Short answer. Not without the court's permission. An accused released on bail who attempts to depart from the Philippines without permission of the court where the case is pending may be re-arrested for that attempt, and no warrant is even needed for that particular re-arrest to lawfully proceed against them.
What the law says
An accused released on bail may be re-arrested without the necessity of a warrant if he attempts to depart from the Philippines without permission of the court where the case is pending.
Rule 114, Section 23 — Arrest of accused out on bail. Read the full provision →
Leaving without permission triggers immediate re-arrest
Bail does not restore unrestricted freedom of movement. An accused on bail who attempts to depart from the Philippines without permission of the court where the case is pending exposes themselves to re-arrest, and the rule specifically removes the ordinary requirement of a warrant for that particular re-arrest — the attempt to leave without authorization is itself enough, without any further showing being required first.
Permission has to come from the specific court hearing the case
The rule is precise about whose permission matters: the court where the case is pending. A general assurance from someone else, or a belief that leaving briefly would go unnoticed, does not substitute for an actual grant of permission from that particular court. An accused who wants to travel abroad while the case is ongoing needs to seek that permission directly rather than assume it or bypass it, since no other authority can substitute its own permission for the court's.
This connects to the broader power to compel surrender
The same rule also empowers the bondsmen to arrest the accused for purposes of surrendering them, or to cause a police officer or other suitable person to do so under written authority endorsed on a certified copy of the undertaking. Attempting an unauthorized departure is one of the situations where this machinery for bringing the accused back into custody becomes relevant, alongside the court's own power to order a re-arrest for the same reason.
Why this matters for someone out on bail
Being released on bail is conditioned on the accused remaining available to the court, and an unauthorized attempt to leave the country undermines exactly that assurance. Anyone out on bail who has a genuine need to travel abroad should raise it with the court handling the case beforehand, rather than risk a re-arrest that requires no warrant at all to carry out, and that could complicate the case well beyond the inconvenience of a delayed trip, since an attempted unauthorized departure is itself the trigger the rule relies on, with no further inquiry needed before re-arrest follows.