Article 6.

Section 21 Respect for the rights of persons appearing in or affected by such

inquiries
Neri v Senate
Former NEDA Director General Romulo Neri testified before the Senate for 11 hours
relating to the ZTE-NBN mess. However, when probed further on what he and the
President discussed about the NBN Project, he refused to answer, invoking executive
privilege. In particular, he refused to answer 3 questions:
(a) whether or not President Arroyo followed up the NBN Project
(b) whether or not she directed him to prioritize it
(c) whether or not she directed him to approve it
Unrelenting, the Senate Committees issued a Subpoena Ad Testificandum to Neri, requiring
him to appear and testify on November 20, 2007. However, Executive Secretary Eduardo R.
Ermita requested the Senate Committees to dispense with Neris testimony on the ground
of executive privilege. In his letter, Ermita said that the information sought to be disclosed
might impair our diplomatic as well as economic relations with China. Neri did not
appear before the Committees. As a result, the Senate issued an Order citing him in
contempt and ordered his arrest and detention until such time that he would appear and
give his testimony.
Neri, the head of NEDA, was then invited to testify before the Senate Blue Ribbon. He appeared
in one hearing wherein he was interrogated for 11 hrs and during which he admitted that Abalos
of COMELEC tried to bribe him with P200M in exchange for his approval of the NBN project.
He further narrated that he informed President Arroyo about the bribery attempt and that she
instructed him not to accept the bribe.
However, when probed further on what they discussed about the NBN Project, petitioner refused
to answer, invoking executive privilege. In particular, he refused to answer the questions on:
(a) whether or not President Arroyo followed up the NBN Project,
(b) whether or not she directed him to prioritize it, and
(c) whether or not she directed him to approve.
He later refused to attend the other hearings and Ermita sent a letter to the senate averring that
the communications between GMA and Neri are privileged and that the jurisprudence laid down

in Senate vs Ermita be applied. He was cited in contempt of respondent committees and an order
for his arrest and detention until such time that he would appear and give his testimony.

Is the contempt and arrest Order of Neri valid?

ANSWER: No. There being a legitimate claim of executive privilege, the issuance of the
contempt Order suffers from constitutional infirmity. The respondent Committees did not comply
with the requirement laid down in Senate v. Ermita that the invitations should contain the
possible needed statute which prompted the need for the inquiry, along with the usual
indication of the subject of inquiry and the questions relative to and in furtherance thereof. The
SC also find merit in the argument of the OSG that respondent Committees violated Section 21
of Article VI of the Constitution, requiring that the inquiry be in accordance with the duly
published rules of procedure. The respondent Committees issuance of the contempt Order is
arbitrary and precipitate. It must be pointed out that respondent Committees did not first pass
upon the claim of executive privilege and inform petitioner of their ruling. Instead, they curtly
dismissed his explanation as unsatisfactory and simultaneously issued the Order citing him in
contempt and ordering his immediate arrest and detention