November 2011 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
[G.R. No. 181653 : November 15, 2011]
POLICE DIRECTOR GENERAL AVELINO I. RAZON, ET AL., PETITIONERS, VERSUS HON. ALAN PETER S. CAYETANO, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
"G.R. No. 181653 - POLICE DIRECTOR GENERAL AVELINO I. RAZON, ET AL., petitioners, versus HON. ALAN PETER S. CAYETANO, ET AL., respondents.
RESOLUTION
Before us is a petition for certiorari and prohibition with application for temporary restraining order and/or writ of preliminary injunction, seeking to annul and set aside any resolutions, subpoenas and other compulsory processes issued by respondents and their committees requiring petitioners to testify at the committee hearings in connection with its investigation on the controversy surrounding the National Broadband Network Deal (NBN Deal) and the alleged disappearance of its principal witness, Engr. Rodolfo "Jhun" Noel Lozada, Jr.
The antecedent facts follow:
On April 21, 2007, the Department of Transportation and Communication (DOTC) entered into a contract with Zhong Xing Telecommunications Equipment (ZTE) for the supply of equipment and services for the National Broadband Network (NBN) Project worth US$329,481,290 (approximately P16 Billion Pesos),[1] to be financed through a loan to be extended by the People's Republic of China.
Following allegations of serious irregularities and corruption involving the NBN-ZTE Contract, the Joint Committees of the Senate, consisting of the Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations (Blue Ribbon Committee), Committee on Trade and Commerce, and Committee on National Defense and Security conducted an Inquiry, in aid of legislation, pursuant to P.S. Resolution Nos. 127,[2] 129,[3] 136,[4] 144[5]; the privilege speech of Sen. Lacson, entitled ''Legacy of Corruption"; and the privilege speech of Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, entitled "International Agreements in Constitutional Law: The Suspended RP-China (ZTE) Loan Agreement." There are also three pending bills in the Senate relevant to the investigations: Senate Bill Nos. 1793,[6] 1794[7] and 1317.[8]
Respondent Committees sent invitations to certain personalities and resource persons involved in the NBN Project. Among those invited as resource persons was Engr. Rodolfo "Jhun" Noel Lozada, Jr. who acted as a consultant of Romulo Neri, the former Director General of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), Lozada was invited to appear at the September 26, 2007[9] hearing, but failed to do so. Thus, respondents issued a Subpoena Ad Testificandum[10] to Lozada to attend the hearing on January 30, 2008 but still he failed to appear. For his failure to appear and testify at the Committee hearings, respondents cited Lozada in contempt and ordered his arrest.
Upon being informed of the subpoena, Lozada immediately consulted DENR Secretary Joselito Atienza, his superior, and informed him of his desire not to attend the respondents' hearing. He then asked Sec. Atienza for assistance to evade any order of arrest by the respondents. He made the same request for protection from Sec. Romulo Neri. These requests were made known to Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita who assigned Deputy Executive Sec. Manuel Gaite to coordinate with Secs. Atienza and Neri regarding Lozada's request. It was then arranged for Lozada to go to London to attend a conference. Lozada thereafter left for Hong Kong and remained there until he came back on February 5, 2008. While in Hong Kong, Sec. Neri asked Lozada to write a letter addressed to Sen. Enrile exonerating First Gentleman Miguel Arroyo from any involvement in the deal.[12]
On February 5, 2008, then Senator, now President of the Republic of the Philippines, Benigno C. Aquino III, along with the elements of the Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms (OSAA) of the Senate and one of Lozada's brothers waited at the NAIA for Lozada's arrival from Hong Kong. Lozada, however, was nowhere to be found. On February 6, 2008, Sen. Aquino, in his privilege speech, entitled "The Disappearance of NBN-ZTE Witness Rodolfo Lozada, Jr., "[13] urged the Senate to look into the circumstances surrounding the alleged disappearance of Lozada. On February 8, 2008, Lozada appeared and testified before the Senate.
From the testimony of Engr. Lozada, it appeared that upon his arrival at the NAIA, he was accosted by persons whom he claims were unknown to him. He claimed that he was forced to be accompanied by several armed military-looking escorts who proceeded to whisk him away and drive him towards Laguna. He further claimed that his escorts were only forced to return him to Metro Manila after the media "made it too hot."
