Agacaoli vs.

Farinas
G.R. No. 232395, July 3, 2018

Facts:

On March 14, 2017, House Resolution No. 882 was introduced by the respondent, Rodolfo
C. Farinas along with the Representatives Pablo P. Bondoc and Aurelio D. Gonzales, Jr.,
directing House Committee in conducting the inquiry, in aid of legislation, pertaining to the
use by the Provincial Government of Ilocos Norte of its shares from the excise taxes on
locally manufactured Virginia-type cigarettes for a purpose other than that provided for by
Republic Act No. 7171 otherwise known as An Act To Promote the Development of the
Farmer In the Virginia Tobacco Producing Provinces. The letter of invitation was sent to the
petitioners individually to attend as resource persons in the initial hearing on House
Resolution No. 882.

All the petitioners appeared on May 29, 2017. The petitioners alleged that at the hearing of
May 29, they were subjected to threats and intimidation. According to the petitioners, they
were asked “leading and misleading questions”.

Issue:

Whether or not the subject legislative inquiry on the House Resolution No.882 may be
enjoined by a writ of prohibition?

Ruling:

No. Under the Court’s expanded jurisdiction, the remedy of prohibition may be issued to
correct errors of jurisdiction to any branch of the government. Co-petitioner Marcos
neglected to show that the subject administrative request disregards the Constitution or that
the lead thereof was gone to by grave maltreatment of prudence adding up to need or in
overabundance of ward. While there is no doubt that a writ of disallowance lies against
administrative capacities, the Court finds no defense for the issuance thereof in the moment
case.