Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 255 views

    Bengzon V Senate Blue Ribbon Digest

    Uploaded by

    Ali Basti
    The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee subpoenaed petitioners to testify regarding alleged violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act involving the acquisition of properties. However, the petitioners refused to testify, claiming their constitutional rights would be violated and the civil case already filed in court would be prejudiced. The petitioners argued the inquiry was not validly in aid of legislation and exceeded the Committee's jurisdiction. They filed a petition for prohibition to prevent being compelled to testify. The Supreme Court agreed the inquiry was not for a legitimate legislative purpose and violated the separation of powers, as the same issues were already before the courts.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Bengzon V Senate Blue Ribbon Digest

    Uploaded by

    Ali Basti
    255 views2 pages
    The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee subpoenaed petitioners to testify regarding alleged violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act involving the acquisition of properties. However, the petitioners refused to testify, claiming their constitutional rights would be violated and the civil case already filed in court would be prejudiced. The petitioners argued the inquiry was not validly in aid of legislation and exceeded the Committee's jurisdiction. They filed a petition for prohibition to prevent being compelled to testify. The Supreme Court agreed the inquiry was not for a legitimate legislative purpose and violated the separation of powers, as the same issues were already before the courts.

    Original Title

    Bengzon v Senate Blue Ribbon Digest.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee subpoenaed petitioners to testify regarding alleged violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act involving the acquisition of properties. However, the petitioners refused to testify, claiming their constitutional rights would be violated and the civil case already filed in court would be prejudiced. The petitioners argued the inquiry was not validly in aid of legislation and exceeded the Committee's jurisdiction. They filed a petition for prohibition to prevent being compelled to testify. The Supreme Court agreed the inquiry was not for a legitimate legislative purpose and violated the separation of powers, as the same issues were already before the courts.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    255 views2 pages

    Bengzon V Senate Blue Ribbon Digest

    Uploaded by

    Ali Basti
    The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee subpoenaed petitioners to testify regarding alleged violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act involving the acquisition of properties. However, the petitioners refused to testify, claiming their constitutional rights would be violated and the civil case already filed in court would be prejudiced. The petitioners argued the inquiry was not validly in aid of legislation and exceeded the Committee's jurisdiction. They filed a petition for prohibition to prevent being compelled to testify. The Supreme Court agreed the inquiry was not for a legitimate legislative purpose and violated the separation of powers, as the same issues were already before the courts.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    By virtue of a privilege speech made by Sen.

    Ensile urging the Senate to look into the


    transactions, an investigation was conducted by the Senate Blue-ribbon Committee. Petitioners
    and Ricardo Lopa were subpoenaed by the Committee to appear before it and testify on "what
    they know" regarding the alleged acquisition of the Lopa Group of the properties of Benjamin
    Kokoy Romualdez which is a subject of sequestration by the PCGG and citing probable
    violations of Republic Act No. 3019 Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Section 5.
    Ricardo A. Lopa declined to testify on the ground that his testimony may "unduly prejudice"
    the defendants in Civil Case No. 0035 before the Sandiganbayan. Petitioner Jose F.S. Bengzon,
    Jr. likewise refused to testify involving his constitutional right to due process, and averring that
    the publicity generated by respondents Committee's inquiry could adversely affect his rights as
    well as those of the other petitioners who are his co-defendants in Civil Case No. 0035 before
    the Sandiganbayan.
    Claiming that the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee is poised to subpoena them and required
    their attendance and testimony in proceedings before the Committee, in excess of its jurisdiction
    and legislative purpose, in clear and blatant disregard of their constitutional rights, and to their
    grave and irreparable damages, prejudice and injury, and that there is no appeal nor any other
    plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, the petitioners filed the
    present petition for prohibition with a prayer for temporary restraining order and/or injunctive
    relief.

    ISSUE: W/N the Blue Ribbon inquiry was in aid of legislation


    NO.
    1. There appears to be no intended legislation involved. The purpose of the inquiry to be
    conducted is not related to a purpose within the jurisdiction of Congress, it was conducted to
    find out whether or not the relatives of President Aquino, particularly Mr. Lopa had violated RA
    3019 in connection with the alleged sale of the 36 or 39 corporations belonging to Benjamin
    Kokoy" Romualdez to the Lopa Group.
    2. The power of both houses of Congress to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation is not absolute
    or unlimited. Its exercise is circumscribed by the Constitution. As provided therein, the
    investigation must be "in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly published rules of
    procedure" and that the rights of persons appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be
    respected." It follows then that the rights of persons under the Bill of Rights must be respected,
    including the right to due process and the right not to be compelled to testify against one's self.
    3. The civil case was already filed in the Sandiganbayan and for the Committee to probe and
    inquire into the same justiciable controversy would be an encroachment into the exclusive
    domain of judicial jurisdiction that had already earlier set in. The issue sought to be investigated
    has already been pre-empted by the Sandiganbayan. To allow the inquiry to continue would not
    only pose the possibility of conflicting judgments between the legislative committee and a
    judicial tribunal.

    4. Finally, a congressional committees right to inquire is subject to all relevant limitations placed
    by the Constitution on governmental action including the relevant limitations of the Bill of Rights.
    One of these rights is the right of an individual to against self-incrimination. The right to remain
    silent is extended to respondents in administrative investigations but only if it partakes of the
    nature of a criminal proceeding or analogous to a criminal proceeding. Hence, the petitioners
    may not be compelled by respondent Committee to appear, testify and produce evidence before
    it only because the inquiry is not in aid of legislation and if pursued would be violate of the
    principle of separation of powers between the legislative and the judicial departments of the
    government as ordained by the Constitution.

    You might also like