Legislative overreach

The House Inquisition body called the Quadcomm should be made to halt its folly since it is creating a foul image for Congress. Four congressmen, who are not lawyers, are running roughshod over conventions, acting as accusers and judges.

The actions of the attack dogs on the panel have completely violated the separation of powers between the branches of government. A seasoned law expert cited the Bengzon vs Senate Blue Ribbon case as proof of the Quadcomm’s abuse of legislative authority.

The Supreme Court ruled in that case that Congress can exercise its power to investigate only with regard to its functions of appropriation and legislation.

Thus, based on the decision in the cited case, the Quadcomm cannot inquire into matters that are in the exclusive province of one of the other branches of government.

The case involved a petition for prohibition filed by former Justice Secretary Jose FS Bengzon Jr. and other petitioners against the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee to enjoin the panel from requiring them to testify and produce evidence at its inquiry.

The petitioners argued that the inquiry had no valid legislative purpose, violated their right to due process, and dealt with a purely private transaction beyond the committee’s power to investigate.

The Supreme Court granted the petition and enjoined the Senate panel from compelling the petitioners to testify, ruling that the inquiry was not in aid of legislation and would violate the separation of powers between the legislative and judicial branches.

The SC decision stated that the power of both houses of Congress to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation was not, therefore, absolute or unlimited. The investigation must be “in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly published rules of procedure” and that “the rights of persons appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be respected.”

The High Tribunal also cited a compelling reason for upholding the separation powers, saying: “To allow the respondent committee to conduct its own investigation of an issue already before the Sandiganbayan would not only pose the possibility of conflicting judgments between a legislative committee and a judicial tribunal, but if the Senate committee’s judgment were to be reached before that of the Sandiganbayan, the possibility of its influence being made to bear on the ultimate judgment cannot be discounted.”

What the Quadcomm is investigating is in the domain of the judiciary, a principle that the four leaders of the House body have not respected because, apparently, they do not know any better.

“It is clear in the decision of the Supreme Court that the proceedings in the quadrilateral House body are not in accordance with the Constitution and, thus, must end,” a legislator lawyer indicated.

The Quadcomm is also violating the constitutional guarantee against being falsely accused since witnesses and resource persons are being forced to make statements sometimes without the presence of a lawyer.

In court proceedings, before an individual is called as a witness, the court is notified. “Bringing in a surprise witness is not allowed such as has been going on in the Quadcomm hearings,” the legislator said.

“Transparency is in accordance with due process,” he added.

In a regular court, the counsels need to stipulate who they will present as witnesses to give the other party the opportunity to determine its next move.

The Quadcomm has been presenting persons its four committee heads want to present and many of those called or volunteer themselves as witnesses may have an axe to grind.

According to the veteran legislator, threats and intimidation cannot be applied on witnesses to make statements the Quadcomm wants to hear.

Lawmakers should stick to the crafting of laws and sparingly use their investigative authority, not the other way around.