A.C. No.

7399 August 25, 2009

ANTERO J. POBRE, Complainant,
vs.
Sen. MIRIAM DEFENSOR-SANTIAGO, Respondent.

FACTS:

In one of her delivered speeches on the Senate Floor, Senator Miriam Defensor-
Santiago uttered these statements:

“I am not angry. I am irate. I am foaming in the mouth. I am homicidal. I am suicidal. I

am humiliated, debased, degraded. And I am not only that, I feel like throwing up to be
living my middle years in a country of this nature. I am nauseated. I spit on the face of
Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban and his cohorts in the Supreme Court, I am no longer
interested in the position [of Chief Justice] if I was to be surrounded by idiots. I would
rather be in another environment but not in the Supreme Court of idiots”. According to
her, the purpose of her speech is to expose what she believed “to be unjust act of the
Judicial Bar Council (JBC),” in not qualifying non-sitting members of the court for the
nomination to the position of Chief Justice despite sending out public invitations for the
nominations to the said position.

To Pobre, the foregoing statements reflected a total disrespect on the part of the
speaker towards then Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban and the other members of the
Court and constituted direct contempt of court. Pobre asks that disbarment proceedings
or other disciplinary actions be taken against the lady senator.

In her defense through her counsel, Senator Santiago explained that those statements
were covered by the constitutional provision on parliamentary immunity.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Senator Santiago can be disbarred or subjected to disciplinary action by

the court for her speech.

RULING:
No.
The Constitution enshrines parliamentary immunity which is a fundamental privilege
cherished in every legislative assembly of the democratic world. Article VI, Section 1 of
the Constitution provides that: "A Senator or Member of the House of Representative
shall, in all offenses punishable by not more than six years imprisonment, be privileged
from arrest while the Congress is in session. No member shall be questioned nor be
held liable in any other place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any
committee thereof."
In this case, Senator Santiago’s speech containing the above questioned statements
during the session is in discharge of her official duties as member of the Senate, and is
covered by the constitutional provision on parliamentary immunity,
Therefore, her privilege speech is not actionable criminally or in a disciplinary
proceeding under the Rules of Court. Thus, there is no ground for disbarment or any
disciplinary action.

Full text link: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2009/aug2009/ac_7399_2009.html