Anda di halaman 1dari 2

G.R. No. 187714: March 8, 2011 injuring or affecting that interest.

In this case, Senator Madrigal is not an


indispensable party to the petition before the Court. While it may be true that she has
AQUILINO Q. PIMENTEL, JR., et al., Petitioner, v. SENATE COMMITTEE OF THE an interest in the outcome of this case as the author of P.S. Resolution 706, the
WHOLE REPRESENTED BY SENATE PRESIDENT JUAN PONCE ENRILE, issues in this case are matters of jurisdiction and procedure on the part of the Senate
Respondent. Committee of the Whole which can be resolved without affecting Senator Madrigal's
interest.
FACTS:
Second issue: The doctrine of primary jurisdiction does not apply to this case. The
On 8 October 2008, Senator Madrigal introduced P.S. Resolution 706, which directed issues presented here do not require the expertise, specialized skills and knowledge
the Senate Ethics Committee to investigate the alleged double insertion of P200 of respondent for their resolution. On the contrary, the issues here are purely legal
million by Senator Manny Villar into the C5 Extension Project. After the election of questions which are within the competence and jurisdiction of the Court.
Senator Juan Ponce Enrile as Senate President, the Ethics Committee was
reorganized, but the Minority failed to name its representatives to the Committee, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
prompting a delay in the investigation. Thereafter, the Senate adopted the Rules of
the Ethics Committee. Third issue: While ordinarily an investigation about one of its members alleged
irregular or unethical conduct is within the jurisdiction of the Ethics Committee, the
In another privilege speech, Senator Villar stated he will answer the accusations Minority effectively prevented it from pursuing the investigation when they refused to
before the Senate, and not with the Ethics Committee. Senator Lacson, then nominate their members to the Ethics Committee. The referral of the investigation to
chairperson of the Ethics Committee, then moved that the responsibility of the Ethics the Committee of the Whole was an extraordinary remedy undertaken by the Ethics
Committee be transferred to the Senate as a Committee of the Whole, which was Committee and approved by a majority of the members of the Senate, and not
approved by the majority. In the hearings of such Committee, petitioners objected to violative of the right to equal protection.
the application of the Rules of the Ethics Committee to the Senate Committee of the
Whole. They also questioned the quorum, and proposed amendments to the Rules. Fourth issue: The adoption by the Senate Committee of the Whole of the Rules of the
Senator Pimentel raised the issue on the need to publish the rules of the Senate Ethics Committee does not violate Senator Villar's right to due process. The
Committee of the Whole. Constitutional right of the Senate to promulgate its own rules of proceedings has been
recognized and affirmed by this Court in Section 16(3), Article VI of the Philippine
ISSUES: Constitution, which states: "Each House shall determine the rules of its proceedings."

1. Whether Senator Madrigal, who filed the complaint against Senator Villar, is an Fifth: The Constitution does not require publication of the internal rules of the House
indispensable party in this petition; or Senate. Since rules of the House or the Senate that affect only their members are
internal to the House or Senate, such rules need not be published,unless such rules
2. Whether the petition is premature for failure to observe the doctrine of primary expressly provide for their publication before the rules can take effect. Hence, in this
jurisdiction or prior resort; particular case, the Rules of the Senate Committee of the Whole itself provide that
the Rules must be published before the Rules can take effect. Thus, even if
3. Whether the transfer of the complaint against Senator Villar from the Ethics publication is not required under the Constitution, publication of the Rules of the
Committee to the Senate Committee of the Whole is violative of Senator Villar's Senate Committee of the Whole is required because the Rules expressly mandate
right to equal protection; their publication.

4. Whether the adoption of the Rules of the Ethics Committee as Rules of the Senate PARTIALLY GRANTED
Committee of the Whole is violative of Senator Villar's right to due process and of the Evelyn Abeja vs Federico Taada
majority quorum requirement under Art. VI, Section 16(2) of the Constitution; and
236 SCRA 60 Law on Public Officers Public Office is Personal to the Incumbent
5. Whether publication of the Rules of the Senate Committee of the Whole is required
for their effectivity. In 1992, Rosauro Radovan was declared the winner of the mayoralty elections in
Pagbilao, Quezon. His rival, Evelyn Abeja, filed an election protest where she
HELD: questioned the results in 22 precincts. Radovan filed a counter protest where he
questioned the results in 36 precincts with counterclaim for damages. Abeja then
REMEDIAL LAW caused the revision of the ballots covering the 22 precincts and paid the expenses
therefor. Abeja then urged Radovan to cause the revision of the 36 precincts he is
questioning. Radovan however refused and so Abeja filed a motion that a judgment
First issue: An indispensable party is a party who has an interest in the controversy or
be rendered based on the results from the 22 precincts. The original judge did not rule
subject matter that a final adjudication cannot be made, in his absence, without
on the motion before he was transferred. Before the judge could be replaced,
Radovan died. Radovan was then substituted by the vice mayor (Conrado de Rama) the protestants case to be at the mercy of the protestee who can just prolong the
and Radovans wife, Ediltrudes. Ediltrudes substituted his deceased husband insofar case until his term is over.
as the latters counterclaim for damages is concerned.
Also, the Supreme Court ruled that the substitution of Ediltrudes for her deceased
In 1993, the new judge, Federico Taada ruled that Abejas motion is premature husband is erroneous. This is notwithstanding the counter-claim for damages in the
because the 36 precincts are not yet revised. Taada agreed with Radovan that the counter protest. Public office is personal to the incumbent and is not a property which
36 precincts may only be revised if Abeja can show that she (Abeja) leads by at least passes to his heirs. The heirs may no longer prosecute the deceased protestees
one point vote over Radovan. counter-claim for damages against the protestant for that was extinguished when
death terminated his right to occupy the contested office.
ISSUE: Whether or not the judge is correct.
HELD: No. There is no rule in election protests cases which states that a protestant
(Abeja) must first show that she won in the precincts she is contesting before
evidence on the protestees (Radovan) counter-protest can be had. This will render