7/30/2019 11 GARCILLANO

1/2

During the hype of Arroyo administration, a new controversy arises. During the 2007 election the conversation of President Arroyo and the herein petitioner Virgilio

Garciliano, COMELEC regional director, regarding the desire of the president to have a favourable

outcome in terms of his senatoriables.

Such conversation was recorded and was played during the house of representative investigation.

Because of such turn of events, a petition was filed before the court praying that such playing ofthe illegally seized communication was in violation of RA 4200 or the anti-wire tapping law.

Also such petition for injunction prays that the Senate committee be prevented from furtherconducting such investigation for the basic reason that there was no proper publication of the

senate rules, empowering them to make such investigation of the unlawfully seized documents.

Issue: Whether or not there was proper publication of the rules as to empower the senate to further

proceed with their investigation?

Held: No, the Supreme Court mentioned the following:

The Senate cannot be allowed to continue with the conduct of the questioned legislative inquirywithout duly published rules of procedure, in clear derogation of the constitutional requirement.

Section 21, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution explicitly provides that "the Senate or the House ofRepresentatives, or any of its respective committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in

accordance with its duly published rules of procedure."

The requisite of publication of the rules is intended to satisfy the basic requirements of dueprocess.

Publication is indeed imperative, for it will be the height of injustice to punish or otherwiseburden a citizen for the transgression of a law or rule of which he had no notice whatsoever, not

even a constructive one.

What constitutes publication is set forth in Article 2 of the Civil Code, which provides that "lawsshall take effect after 15 days following the completion of their publication either in the Official

Gazette, or in a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines." Respondentsjustify their non-observance of the constitutionally mandated publication by arguing

that the rules have never been amended since 1995 and, despite that, they are published in

booklet form available to anyone for free, and accessible to the public at the Senates internet

web page.

The Court does not agree. The absence of any amendment to the rules cannot justify the Senates defiance of the clear and

unambiguous language of Section 21, Article VI of the Constitution.

The organic law instructs, without more, that the Senate or its committees may conduct inquiriesin aid of legislation only in accordance with duly published rules of procedure, and does not make

any distinction whether or not these rules have undergone amendments or revision.

The constitutional mandate to publish the said rules prevails over any custom, practice ortradition followed by the Senate.

The invocation by the respondents of the provisions of R.A. No. 8792,otherwise known as theElectronic Commerce Act of 2000, to support their claim of valid publication through the internet

is all the more incorrect.

R.A. 8792 considers an electronic data message or an electronic document as the functionalequivalent of a written document only for evidentiary purposes.

7/30/2019 11 GARCILLANO

2/2

In other words, the law merely recognizes the admissibility in evidence (for their being theoriginal) of electronic data messages and/or electronic documents. It does not make the internet

a medium for publishing laws, rules and regulations.

Given this discussion, the respondent Senate Committees, therefore, could not, in violation of theConstitution, use its unpublished rules in the legislative inquiry subject of these consolidated

cases. The conduct of inquiries in aid of legislation by the Senate has to be deferred until it shall have

caused the publication of the rules, because it can do so only "in accordance with its duly

published rules of procedure."

Indeed the inquiry to be conducted by the senate in aid of legislation cannot proceed for thereason that the rules that they will observe was not properly published as provided by the

Fundamental Law of the land.

Such inquiry if allowed without observance of the required publication will put a persons life,liberty and property at stake without due process of law.

Also, the further assertion of the senate that they already published such rules through their webpage, in observance of the RA 8792 or the Electronic Commerce Act was only viewed by the

court as matter of evidence and still does not conforme with what the constitution propounded. In this regard the high court granted the petition for injunction preventing the senate to conduct

such inquiry in aid of legislation.