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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 28 views

    Sabio v. Gordon

    Uploaded by

    Christina Aure
    The Supreme Court ruled that Section 4(b) of Executive Order No. 1, which exempts members and staff of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) from testifying before Congress, is unconstitutional. The case involved PCGG Chairman Camilo Sabio declining an invitation to testify before two Senate committees regarding alleged losses by government corporations. The committees cited Sabio for contempt. The Supreme Court held that under Article VI, Section 21 of the Constitution, the Senate has the power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation, and this power extends to investigating government agencies. Section 4(b) of the executive order violated the Constitution by invalidly exempting PCGG members from legislative scrutiny.

    Copyright:

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

    Sabio v. Gordon

    Uploaded by

    Christina Aure
    28 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled that Section 4(b) of Executive Order No. 1, which exempts members and staff of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) from testifying before Congress, is unconstitutional. The case involved PCGG Chairman Camilo Sabio declining an invitation to testify before two Senate committees regarding alleged losses by government corporations. The committees cited Sabio for contempt. The Supreme Court held that under Article VI, Section 21 of the Constitution, the Senate has the power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation, and this power extends to investigating government agencies. Section 4(b) of the executive order violated the Constitution by invalidly exempting PCGG members from legislative scrutiny.

    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 Supreme Court ruled that Section 4(b) of Executive Order No. 1, which exempts members and staff of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) from testifying before Congress, is unconstitutional. The case involved PCGG Chairman Camilo Sabio declining an invitation to testify before two Senate committees regarding alleged losses by government corporations. The committees cited Sabio for contempt. The Supreme Court held that under Article VI, Section 21 of the Constitution, the Senate has the power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation, and this power extends to investigating government agencies. Section 4(b) of the executive order violated the Constitution by invalidly exempting PCGG members from legislative scrutiny.

    Copyright:

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

    Sabio v. Gordon

    Uploaded by

    Christina Aure
    The Supreme Court ruled that Section 4(b) of Executive Order No. 1, which exempts members and staff of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) from testifying before Congress, is unconstitutional. The case involved PCGG Chairman Camilo Sabio declining an invitation to testify before two Senate committees regarding alleged losses by government corporations. The committees cited Sabio for contempt. The Supreme Court held that under Article VI, Section 21 of the Constitution, the Senate has the power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation, and this power extends to investigating government agencies. Section 4(b) of the executive order violated the Constitution by invalidly exempting PCGG members from legislative scrutiny.

    Copyright:

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

    TITLE: Sabio v.

    Gordon
    G.R. NO. 174340 DATE: October 17, 2006
    PONENTE: TOPIC: Article VI, Sec. 21 on the power to punish
    a person under investigation
    FACTS OF THE CASE:
    Former President Corazon Aquino, by virtue of E.O. No. 1, created the Presidential Commission on
    Good Government (PCGG) to reclaim all the ill-gotten wealth accumulated and deposed by Former
    President Ferdinand Marcos and his allies during the regime. Also stated in E.O. No. 1 in its Section
    4(b) that "no member or staff of the Commission shall be required to testify or produce evidence
    in any judicial, legislative or administrative proceeding concerning matters within its official
    cognizance" to ensure PCGG’s unhampered performance of their function. The constitutionality now of
    Sec. 4(b) is being questioned on the ground that it tramples upon the senate’s power to conduct
    legislative inquiry under Article VI, Sec. 21 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution which states that:

    “The Senate or the House of Representatives or any of its respective committees may conduct inquiries
    in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly published rules of procedure. The rights of persons
    appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be respected.”

    Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago then introduced Philippine Senate Resolution No. 455 which directs
    an inquiry in aid of legislation on anomalous losses incurred by the Philippine Overseas
    Telecommunications Corporation (POTC), Philippine Communications Satellite Corporation
    (PHILCOMSAT), and PHILCOMSAT Holdings Corporation (PHC) due to the improprieties in the
    operations conducted by their Board of Directors. With this, Senator Richard Gordon then requested the
    PCGG Chairman Camilo Sabio and his commissioners to appear as resource persons in the public
    meeting by the Committee on Government Corporations and Public Enterprises and Committee on
    Public Service. Sabio declined the invitation invoking sec. 4(b) of E.O. No. 1.

    PROCEDURAL HISTORY:
    Senator Gordon then issued an order requiring Sabio to show cause of non-appearance and why they
    should not be cited in contempt of the senate. Sabio issued a reply, but the Committee on Government
    Corporations and Public Enterprises, as well as the Committee on Public Services still unconvinced,
    ordered for his arrest. Hence, Sabio filed with this Court a petition for habeas corpus against the Senate
    Committee on Government Corporations and Public Enterprises and Committee on Public Services,
    their Chairmen, Senators Richard Gordon and Joker P. Arroyo and Members. The case was docketed
    as G.R. No. 174340.
    STATEMENT OF ISSUE/S:
    Whether or not Section 4(b) of E.O. No. 1 is unconstitutional
    HOLDING
    Yes. The 1987 Philippine Constitution recognizes the power of investigation of the congress and any of
    its committee because it constitutes a direct conferral of investigatory power upon the bodies. Hence,
    sec. 4(b) of E.O. No. 1 is not in line with article VI, sec. 21 of the constitution, invalidating the said
    statute which makes the exemption of PCGG members and staff as invalid. The congress’ power of
    inquiry encompasses everything that concerns the administration of existing laws, as well as proposed
    and/or possibly needed statutes, and extends to government agencies created by the congress.

    Furthermore, the SC also cited two (2) cases in the issue at bar. In the case of Briggs v. McKellar that
    the power of inquiry is inherent in the power to legislate. In the case of Arnault v. nazareno, it was stated
    that the power of inquiry is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to legislative function.
    1
    notes, if any:

    You might also like