7/27/2019 Garci Llano

1/2

Facts: 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 of the 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 further conducting

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 inquiry without

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 of

Representatives, 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 due process.Publication is indeed imperative, for it will bethe height of injustice to punish or otherwise burden 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 "laws shall 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."

Respondents justify 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 inquiries in aid of legislation

7/27/2019 Garci Llano

2/2

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 or tradition followed by the Senate.

The invocation by the respondents of the provisions of R.A. No. 8792,otherwise known as the Electronic

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 functional

equivalent of a written document only for evidentiary purposes.In other words, the law merely

recognizes the admissibility in evidence (for their being the original) 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 the

Constitution, use its unpublished rules in the legislative inquiry subject of these consolidated cases. Theconduct 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 the reason that

the rules that they will observe was not properly published as provided by the Fundamental Law of the

land. Such inquiry ifallowed 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 web page, 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.