Short answer. Yes. Rule 113, Section 14 of the Rules of Court gives any member of the Philippine Bar, on your request or the request of someone acting for you, the right to visit and confer privately with you in jail at any hour of the day or night. Relatives have the same right, subject to reasonable regulations.
What the law says
have the right to visit and confer privately with such person in the jail or any other place of custody at any hour of the day or night
Rule 113, Section 14 — Right of attorney or relative to visit person arrested. Read the full provision →
What the law says
Subject to reasonable regulations, a relative of the person arrested can also exercise the same right.
Rule 113, Section 14 — Right of attorney or relative to visit person arrested. Read the full provision →
The lawyer's visit is the strong version of the right
For counsel, the rule is written with almost no qualifiers. Any member of the Philippine Bar — not only a lawyer you have already retained — shall have the right to visit and confer privately with such person in the jail or any other place of custody at any hour of the day or night. Each phrase closes a door custodians might otherwise shut. Confer privately means the conversation is not monitored conversation-by-permission; any other place of custody reaches police stations and holding areas, not just jails; and at any hour of the day or night means visiting hours do not apply. A lawyer turned away at 2 a.m. because the precinct is closed to visitors is being refused something the Rules grant.
Who can trigger it — you, or someone acting for you
The visit happens at the request of the person arrested or of another acting in his behalf. That second phrase is what makes the right workable in practice, because a person in custody often cannot phone anyone. A spouse, parent, sibling or friend outside can engage a lawyer and send them in; the detainee does not have to have asked first. This is worth knowing on both sides of the cell door. If you are detained, your family can act without waiting for word from you. If your relative has been arrested, you do not need their instruction — you are another acting in his behalf, and the lawyer you send has the right to be admitted.
Relatives may visit too, within reasonable limits
The rule extends the visit beyond counsel: subject to reasonable regulations, a relative of the person arrested can also exercise the same right. The difference between the two clauses is deliberate. The lawyer's access is stated without condition; the relative's is subject to reasonable regulations — so a jail may impose sensible rules on family visits, such as identification, logging or security screening. But regulation is not prohibition. A rule that in practice prevents the family from visiting at all is not a reasonable regulation of the right; it is a denial of it. The baseline the section sets is that both the lawyer and the family get to the detainee.
If access is being refused
Document the refusal while it is happening: who denied entry, at what station or facility, at what time, and on what stated ground. The details matter because the rule's own words defeat the usual excuses — at any hour of the day or night answers "come back tomorrow", and any other place of custody answers "he is not in a jail yet". A lawyer refused access can raise it with the officers' superiors and put the denial on record, and persistent refusal of counsel's visit is the kind of fact that matters later in the case. The immediate goal is simple: get the visit, get it privately, and get it noted if it was resisted.