PRIVILEGE FROM ARREST

COMPARE JALOSJOS CASE AND TRILLANES

Case Digest: People vs. Jalosjos, GR 132875-76, February 3, 2000

6/21/2020
0 COMMENTS
 

FACTS:  The accused-appellant, Romeo Jalosjos, is a full-fledged member of Congress

who is confined at the national penitentiary while his conviction for statutory rape and
acts of lasciviousness is pending appeal. The accused-appellant filed a motion asking
that he be allowed to fully discharge the duties of a Congressman, including attendance
at legislative sessions and committee meetings despite his having been convicted in the
first instance of a non-bailable offense on the basis of popular sovereignty and the need
for his constituents to be represented. 

ISSUE:  Does membership in Congress exempt an accused from statutes and rules

which apply to validly incarcerated persons in general.
DECISION:  Denied. 

RATIO DECIDENDI:  The immunity from arrest or detention of Senators and members

of the House of Representatives arises from a provision of the Constitution. The
privilege has always been granted in a restrictive sense. The provision granting an
exemption as a special privilege cannot be extended beyond the ordinary meaning of its
terms. It may not be extended by intendment, implication or equitable considerations.
The accused-appellant has not given any reason why he should be exempted from the
operation of Sec. 11, Art. VI of the Constitution. The members of Congress cannot
compel absent members to attend sessions if the reason for the absence is a legitimate
one. The confinement of a Congressman charged with a crime punishable by
imprisonment of more than six years is not merely authorized by law, it has
constitutional foundations. To allow accused-appellant to attend congressional sessions
and committee meetings for 5 days or more in a week will virtually make him a free man
with all the privileges appurtenant to his position. Such an aberrant situation not only
elevates accused-appellant’s status to that of a special class, it also would be a
mockery of the purposes of the correction system.  
Trillanes v. Pimentel
ANTONIO TRILLANES IV v. HON. OSCAR PIMENTEL SR. (D)
G.R. No. 179817 June 27, 2008

FACTS:
 July 27, 2003, a group of more than 300 heavily armed soldiers led by junior
officers of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) stormed into the Oakwood
Premier Apartments in Makati City and publicly demanded the resignation of the
President and key national officials.
 On the same day, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo issued Proclamation No.
427 and General Order No. 4 declaring a state of rebellion and calling out the Armed
Forces to suppress the rebellion. 
 Petitioner Antonio F. Trillanes IV was charged, along with his comrades, with
coup d’etat defined under Article 134-A of the Revised Penal Code before the RTC of
Makati.
 4 years later, petitioner, who has remained in detention, threw his hat in the
political arena and won a seat in the Senate with a 6-year term commencing at noon on
June 30, 2007.
 Petitioner filed with the RTC, Makati City, Branch 148, an "Omnibus Motion for
Leave of Court to be Allowed to Attend Senate Sessions and Related Requests".
 The trial court denied all the requests in the Omnibus Motion.

ISSUE:
 Whether or not membership in Congress exempt an accused from statutes and
rules which apply to validly incarcerated persons in general

HELD:
 No, it is impractical to draw a line between convicted prisoners and pre-trial
detainees for the purpose of maintaining jail security; and while pre-trial detainees do
not forfeit their constitutional rights upon confinement, the fact of their detention makes
their rights more limited than those of the public.
 When a person indicted for an offense is arrested, he is deemed placed under
the custody of the law. He is placed in actual restraint of liberty in jail so that he may be
bound to answer for the commission of the offense. He must be detained in jail during
the pendency of the case against him, unless he is authorized by the court to be
released on bail or on recognizance.
 Presumption of innocence does not carry with it the full enjoyment of civil and
political rights.
 Allowing accused-appellant to attend congressional sessions and committee
meetings for 5 days or more in a week will virtually make him a free man with all the
privileges appurtenant to his position. Such an aberrant situation not only elevates
accused-appellant’s status to that of a special class, it also would be a mockery of the
purposes of the correction system.

SECTION 26. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shall embrace only one subject which shall
be expressed in the title thereof.

(2) No bill passed by either House shall become a law unless it has passed three readings on
separate days, and printed copies thereof in its final form have been distributed to its Members
three days before its passage, except when the President certifies to the necessity of its
immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency. Upon the last reading of a bill, no
amendment thereto shall be allowed, and the vote thereon shall be taken immediately
thereafter, and the yeas and nays entered in the Journal.

SECTION 27. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shall, before it becomes a law, be
presented to the President. If he approves the same, he shall sign it; otherwise, he shall veto it
and return the same with his objections to the House where it originated, which shall enter the
objections at large in its Journal and proceed to reconsider it. If, after such reconsideration, two-
thirds of all the Members of such House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together
with the objections, to the other House by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if
approved by two-thirds of all the Members of that House, it shall become a law. In all such
cases, the votes of each House shall be determined by yeas or nays, and the names of the
Members voting for or against shall be entered in its Journal. The President shall communicate
his veto of any bill to the House where it originated within thirty days after the date of receipt
thereof; otherwise, it shall become a law as if he had signed it.