Scribd
Upload
281 views

People V Jalosjos

This document discusses a case regarding Romeo Jalosjos, a member of Congress who was convicted of statutory rape and acts of lasciviousness and imprisoned while his conviction was pending appeal. Jalosjos argued that as an elected representative, he had a duty to perform his congressional functions. However, the court ruled against Jalosjos, stating that while election expresses the will of the people, privileges arising from it can be restricted by law. The Constitution only grants exemption from arrest for offenses punishable by 6 years or less, and this privilege cannot be extended beyond its ordinary meaning. As Jalosjos did not provide reasons to exempt him, allowing him to attend sessions would undermine the correctional system.

Uploaded by

A M I R A
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
281 views

People V Jalosjos

This document discusses a case regarding Romeo Jalosjos, a member of Congress who was convicted of statutory rape and acts of lasciviousness and imprisoned while his conviction was pending appeal. Jalosjos argued that as an elected representative, he had a duty to perform his congressional functions. However, the court ruled against Jalosjos, stating that while election expresses the will of the people, privileges arising from it can be restricted by law. The Constitution only grants exemption from arrest for offenses punishable by 6 years or less, and this privilege cannot be extended beyond its ordinary meaning. As Jalosjos did not provide reasons to exempt him, allowing him to attend sessions would undermine the correctional system.

Uploaded by

A M I R A
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

PEOPLE v.

JALOSJOS | 72

EN BANC
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee vs. ROMEO G. JALOSJOS, accused-appellant
G.R. 132875-76. February 3, 2000
Ynares-Santiago, J

Topic: Section 11 of Article 6, 1987 Constitution: A Senator or Member of the House of


Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by not more than six years imprisonment, be
privileged from arrest while the Congress is in session. No Member shall be questioned nor be held
liable in any other place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof.

FACTS:
 The accused-appellant, Romeo G. Jalosjos is a full-fledged member of Congress who is now
confined at the national penitentiary while his conviction for statutory rape on two counts and acts
of lasciviousness on six counts, is pending appeal.

 The accused-appellant filed this 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.

 The primary argument of the movant is the "mandate of sovereign will." He states that the
sovereign electorate of the First District of Zamboanga del Norte chose him as their representative
in Congress.

 Having been re-elected by his constituents, he has the duty to perform the functions of a
Congressman. He calls this a covenant with his constituents made possible by the intervention of
the State. He adds that it cannot be defeated by insuperable procedural restraints arising from
pending criminal cases.

ISSUE:
Whether accused-appellant, Romeo G. Jalosjos, be allowed to discharge his mandate as
member of the House of Representatives.

RULING:
No. The privilege of arrest has always been granted in a restrictive sense. True, election is the
expression of the sovereign power of the people. However, in spite of its importance, the privileges
and rights arising from having been elected may be enlarged or restricted by law. Privilege has to be
granted by law, not inferred from the duties of a position. In fact, the higher the rank, the greater is the
requirement of obedience rather than exemption.

Section 11, Article VI, of the Constitution provides:


A Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by not
more than six years imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while the Congress is in session.

The immunity from arrest or detention of Senators and members of the House of
Representatives, arises from a provision of the Constitution. The history of the provision shows that
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 Romeo Jalosjos has not given any reason why he should be exempted
from the operation of Section 11 of Article 6 of the Constitution. The members of Congress cannot
compel absent members to attend sessions if the reason for the abuse is a legitimate one. The
confinement of a Congressman with a crime punishable imprisonment by more than six (6) months is
not merely authorized by law, has constitutional foundations. Allowing Jalosjos to attend in
Congressional sessions and meetings for five (5) days in a week which will make him a free man with
all the privileges and would make his status to that of a special class, it also would be a making of the
purpose of the correction system

You might also like