On February 8, 2008, Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano, as Chairman of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee sent invitations[14] to herein petitioners PNP Director General Avelino Razon, Jr., Supt. Paul Mascari�as, Brig. Gen. Angel Atutubo, Engr. Octavio Lina and SPO4 Roger Valeroso for them to appear at the Committee's hearing on February 11, 2008. The letter reads as follows:
The Committees on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations (Blue Ribbon), Trade and Commerce & National Defense and Security to which have been referred P.S. Res No. 127 titled, "RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND INDUSTRY TO INVESTIGATE, IN AID OF LEGISLATION, THE CIRCUMSTANCES LEADING TO THE APPROVAL OF THE BROADBAND CONTRACT WITH THE ZTE AND THE ROLE PLAYED BY THE OFFICIALS CONCERNED IN GETTING IT CONSUMMATED, AND TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO HALE TO THE COURTS OF LAW, THE PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ANOMALY IN CONNECTION THEREWITH AND TO PLUG LOOPHOLES, IF ANY IN THE BOT LAW AND OTHER PERTINENT LEGISLATIONS" by Senator Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr.; P.S. Res. No. 129 titled, "RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL DEFENSE AND SECURITY TO CONDUCT AN INQUIRY IN AID OF LEGISLATION INTO THE NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATIONS OF AWARDING THE NATIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK CONTRACT TO THE CHINESE FIRM ZHONG XENG TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT COMPANY LIMITED (ZTE CORPORATION), WITH THE END IN VIEW OF PROVIDING REMEDIAL LEGISLATION THAT WILL FURTHER PROTECT OUR NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY AND TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY" by Senator Panfilo M. Lacson; Privilege Speech of Sen. Panfilo M. Lacson titled �LEGACY OF CORRUPTION" delivered on 11 September 2007; P.S. Res. No. 136 titled, "RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE PROPER SENATE COMMITTEE TO CONDUCT AN INQUIRY, IN AID OF LEGISLATION, ON THE LEGAL AND ECONOMIC JUSTIFICATION OF THE NATIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK (NBN) PROJECT OF THE GOVERNMENT" by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago; Privilege Speech of Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago titled "INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: THE SUSPENDED RP-CHINA (ZTE) LOAN AGREEMENT" delivered on 24 September 2007; P.S. Res. No. 144 titled, �A RESOLUTION URGING PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL ARROYO TO DIRECT THE CANCELLATION OF THE ZTE CONTRACT" by Senator Mar Roxas; and Privilege Speech of Sen. Benigno S. Aquino III titled "THE DISAPPEARANCE OF NBN-ZTE WITNESS RODOLFO LOZADA JR." delivered on 06 February 2008 (copies of which are attached for your ready reference) will be holding their ninth joint public hearing on Monday, February 11, 2008, 10:30 a.m. at the Senator Claro M. Recto Room, 2nd Floor, Senate of the Philippines, GSIS Bldg., Roxas Blvd., Pasay City.
Invitation letters[15] containing the same legislative items as mentioned above were also sent to petitioners P/Chief Supt. Romeo Hilomen, Chief Superintendent Atilano Morada, Mr. Rodolfo Valeroso, SPO2 Glicerio Gallinera, SPO3 Lou Ochea, PO1 William Quililan, Mr. Nelson Malto, and SPO2 Jaime Halog, all accountable officials of the Manila International Airport Authority and the Philippine National Police, to appear before the respondents' public hearing scheduled on February 11, 2008. However, only petitioners Razon and Mascari�as appeared at the hearing.
On February 15, 2008, Sen. Ma. Ana Consuelo Madrigal filed criminal charges for Obstruction of Justice against several persons, including petitioners Hilomen and Mascari�as, for purportedly preventing Lozada from testifying or reporting at the Senate hearings over the NBN Project.
On February 20, 2008, respondents issued Subpoenas Ad Testificandum to petitioners to appear at the February 26, 2008 public hearing.
On February 22, 2008, petitioners filed the instant petition seeking to enjoin the respondents and their Committees from compelling them to appear and testify at the hearings. On February 26, 2008, Brig. Gen. Angel Atutubo (Ret.) and Engr. Octavio Lina filed an Omnibus Motion for Leave to Intervene as Petitioners and to Adopt the Petition.
In essence, petitioners argue that the respondents' inquiries for which they were invited and/or subpoenaed, are not in aid of legislation and, therefore, petitioners cannot be compelled to appear during the said inquiries. Petitioners contend that respondents committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in proceeding with, sending invitations to, and compelling the attendance of petitioners to appear and testify in an inquiry on the supposed anomalies involved in the NBN-ZTE Broadband deal since the questions and/or information sought from petitioners are not relevant to the matter under inquiry. They further claimed that in issuing the subpoenas to compel petitioners to appear and testify at the hearing regarding the disappearance of Lozada, respondents violated their right against self-incrimination.
