Romulo Neri (Petitioner)

Versus

Senate Committee on Accountability (Respondent)

GR No. 180643 September 4, 2008

Facts:

Neri, appeared before the committee to testify (11 hours’ worth of testimony) relative to the
National Broadband Project (NBN), a project of the DOTC awarded in favor of ZTE, wherein he disclosed
that then COMELEC Chairman Benjamin Abalos offered a bribe worth P200,000,000.00 in exchange for
the approval of the project. Further disclosing that he relayed this information to then president Gloria
Macapagal Arroyo, whom in turn advised him to not take the bribe. Further inquiries by the committee
were met with no answer as Neri invoked “Executive Privilege”.

Neri did not attend the next scheduled hearing on November 20, 2007, which led to the issuance
of a show cause order requiring him to explain, and when his explanation was deemed insufficient or
unsatisfactory, he was cited in contempt on January 30, 2008. Thus, petitioner filed a petition for
certiorari anchored on two grounds: (a) the communications elicited are covered by executive privilege;
and (b) the committee committed grave abuse of discretion in citing the petitioner in contempt, in which
to specify the issue relative to the transgression of Article 2 of the Civil Code, the issue that the
committee violated Section 21, Article VI of the Constitution because the inquiry was not in accordance
with the duly published rules of procedure. The senate filed their comment, and thereafter the
petitioner filed his, and being represented by the Office of the Solicitor General, petitioner maintained
that the failure of the present senate to publish their rules renders their acts and previous issuances
relative to the matter as void.
Issue:

Whether or not the Committee committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing the assailed
orders/issuance despite not being able to publish their Rules of Procedure.

Ruling:

Yes, it was held by the Supreme Court that the committee had committed a violation, in not
being able to publish their Rules of Procedure or in making it clear that their previous rules on legislative
inquiries will be effective in subsequent congresses. Although the senate maintained that their
institution was a continuing body, nonetheless, the court clarified that said continuity does not apply in
the conduct of its business, as their rules state that pending matters will be terminated upon the
expiration of one Congress.

The court further held that Article VI Section 21 of the Constitution requiring that the inquiry be
done in accordance with its duly published Rules of Procedure is categorical. Therefore, it is incumbent
upon the senate to publish the Rules for legislative inquiries in each Congress, or make the published
rules state that the same shall be effective in subsequent Congresses.