ANTONIO TAN, DANILO DOMINGO and ROBERT LIM, petitioners, vs. AMELITO BALLENA, ZENAIDA BORLONGAN,

 We cannot sustain the argument that Proclamation No. 84 is a bill of attainder; that is, a "legislative act which inflicts punishment without judicial trial."³⁸ Its declaration that QLP No. 33 is a patent nullity³⁹ is certainly not a declaration of guilt. Neither is the cancellation of the license a punishment within the purview of the constitutional proscription against bills of attainder.

Too, there is no merit in the argument that the proclamation is an ex post facto law. There are six recognized instances when a law is considered as such: 1) it criminalizes and punishes an action that was done before the passing of the law and that was innocent when it was done; 2) it aggravates a crime or makes it greater than it was when it was committed; 3) it changes the punishment and inflicts one that is greater than that imposed by the law annexed to the crime when it was committed; 4) it alters the legal rules of evidence and authorizes conviction upon a less or different testimony than that required by the law at the time of the commission of the offense; 5) it assumes the regulation of civil rights and remedies only, but in effect imposes a penalty or a deprivation of a right as a consequence of something that was considered lawful when it was done; and 6) it deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful protection to which he or she become entitled, such as the protection of a former conviction or an acquittal or the proclamation of an amnesty.⁴⁰ Proclamation No. 84 does not fall under any of the enumerated categories; hence, it is not an ex post facto law.

It is settled that an ex post facto law is limited in its scope only to matters criminal in nature.⁴¹ Proclamation 84, which merely restored the area excluded from the Biak-na-Bato national park by canceling respondents’ license, is clearly not penal in character.

THIRD DIVISION

G.R. No. 168111             July 4, 2008

ANTONIO TAN, DANILO DOMINGO and ROBERT LIM, petitioners,
vs.
AMELITO BALLENA, ZENAIDA BORLONGAN, 

https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2008/jul2008/gr_168111_2008.html