In their Comment, respondents raised the following arguments, to wit: (1) the principle of separation of powers must be upheld; (2) Congress has the power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation; (3) petitioners and intervenors' reliance on the right against self-incrimination is misplaced and premature; (4) the complaints filed against petitioners and intervenors do not and cannot bar the Senate from proceeding with its legislative inquiry; (5) petitioners and intervenors' testimony is material, intimately related and pertinent, to the subject matter of the inquiry; and (6) the instant petition must be dismissed in view of the exhortation to respect the hierarchy of courts.
Respondent Sen. Cayetano likewise filed his Comment mainly asserting that the assailed proceedings conducted by respondents and the processes issued in connection therewith, are valid for having been performed pursuant to respondents' constitutional power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation.
Meanwhile, the Office of the Ombudsman issued a Joint Resolution dated July 14, 2009 dismissing the complaint for Obstruction of Justice filed by former Sen. Madrigal.
Essentially, the issue for our resolution is whether respondents acted with grave abuse of discretion in issuing the invitations and subpoenas ad testificandum to petitioners to testify before the Senate committees' joint investigation on the NBN-ZTE deal.
We dismiss the petition.
There is no question that Congress has the power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation. When the respondents issued the invitations and subpoenas to petitioners to appear in the hearings conducted in connection with its investigation involving the NBN-ZTE deal and the disappearance of its principal witness, Engr. Lozada, respondents did so pursuant to the Congressional authority to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation, as provided in Article VI, Sec. 21[16] of the 1987 Constitution and in accordance with Sec. 1[17] of the Senate Rules of Procedure Governing Inquiries in Aid of Legislation.
The power of Congress to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation is broad.[18] In the landmark case of Arnault v. Nazareno,[19] we emphasized that the power of inquiry�with process to enforce it�is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function. A legislative body cannot legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions which the legislation is intended to effect or change. Inquiries in aid of legislation are, inter alia, undertaken as tools to enable the legislative body to gather information and, thus, legislate wisely and effectively, and to determine whether there is a need to improve existing laws or enact new or remedial legislation, albeit the inquiry need not result in any potential legislation.
Indeed, as aptly postulated by respondents, the disappearance of a material witness to the investigation, which may be related to the anomalies being investigated, is relevant to the inquiry. The relevance and materiality of the required testimony must be determined by its direct relation to the subject of the inquiry and not by its indirect relation to the proposed or possible legislation. Here, respondents' inquiry on the conduct and involvement of petitioners and intervenors as public officials and employees in preventing a material witness from appearing and testifying at the committee hearings on the NBN-2TE deal, bears serious implications on the Senate's inquiry on the said deal. Thus, respondents committed no grave abuse of discretion in compelling the appearance of petitioners to testify at the committee hearings which are conducted in aid of legislation.
Verily, in Romero II v. Estrada,[20] we held that the Court has no authority to prohibit a Senate Committee from requiring persons to appear and testify before it in connection with an inquiry in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly established rules of procedure. Additionally, in the case of Sabio v. Gordon,[21] we stressed the importance of the duty of those subpoenaed to appear before the legislature, even if incidentally incriminating questions are expected to be asked.
In any event, the Court should dismiss the petition which has now become moot. An issue or a case becomes moot and academic when it ceases to present a justiciable controversy, so that a determination of the issue would be without practical use and value. In such cases, there is no actual substantial relief to which the petitioner would be entitled and which would be negated by the dismissal of the petition. Courts decline jurisdiction over such cases or dismiss them on the ground of mootness, except in exceptional cases, none of which appears to obtain in this case.
In our Resolution of September 4, 2008 in G.R. No. 180643, entitled Neri v. Senate Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations, we held:
x x x all pending matters and proceedings, i.e., unpassed bills and even legislative investigations, of the Senate of a particular Congress are considered terminated upon the expiration of that Congress and it is merely optional on the Senate of the succeeding Congress to take up such unfinished matters, not in the same status, but as if presented for the first time. The logic and practicality of such a rule is readily apparent considering that the Senate of the succeeding Congress (which will typically have a different composition as that of the previous Congress) should not be bound by the acts and deliberations of the Senate of which they had no part. x x x[22] (Underlining ours.)
