Arnault v. Nazareno, G.R. No.

L-3820, July 18, 1950

D E C I S I O N
(En Banc)
OZAETA, J.:
I.

THE FACTS

The Senate investigated the purchase by the government of two parcels of land, k
nown as Buenavista and Tambobong estates. An intriguing question that the Senate
sought to resolve was the apparent irregularity of the government s payment to on
e Ernest Burt, a non-resident American citizen, of the total sum of Php1.5 milli
on for his alleged interest in the two estates that only amounted to Php20,000.0
0, which he seemed to have forfeited anyway long before. The Senate sought to de
termine who were responsible for and who benefited from the transaction at the e
xpense of the government.
Petitioner Jean Arnault, who acted as agent of Ernest Burt in the subject transa
ctions, was one of the witnesses summoned by the Senate to its hearings. In the
course of the investigation, the petitioner repeatedly refused to divulge the na
me of the person to whom he gave the amount of Php440,000.00, which he withdrew
from the Php1.5 million proceeds pertaining to Ernest Burt.
Arnault was therefore cited in contempt by the Senate and was committed to the c
ustody of the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms for imprisonment until he answers the ques
tions. He thereafter filed a petition for habeas corpus directly with the Suprem
e Court questioning the validity of his detention.
II.

THE ISSUE

1. Did the Senate have the power to punish the petitioner for contempt for refu
sing to reveal the name of the person to whom he gave the Php440,000.00?
2. Did the Senate have the authority to commit petitioner for contempt for a t
erm beyond its period of legislative session?
3.
May the petitioner rightfully invoke his right against self-incrimination?
III.

THE RULING

[The Court DENIED the petition for habeas corpus filed by Arnault.]