Investigations in aid of reelection

Power can be abused and too much power can even be dangerous. Those whom we have sent to the highest echelon of powers have the tendency to use their powers against the people who placed them where they are. Let us consider how senators and congressmen use power when they know that the whole nation is watching live on national TV and YouTube.

I remember those excessively tense moments when Senator RodanteMarcoleta, as the former chair of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, grilled Engr. Allan Quirante of the now famous QM Construction, and the senator threatened the provinciano from Dumanjug with the Senate gavel which he called a hammer? I am sure Marcoleta will never win in Dumanjug again.

For the longest time, the whole nation witnessed some overacting senators and congressmen who "terrorize" resource persons, declare witnesses in contempt, order their detention and deprive people of their liberty without due process of law. There is such a thing as legislative overreach, when the powers of Congress are abused to the detriment of private citizens and also public executive officials and personnel.

Not only once, not only twice but for a number of times, both Houses of Congress have exercised their power of oversight over the executive department. Many cabinet members were called to testify before legislative investigations, and some undersecretaries, assistant secretaries and directors had been taken to tasks by both Senate and House committees.

While we do recognize the importance of these investigations and their value in keeping executive officials and personnel on their toes, we deplore the excessive manner by which certain resource persons had been treated before the Committee, and even shown by national TV to be seen by millions of Filipinos and other people. Many witnesses had been insulted, berated, put on the spot and being charged verbally of corruption, gross negligence or plain stupidity.

Justice Dante Tinga, my former boss, as Dean of the UE College of Law, gave us a good lecture in his separate opinion in the famous Supreme Court en banc case of Romulo Neri vs Senate decided on March 25, 2007. He wrote that the constitutionality of legislative investigations was delineated in Section 21, Article VI of the Constitution. It was stressed that while these investigations are based on the Constitution itself, it does not mean that the exercise thereof is absolute. On the contrary, they are subject to limitations.

Congress was aptly reminded that the intention of legislative investigations is to enact sensible laws and to achieve that purpose, it is important that legislators should listen to resource persons whose knowledge, expertise and insights could enrich the quality of legislation. The good justice advised Congress:" Yet, all the righteous, divinely-inspired fulminations that find expression in the legislative inquiry cannot bestow on that process a higher or different purpose than that intended by the Constitution.

Legislators were also instructed by a legal luminary that " Legislative inquiries do not share the same goals as the criminal trial or the impeachment process. The orientation of legislative inquiries may be remedial in nature, yet they cannot be punitive in the sense that they cannot result in legally binding deprivation of a person's life, liberty or property. No doubt that a legislative inquiry conducted under the glare of klieg lights can end up destroying one's life, livelihood or public reputation."

To our mind, the most contentious issue related to legislative investigations is the contempt power incident to power to investigate in aid of legislation.  In the case of Alvin Balag vs. Senate, Justice (later Chief Justice) Alexander Gesmundo underscored the rights of resource persons appearing as witnesses in investigations in aid of legislation, particularly on the limits of the legislative power of the Senate in declaring persons in contempt. First, it was emphasized that such power can be used only while Congress is in session.

The High Tribunal in the Balag case held: "The Court finds that there is a genuine necessity to place a limitation on the period of imprisonment that may be imposed by the Senate pursuant to its inherent power of contempt during inquiries in aid of legislation." Congress was reminded by the Supreme Court that under Section 21 of Article VI of the Constitution, in conducting inquiries in aid of legislation, the Senate or the House must respect the rights of persons appearing in or affected therein."

Our take on this is simple, succinct, and categorical: Just because you are a senator or a congressman, you are not God. You are not all-powerful and all-knowing. Above all, you have no right to strip any witness of his human dignity and honor. You cannot berate, insult or charge witnesses with any crime, felony or misdemeanor without giving him an ample opportunity to be heard. You cannot gain political mileage at the expense of the human rights of a human person.

You cannot use the platform of legislative investigations as a launching pad to campaign for support of your political ambitions. To paraphrase Article 19 of the Civil Code, every senator and congressman, in the exercise of his or her right and in the performance of obligations, he or she must act with justice, give everyone his due and observe honesty and good faith.