The document summarizes legislative immunities and privileges in the Philippines, including immunity from arrest, legislative privilege, and privilege of speech and debate. It also discusses legislative oversight and investigation, limitations on these powers, executive privilege, and the question hour process. The key information provided is on the specific immunities and privileges afforded to legislators, as well as oversight powers and limitations of Congress over the executive branch.
The document summarizes legislative immunities and privileges in the Philippines, including immunity from arrest, legislative privilege, and privilege of speech and debate. It also discusses legislative oversight and investigation, limitations on these powers, executive privilege, and the question hour process. The key information provided is on the specific immunities and privileges afforded to legislators, as well as oversight powers and limitations of Congress over the executive branch.
The document summarizes legislative immunities and privileges in the Philippines, including immunity from arrest, legislative privilege, and privilege of speech and debate. It also discusses legislative oversight and investigation, limitations on these powers, executive privilege, and the question hour process. The key information provided is on the specific immunities and privileges afforded to legislators, as well as oversight powers and limitations of Congress over the executive branch.
Legislative Privilege Privilege of Speech and Debate Immunity from Arrest Members of the legislature are privileged from arrest while Congress is in session with respect to offenses punishable by up to 6 years of imprisonment. (Art. VI, Section 11)
Purpose of the immunity is not for the benefit of the
officials; rather, it is to protect and support the rights of the people by ensuring that their representatives are doing their jobs according to the dictates of their conscience. It is indispensable no matter how powerful the offended party is. (People of the Philippines v. Jalosjos, G.R. Nos. 13287576, February 3, 2000 ) Legislative Privilege no member shall be questioned or held liable in any forum other than his/her respective Congressional body for any debate or speech in Congress or in any committee thereof. (Sec. 11, Article VI) a senatorlawyer cannot be disbarred or disciplined by the Supreme Court for statements made during a privilege speech. The senatorlawyers privilege speech is not actionable criminally or in a disciplinary proceeding under the Rules of Court. (Pobre v. Sen. Santiago, A.C. No, 7399, August 25, 2009) Limitations to the Legislative Privilege
1. Protection is only against forum other than
Congress itself. Thus, for defamatory remarks, which are otherwise privileged, a member may be sanctioned by either the Senate or the House as the case may be. 2. The speech or debate must be made in performance of their duties as members of Congress. Preventive Suspension a Member of the HoR being prosecuted criminally for the violation of the AntiGraft and Corrupt Practices Act, the Court held that the accused cannot validly argue that only his peers in the House of Representatives can suspend him because the courtordered suspension is a preventive measure that is different and distinct from the suspension ordered by his peers for disorderly behavior which is a penalty. (Paredes, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan, GR 118354, August 8, 1995) Privilege of Speech and Debate 1. That the remarks must be made while the legislature or the legislative committee is functioning, that is in session 2. That they must be made in connection with the discharge of official duties. Speech or debate includes a vote or passage of a resolution, all the utterances made by Congressmen in the performance of their functions such as speeches delivered, statements made, or votes casts in the halls of Congress. Includes bills introduced in Congress (whether or not it is in session) and all the other utterances (made outside or inside the premises of Congress) provided they are made in accordance with a legislative function. (Jimenez, v. Cabangbang, G.R. No. L15905, August 3, 1966) Publication does not at all times fall under the scope of speech. The same shall be made while Congress is in session and not during its recess. However, if publication is made when Congress is not in session, it is not privileged because Congressman is said to be not acting as congressman. (Jimenez, v. Cabangbang, G.R. No. L15905, August 3, 1966) Legislative Oversight & investigation Legislative Oversight the power of oversight embraces all activities undertaken by Congress to enhance its understanding of and influence over the implementation of legislation it has enacted. The power of oversight has been held to be intrinsic in the grant of legislative power itself and integral to the checks and balances inherent in a democratic system of government. Purposes: monitor bureaucratic compliance with program objectives to determine whether agencies are properly administered to eliminate executive waste and dishonesty to prevent executive usurpation of legislative authority to assess executive conformity with the congressional perception of public interest. CATEGORIES Supervision Scrutiny Investigation Legislative Supervision connotes a continuing and informed awareness on the part of a congressional committee regarding executive operations in a given administrative area Scrutiny primarily intended to determine economy and efficiency of the operation of government activities, exercised through budget hearings, the question hour and the power of confirmation Legislative Investigation investigation, which is also known as the inquiry in aid of legislation.
