POBRE VS MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO

Facts:
JBC through public invitation publish the soon vacant position of Chief of Justice,
hence Santiago was one of the applicant but unfortunately informed by the JBC
that only incumbent associate justice would qualify the position. During her
privilege speech on the Congress to wit; “x x x I am not angry. I am irate. I am
foaming in the mouth. I am homicidal. I am suicidal. I am humiliated,
debased, degraded. And I am not only that, I feel like throwing up to be
living my middle years in a country of this nature. I am nauseated. I spit on
the face of Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban and his cohorts in the
Supreme Court, I am no longer interested in the position [of Chief Justice] if
I was to be surrounded by idiots. I would rather be in another environment
but not in the Supreme Court of idiots.xxx
ANTERO J. POBRE in his sworn letter/complaint invites the attention of the court
and asks that disbarment proceedings or other disciplinary actions be taken
against the lady senator.

Issue: Does the disbarment proceeding and other disciplinary actions should be
taken against the senator?

Ruling:
NO, because the delivery of speech was conducted while the Congress is in
session and therefore she is covered with the state immunity provided in our
Constitution Art. VI Sec.11 of the Constitution. Indeed, her privilege speech is not
actionable criminally or in a disciplinary proceeding under the Rules of Court.
The plea of Senator Santiago for the dismissal of the complaint for disbarment or
disciplinary action is well taken. Indeed, her privilege speech is not actionable
criminally or in a disciplinary proceeding under the Rules of Court. The
disciplinary actions falls under the Congress provided in The Rules of the Senate
contains a provision on Unparliamentary Acts and Language that enjoins a
Senator from using, under any circumstance, offensive or improper language
against another Senator or against any public institution . Senate President had
not apparently called her to order, let alone referred the matter to the Senate
Ethics Committee for appropriate disciplinary action, as the Rules dictates under
such circumstance. The lady senator clearly violated the rules of her own
chamber. Therefore the disbarment case proceeding was DISMISSED.