6/7/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly There is also no question that the instant petitions involved a matter of public interest as the petitioners are not alone in this predicament and there can be several more in the future who may be similarly situated. It is not far fetched that a similar challenge to the constitutionality of DOJ Circular No. 41 will recur considering the thousands of names listed in the watch list of the DOJ, who may brave to question the supposed illegality of the issuance. Thus, it is in the interest of the public, as well as for the education of the members of the bench and the bar, that this Court takes up the instant petitions and resolves the question on the constitutionality of DOJ Circular No. 41. The Constitution is inviolable and supreme of all laws We begin by emphasizing that the Constitution is the fundamental, paramount and supreme law of the nation; it is deemed written in every statute and contract.[70] If a law or an administrative rule violates any norm of the Constitution, that issuance is null and void and has no effect. The Constitution is a testament to the living democracy in this jurisdiction. It contains the compendium of the guaranteed rights of individuals, as well as the powers granted to and restrictions imposed on government officials and instrumentalities. It is that lone unifying code, an inviolable authority that demands utmost respect and obedience. The more precious gifts of democracy that the Constitution affords us are enumerated in the Bill of Rights contained in Article III. In particular, Section 1 thereof provides: Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. The guaranty of liberty does not, however, imply unbridled license for an individual to do whatever he pleases, for each is given an equal right to enjoy his liberties, with no one superior over another. Hence, the enjoyment of one's liberties must not infringe on anyone else's equal entitlement. Surely, the Bill of Rights operates as a protective cloak under which the individual may assert his liberties. Nonetheless, "the Bill of Rights itself does not purport to be an absolute guaranty of individual rights and liberties. Even liberty itself, the greatest of all rights, is not unrestricted license to act according to one's will. It is subject to the far more overriding demands and requirements of the greater number."[71] It is therefore reasonable that in order to achieve communal peace and public welfare, calculated limitations in the exercise of individual freedoms are necessary. Thus, in many significant provisions, the Constitution itself has provided for exceptions and restrictions to balance the free exercise of rights with the equally important ends of promoting common good, public order and public safety. The state's exercise of police power is also well-recognized in this jurisdiction as an acceptable limitation to the exercise of individual rights. In Philippine Association of elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/64165 11/70