Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DIGEST Jimenez Vs Cabangbang 1966
DIGEST Jimenez Vs Cabangbang 1966
Cabangbang
17 SCRA 876
GR.NO. L-15905
August 3, 1966
PARTIES:
PONENTE: Concepcion, C. J.
FACTS:
ISSUE:
RULING:
No. Under the provisions of sec. 15, Article VI of the Constitution, "speech or debate
therein" only refers to the utterances made by Congress members in the performance of their
official duties, such as delivering speeches, making statements, or casting votes in the
Congressional hall while the same is in session. It could also refer to the introduction of bills in
Congress, whether it is session or not, and other acts performed by Congress members in their
official capacity whether there was a session or not, whether inside or outside the premises of
one's office.
In the case at bar, the Court ruled that Cabangbang's letter cannot be classified as a privileged
form of communication because it was published during a time when the Congress was not in
session. Moreover, the defendant was not performing his official duty as either a member of
Congress when he intended the letter to be published. Therefore, the open letter was not
privileged. Because of these reasons, Cabangbang's open letter cannot be classified as a
privileged form of communication.