SECTION 21. 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. Limitations it must be in aid of its legislative functions, it must be conducted in accordance with duly published rules of procedure, and the persons appearing therein are afforded their constitutional rights, including the right to be represented by counsel and the right against self- incrimination. Even where the inquiry is in aid of legislation, there are still recognized exemptions to the power of inquiry, which exemptions fall under the rubric of executive privilege. Executive Privilege the power of the Government to withhold information from the public, the courts, and the Congress or the right of the President and high- level executive branch officers to withhold information from Congress, the courts, and ultimately the public. Executive Privilege Protects Information
Executive privilege is properly invoked in relation to
specific categories of information and not to categories of persons. Executive privilege, whether asserted against Congress, the courts, or the public, is recognized only in relation to certain types of information of a sensitive character. Matters covered (1) Information between inter-government agencies prior to the conclusion of treaties and executive agreements; (2) Presidential conversations, correspondences, and discussions in closed-door Cabinet meetings; and (3) Matters affecting national security and public order. Invocation of the Privilege When an official is being summoned by Congress on a matter which, in his own judgment, might be covered by executive privilege, he must be afforded reasonable time to inform the President or the Executive Secretary of the possible need for invoking the privilege. This is necessary in order to provide the President or the Executive Secretary with fair opportunity to consider whether the matter indeed calls for a claim of executive privilege. If, after the lapse of that reasonable time, neither the President nor the Executive Secretary invokes the privilege, Congress is no longer bound to respect the failure of the official to appear before Congress and may then opt to avail of the necessary legal means to compel his appearance. Privilege must be asserted A claim of privilege, being a claim of exemption from an obligation to disclose information, must be clearly asserted. An implied claim of privilege is invalid per se. The validity of claims of privilege must be assessed on a case to case basis, examining the ground invoked therefore, and the particular circumstances surrounding it. Question Hour In a parliamentary system, it is a period of confrontation initiated by Parliament to hold the Prime Minister and the other ministers accountable for their acts and the operation of the government, corresponding to what is known in Britain as the question period. The 1987 Constitution removed the mandatory nature of such appearance during the question hour in the present Constitution so as to conform more fully to a system of separation of powers SECTION 22. The heads of departments may upon their own initiative, with the consent of the President, or upon the request of either House, as the rules of each House shall provide, appear before and be heard by such House on any matter pertaining to their departments. Written questions shall be submitted to the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives at least three days before their scheduled appearance. Interpellations shall not be limited to written questions, but may cover matters related thereto. When the security of the State or the public interest so requires and the President so states in writing, the appearance shall be conducted in executive session. ection 21 (inquiry in aid of legislation) and Section 22 (question hour) of Article VI are closely related and complementary to each other, but they do not pertain to the same power of Congress. One specifically relates to the power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation, the aim of which is to elicit information that may be used for legislation, while the other pertains to the power to conduct a question hour, the objective of which is to obtain information in pursuit of the oversight function of Congress. While attendance was meant to be discretionary in the question hour, it was compulsory in inquiries in aid of legislation.
Joseph C. Sun v. Federal Bureau of Prisons Michelle Allport Lt. Tyndall J. Griswold Ed Hughes Lt. Kolatson Lt. Bailey Anthony Belaski Rick Veach Joy Curry Anthony Boyd J. Lighty P.L. Ferlazzo L.E. Debois, 52 F.3d 338, 10th Cir. (1995)