It may be noted that the subject invitations and subpoenas directing petitioners to testify in connection with the subject investigation were sent sometime in February 2008 or in the past Congress. There is no debate that the Senate as an institution is "continuing," as it is not dissolved as an entity with each national election or change in the composition of its members. However, in the conduct of its day-to-day business, the Senate of each Congress acts separately and independently of the Senate before it. Here, based on the records, it has not been shown that the Senate of the present Congress has opted to take up anew, as an unfinished matter, its inquiry into the NBN-ZTE deal. Therefore, the termination of the subject investigations has mooted the instant petition.cralaw
WHEREFORE, the present petition for certiorari and prohibition with a prayer for injunctive relief/s is hereby DISMISSED for being MOOT. The Omnibus Motion for Leave to Intervene as Petitioners and to Adopt the Petition, filed by Retired Brig. Gen. Angel Atutubo and Engr. Octavio Lina, is accordingly NOTED WITHOUT ACTION."
Leonardo-De Castro, J., on official business.
Del Castillo, J., on official leave.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) ENRIQUETA E. VIDAL
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] Rollo, pp. 663-664.[2] Entitled, "RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE AND THIE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND INDUSTRY TO INVESTIGATE, IN AID OF LEGISLATION, THE CIRCUMSTANCES LEADING TO THE APPROVAL OF THE BROADBAND CONTRACT WITH THE ZTE AND THE ROLE PLAYED BY THE OFFICIALS CONCERNED IN GETTING IT CONSUMMATED, AND TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO HALE TO THE COURTS OF LAW, THE PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ANOMALY IN CONNECTION THEREWITH AND TO PLUG LOOPHOLES, IF ANY, IN THE BOT LAW AND OTHER PERTINENT LEGISLATIONS."
[3] Entitled, "RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL DEFENSE AND SECURITY TO CONDUCT AN INQUIRY IN AID OF LEGISLATION INTO THE NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATIONS OF AWARDING THE NATIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK CONTRACT TO THE CHINESE FIRM ZHONG XING TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT COMPANY LIMITED (ZTE CORPORATION), WITH THE END IN VIEW OF PROVIDING REMEDIAL LEGISLATION THAT WILL FURTHER PROTECT OUR NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY AND TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY."
[4] Entitled, "RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE PROPER SENATE COMMITTEE TO CONDUCT AN INQUIRY, IN AID OF LEGISLATION, ON THE LEGAL AND ECONOMIC JUSTIFICATION OF THE NATIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK (NBN) PROJECT OF THE GOVERNMENT."
[5] Entitled, "A RESOLUTION URGING PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL ARROYO TO DIRECT THE CANCELLATION OF THE ZTE CONTRACT."
[6] ENTITLED "AN ACT SUBJECTING TREATIES, INTERNATIONAL OR EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTS INVOLVING FUNDING IN THE PROCUREMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS, GOODS, AND CONSULTING SERVICES TO BE INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE AND APPLICATION OF PHILIPPINE PROCUREMENT LAWS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9184, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT REFORM ACT, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES."
[7] Entitled, "AN ACT IMPOSING SAFEGUARDS IN CONTRACTING LOANS CLASSIFIED AS OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8182, AS AMENDED BY REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8555, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1996, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES."
[8] Entitled, "AN ACT MANDATING CONCURRENCE TO INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS AND EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTS."
[9] Rollo, p. 747.
[10] Id. at 748.
[11] Id. at 750.
[12] TSN, Joint Public Hearing, February 8, 2008, rollo, pp. 170-175.
[13] Rollo, pp. 583-586.
[14] Id. at 101-103.
[15] Id. at 104-111.
[16] SEC. 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.
[17] SECTION 1. Power to Conduct Formal Inquiries or Investigations.
The Senate or any of its Committees may conduct formal inquiries or investigations in aid of legislation in accordance with these Rules.
Such inquiries may refer to the implementation or re-examination of any law or appropriation, or in connection with any proposed legislation or the formulation of, or in connection with future legislation, or will aid in the review or formulation of a new legislative policy or enactment. They may also extend to any and all matters vested by the Constitution in Congress and/or in the Senate alone
[18] Neri v. Senate Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations, G.R. No. 180643, March 25, 2008, 549 SCRA 77, 116.
[19] 87 Phil. 29, 45 (1950).
[20] G.R. No. 174105, April 2, 2009, 583 SCRA 396, 408.
[21] G.R. Nos. 174340, 174318 & 174177, October 17, 2006, 504 SCRA 704.
[22] Supra note 18 at 229.
