Scribd
Upload
15 views3 pages

Cases On Executive Department

The document discusses several cases related to executive privilege and the power of legislative inquiry. It summarizes four cases that discuss whether executive privilege can be invoked to avoid legislative inquiry, whether a Senator has standing to challenge an executive order, whether the People can challenge the constitutionality of a law, and whether the Senate has the power to inquire into executive operations.

Uploaded by

toby marshall
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
15 views3 pages

Cases On Executive Department

The document discusses several cases related to executive privilege and the power of legislative inquiry. It summarizes four cases that discuss whether executive privilege can be invoked to avoid legislative inquiry, whether a Senator has standing to challenge an executive order, whether the People can challenge the constitutionality of a law, and whether the Senate has the power to inquire into executive operations.

Uploaded by

toby marshall
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/ 3

CASES ON EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT

Neri vs. Senate Committee, G.R. No. 180643, September 4, 2008

Facts: NEDA Director General Romulo Neri was invited by the Senate Committee to attend
joint investigation on the alleged anomalies in the NBN Project. During his testimony he
disclosed that COMELEC Chairman Benjamin Abalos brokered ZTE to him, offered him
money to approve it. He also stated that when he informed Gloria Arroyo, Arroyo told him
not to accept the bribe. When probed further, he invoked “executive privilege.” Neri did not
attend the succeeding hearings and was sent a show cause memo by the Senate.
Issue: Whether or not executive privilege may be invoked on a legislative inquiry?
Decision: Petition granted. There is a legitimate claim of executive privilege. The context in
which executive privilege is being invoked is that the information sought to be disclosed
might impair diplomatic and economic relations with China. Given the confidential nature in
which these information were conveyed to the president, Neri can not provide the
Committee any further details of these conversations, without disclosing the very thing the
privilege is designed to protect.

Ople vs. Torres, G.R. No. 127685, July 23, 1998


Facts: Administrative Order No 308, otherwise known as “Adoption of a National
Computerized Identification Reference System” was issued by President Fidel Ramos on 12
December 1996. Senator Blas Ople filed a petition to invalidate the said order for violating
the right to privacy. He contends that the order must be invalidated on two constitutional
grounds, (1) that it is a usurpation of the power to legislate; and (2) that it intrudes the
citizen’s right to privacy.
Issue: Whether or not Senator Ople has standing to maintain suit?
Decision: Petitioner, Senator Ople is a distinguished member of the Senate. As a Senator,
petitioner is possessed of the requisite standing to bring suit raising the issue that the issue
of Administrative Order No 308 is a usurpation of legislative power. Ople’s concern that the
Executive branch not to trespass on the lawmaking domain of Congress is understandable.
The blurring demarcation line between the power of legislature to make laws and the power
of executive to execute laws will disturb their delicate balance and cannot be allowed.

People vs. Vera, 7 SCRA 152


Facts: Mariano Cu Unjieng is one of the defendants in a criminal case where he was
convicted. Cu Unjieng appealed up to the Supreme Court but was denied. On 27 November
1936 he filed fan application for probation under the provisions of Act 4221 of the defunct
Philippine Legislature. Cu Unjieng states in his petition that he is innocent of the crime of
which he was convicted, that he has no criminal record and that he would observe good
conduct in the future. The CFI of Manila denied the petition on18 June 1937. Thereafter, the
seventh branch of CFI of Manila, set the petition for hearing on 5 April 1937. The Fiscal of
the City of Manila and the private prosecution also filed an opposition on 5 April 1937 that
Act 4221, assuming that it has not been repealed by section 2 of Article XV of the
Constitution, is nevertheless violative of section 1, subsection (1), Article III of the
Constitution guaranteeing equal protection of the laws for the reason that its applicability is
not uniform throughout the Islands and because section 11 of the said Act endows the
provincial boards with the power to make said law effective or otherwise in their respective
or otherwise in their respective provinces
Issue: Whether the People of the Philippines, through the Solicitor General and Fiscal of the
City of Manila, is a proper party in present case.
Decision: The People of the Philippines, represented by the Solicitor-General and the Fiscal
of the City of Manila, is a proper party in the present proceedings. The unchallenged rule is
that the person who impugns the validity of a statute must have a personal and substantial
interest in the case. If Act 4221 really violates the constitution, the People of the
Philippines, in whose name the present action is brought, has a substantial interest in
having it set aside. Of greater import than the damage caused by the illegal expenditure of
public funds is the mortal wound inflicted upon the fundamental law by the enforcement of
an invalid statute. Hence, the well-settled rule that the state can challenge the validity of its
own laws.

Senate vs. Ermita, G.R. No. 169777, April 20, 2006


Facts: The Committee of the Senate as a whole issued invitations to various officials of the
executive department for them to appear as resource speakers in a public hearing on the
railway project. However the President issued Executive Order 464 invoking executive
privilege. This was used by Ermita in response to the invitation.
Issue: Whether or not the Senate has power to inquire into the operations of the executive
department?
Decision: Petition partly granted. Since Congress has power to inquire into the operations
of the executive branch it would be incongruous to hold that the power of inquiry does not
extend to executive officials who are the most familiar and informed by executive
operations.

You might also like