through symbolic resolutions that lack legal force but carry significant social stigma.

Moving Forward: Upholding Constitutionalism

While LGUs have every right to express their collective sentiments and disapproval, these expressions must not infringe upon the fundamental rights of citizens. The declaration of persona non grata against a Filipino citizen, while symbolically powerful, is legally hollow and constitutionally problematic.

Instead of resorting to such declarations, LGUs should focus on:

• Dialogue and Engagement: Addressing concerns through open dialogue, public forums, and transparent governance.

• Legal Recourse: Utilizing existing legal mechanisms if actual offenses or crimes have been committed.

• Upholding Rights: Leading by example in respecting and defending the constitutional rights of all citizens, even those with whom they disagree.

Ultimately, the strength of our democracy lies in its commitment to fundamental rights. LGUs, as frontline implementers of governance, have a solemn duty to uphold this commitment. Abandoning the practice of declaring Filipino citizens persona non grata would be a significant step towards reinforcing constitutionalism and protecting the precious freedoms that define us as a nation.